Thread: The WORST Firearm You Ever Owned

Originally Posted by gadgetman

No. It just means that the shops push the Ruger more in order to make more money.

you are putting the cart before the horse. how do you make more money if the market does not want to buy it? Your theory is fundamentally incompatible with the current economic theory of supply and demand. in the same vien, would you suggest the reason Tikka T3 is the most popular bolt action centrefire because shops get more profit from selling Tikka T3 than other guns? and cannot possibly be that T3 is the most popular gun in the eyes of the consumers?

Originally Posted by gadgetman

We used to mainly buy British cars here. Was it because they were great? No, they leaked oil, most needed a recondition at about 80,000km, ... It was because it was all that was available due to trade agreements.

You have already acknowledged that it is not analogous then why make this analogy? British cars were the only option because of the trade agreement. But has there ever been a trade agreement with Ruger to not sell Marlin and Norinco and CZ semis in New Zealand?

Originally Posted by gadgetman

Those are the people the gun shops like. They don't know any better and are therefore easily persuaded into buying something that isn't the best for what they really want to do.

Be that as it may, the point is simply that there is a large body of consumers who do not turn their minds to the more nuanced analysis and would just settle for the more "robust" product. This is not just the case for guns, the same goes for many other types of products. Corolla has never been the fastest, or the cheapest, or the most economical, or the most stylish small car. It is reliably and robust. People can go on years without proper service and maintenance schedules and they would still run. An European car owner may well say that is not the right way to treat a car, my fiat which I service once every 6 month or 3000 km has just been reliable.... yet Corolla is the most popular small car in New Zealand. Fiat is not.

Originally Posted by Ultimitsu

you are putting the cart before the horse. how do you make more money if the market does not want to buy it? Your theory is fundamentally incompatible with the current economic theory of supply and demand. in the same vien, would you suggest the reason Tikka T3 is the most popular bolt action centrefire because shops get more profit from selling Tikka T3 than other guns? and cannot possibly be that T3 is the most popular gun in the eyes of the consumers?

The big appeal to kick the T3 market off was a marketing ploy. They simply put in a guarantee of accuracy. When you look at the guarantee is states that it is guaranteed to shoot the factory load at the factory range and achieve a certain result, making the guarantee useless anyway. It is also the appeal of European/Scandinavian quality. That kicked off the momentum and the NZ company that imports them promoted them well.

You have already acknowledged that it is not analogous then why make this analogy? British cars were the only option because of the trade agreement. But has there ever been a trade agreement with Ruger to not sell Marlin and Norinco and CZ semis in New Zealand?

I did not say there was no analogy, quite the opposite. You will find that there is a trade agreement between a New Zealand wholesaler and and overseas supplier. A lot depends on how well the guys at our end promote products. What I was pointing out was that sometimes the market is driven by what is put in front of consumers and that the guys dealing with the Marlins have been lax here.

Be that as it may, the point is simply that there is a large body of consumers who do not turn their minds to the more nuanced analysis and would just settle for the more "robust" product. This is not just the case for guns, the same goes for many other types of products. Corolla has never been the fastest, or the cheapest, or the most economical, or the most stylish small car. It is reliably and robust. People can go on years without proper service and maintenance schedules and they would still run. An European car owner may well say that is not the right way to treat a car, my fiat which I service once every 6 month or 3000 km has just been reliable.... yet Corolla is the most popular small car in New Zealand. Fiat is not.

The trouble is that with a lack of promotion the consumer has unwittingly settled on the less robust product here manly through lack of knowledge/choice. As far as vehicles go the Marlin would equate well to a Corolla in price and function. Just imagine if Toyota NZ decided we didn't need cars that size here and didn't import and promote them?

I think Gadgetman my friend, we have fundamentally different view of how the market works. I believe in free market, I believe that while marketing has its place, ultimately the consumers know what they want. you appear to believe that whatever market share each product has is the result of better or worse marketing strategy and merit plays a small (or non-existent) part. that view, to me, is almost like a conspiracy theory, so we will just have to accept that we disagree.

Originally Posted by Ultimitsu

I think Gadgetman my friend, we have fundamentally different view of how the market works. I believe in free market, I believe that while marketing has its place, ultimately the consumers know what they want. you appear to believe that whatever market share each product has is the result of better or worse marketing strategy and merit plays a small (or non-existent) part. that view, to me, is almost like a conspiracy theory, so we will just have to accept that we disagree.

We have a freeish market. There are a few bigish fish in our small pond that import these things. They have agreements with overseas suppliers that they will be the only ones the supplier will supply in our country, same thing happened in the PLB market with RescueMe. It is difficult for many to work around these restrictions. Not that hard to understand when you look at it.

Originally Posted by Ultimitsu

I think Gadgetman my friend, we have fundamentally different view of how the market works. I believe in free market, I believe that while marketing has its place, ultimately the consumers know what they want. you appear to believe that whatever market share each product has is the result of better or worse marketing strategy and merit plays a small (or non-existent) part. that view, to me, is almost like a conspiracy theory, so we will just have to accept that we disagree.

Believing that marketing doesn't make a big difference to sales volumes seems pretty naive to me. Based on your own supply/demand reasoning, if the marketing didn't work then companies wouldn't be spending so much money on it.

To use the car analogy - most of the European manufacturers market themselves in NZ as 'premium' products, with prices inflated accordingly. In Europe most of their range are taxis and sales rep cars, its only the top models that are 'premium'. But its 'German quality!' and thats good right? Not necessarily reflected by real-world data, but the marketing departments keep pushing that line and enough people hear it often enough to maintain the idea in general public perception.

Marketing strategies work on a large enough number of people to make a big difference.

Another angle on the Marlin / Ruger subject are the people in our shops that sell these products.
I have walked into many different sports shops over years . Every time I ask about what semi auto .22 do you recommend straight away they say 10/22. As soon as I elude to the fact I am pretty knowledgeable on the subject and I know they are generally inaccurate POS then the story changes.
A lot of people that walk into these stores are very much in the salesman hands, if some twat dressed in a Camo shop uniform tells them it's the shit then it must be the shit.
On the flip side if that's all that whole salers are bringing in and you have a very limited choice then what the hell else can you recommend to a customer ?