![]() |
Visit Brian Dudley's homepage! | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
#3 | ||||||
|
The Ithaca NID serial number chronology from the Second Edition of Walter Snyder's book shows 315 regular frame NIDs for those years. It also shows no Lefever Nitro Specials for 1931 & 2 and only 49 for 1933.
|
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
| The Following User Says Thank You to Dave Noreen For Your Post: |
|
|
#4 | ||||||
|
Remember, the stock market crash of 1929... It took a decade or more for this country to recover economically... some folks and some businesses never did recover.
.
__________________
"I'm a Setter man. Not because I think they're better than the other breeds, but because I'm a romantic - stuck on tradition - and to me, a Setter just "belongs" in the grouse picture." George King, "That's Ruff", 2010 - a timeless classic. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
| The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Dean Romig For Your Post: |
|
|
#5 | ||||||
|
Remington steps in to buy the floundering Parker gun business in 1934. Then slowly moves it to Ilion.
|
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
| The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Jerry Harlow For Your Post: |
|
|
#6 | ||||||
|
It would be interesting to know if mostly high grade guns were sold during the hard times vs. lower grade guns.
|
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
#7 | ||||||
|
I couldn't go to sleep tonight so, WTH...I counted a couple pages in the I&S book for the time period. V-grade was highest. 287 total counted. Scanning the other pages, the ratio of V-grade was even higher
V - 96 - 33% P2 - 68 - 24% Ti3 - 79 - 28% A5 - 8 - 3% S4 - 17 - 6% A4 - 11 - 4% S6 - 1 - 0.3% P7 - 1 - 0.3% A6 - 2 - 0.7% PP - 1 - 0.3% |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
| The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to J. Scott Hanes For Your Post: |
|
|
#8 | ||||||
|
Total gun sales, 1934 to 1945.
1934: 526 1935: 1047 1936: 1489 1937: 1305 1938: 542 1939: 456 1940: 431 1941: 500 1942: 249 1943: 92 1944: (2) 1945: 14 Total: 6649 Total of all high grades, BHE to A1 Special, 74. Double guns only. These figures are from a May 10,1946 Remington memo from M.R. Warden to G.E. Pinckney The projected loss for 1941 as projected in 1940 was $86,200.69. Of that figure, $34,096 was for VHE grade guns. In 1941, it cost $215.59 to build a VHE and its net price was $88.23. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
| The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Bill Murphy For Your Post: |
|
|
#9 | ||||||
|
[QUOTE=Bill Murphy;
The projected loss for 1941 as projected in 1940 was $86,200.69. Of that figure, $34,096 was for VHE grade guns. In 1941, it cost $215.59 to build a VHE and its net price was $88.23.[/QUOTE] I would think it safe to say the $215.59 cost to build the VHE is not the actual cost of material and labor for each gun, but rather the cost in relationship to the total cost of overhead of the entire company. If sales had been higher the build cost per gun would have been lower. If the company could have sold 1500 guns or more each year they would have made a nice profit. When sales are slow it's the overhead that can sink a company. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
| The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to David Noble For Your Post: |
|
|
#10 | ||||||
|
The Charles Parker company supported the Parker gun business for most of the time the company was in business. The same situation existed when Remington bought in. The marketing plan was ridiculous from the beginning. VHE, 1935 retail $116.00, net $64.00. An examination of the order books will show discounts of 10%, 5%, 2%, piled one on top of the other for good customers, not even neccesarily volume customers. The jobbers and retailers made more than the company and they didn't have to build and promote the product. Remington had no idea what they were getting into. It didn't matter where the cost of the gun came from, the labor and materials or the company. The result was the same. Whether the cost of the gun came from the company or the "actual" cost of labor and materials, it was still more than they got from the jobbers. The more guns they made, the bigger the loss, not the other way around.
|
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
| The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bill Murphy For Your Post: |
![]() |
|
|