Reprinted without permission from North American Hunting Club:
Smith & Wesson Back To Old Self
When Saf-T-Hammer purchased Smith & Wesson (S&W) in May 2001, from the British conglomerate Tomkins PLC for $15 million, it was beset by slumping sales, a negative image with firearms dealers and consumers and a regulatory environment pushing for major safety constraints.
The shareholders of Saf-T-Hammer recently voted to change the company’s name to Smith & Wesson Holding Corp., capitalizing on the venerable 150-year-old S&W name.
It was a name that some perceived as tarnished by the company’s willingness to capitulate to anti-gun sentiment in the face of lawsuits. But recently S&W President Bob Scott was nominated for the National Shooting Sports Foundation’s “Man of the Year” award. Scott also received a standing ovation during the National Rifle Association’s annual convention for bringing S&W back to American soil.
S&W has been experiencing a strong financial turn around lately, which has led equity research firm ManageSource to rate S&W’s stock a “strong buy.”
S&W Chairman and CEO Mitchell Saltz attributes the company’s turn around to both internal measures and external factors.
“Once we took over, we had to right-size the company,” he said, referring to the cutting of 43 administrative positions. “There was a decrease in sales, and they had never made the proper adjustments.”
But a bigger boon to business has been a decision by the Department of Housing and Urban Development to back off an agreement inked by the Clinton administration during March 2000, that required S&W to increase its gun-safety efforts. The deal was made in exchange for cooperation in dealing with pending lawsuits filed by cities and counties against gun makers such as S&W related to gun violence.
S&W was required to provide locking devices and to develop child-proof guns, as well as to more closely monitor dealers who sold its products.
“From a dealer standpoint, a lot of people were angry and dropped the S&W line,” said Scott Hanson, general manager of the Arizona Sportsman stores. “From a customer standpoint, it was vicious for a while. But that’s changed, and they’ve taken a different attitude with the new company; they’re back to the principle that no one can restrict what we do.”