Stag Arms troubles

Posted By: kmon11

Stag Arms troubles - 12/24/15 03:58 PM

Saw this on another site

Quote:

All you lefties need to take notice. One of the few sources of Left Handed UR's just messed up in a major way!

The short:

Facing Federal Firearms charges, Mark Malkowski, founder and CEO agrees to pay $100K fine, leave company and surrender FFL. Stag Arms, LLC, is forced to pay $500K fine.

According to the news story, Stag will be closing up shop in Hartford, CT.

Stag released this statement, yesterday.

Quote:

Dec 22, 2015 HARTFORD
"Stag Arms, LLC today announced that the company and its founder, Mark Malkowski, have reached a resolution with government officials stemming from an investigation that began last year relating primarily to the timing of recordkeeping during the manufacturing process and compliance with federal firearms manufacturing and registration requirements. Both Stag Arms and Mr. Malkowski cooperated fully with the government throughout the investigation. While both Stag Arms and Mr. Malkowski believe that public safety was never compromised, they have agreed to enter guilty pleas and to pay significant fines, because doing so is in the best interests of the company and its employees. Mr. Malkowski has also agreed to transition the business to new ownership and is in advanced talks with a potential buyer. Mr. Malkowski will continue as a marketing consultant to the business and the industry for a period of time following the sale. Stag Arms takes its obligations to comply with all laws and regulations very seriously and has made comprehensive changes to ensure that similar problems cannot happen again and that best compliance practices are maintained in all of its operations."

More can be read here:

http://fox61.com/2015/12/22/stag-arms-ow...e-gun-business/

http://bearingarms.com/stag-feds-revoke-...mpaign=baupdate

Posted By: Central texas

Re: Stag Arms troubles - 12/24/15 05:09 PM

Thanks for posting that article, interesting read. My dad has a stag ar , I will surely let him know

Posted By: Fatdaddy

Re: Stag Arms troubles - 12/24/15 05:19 PM

And if they sell out the quality will probably suffer

Posted By: Fatdaddy

Re: Stag Arms troubles - 12/24/15 05:20 PM

I wonder what happens to their lifetime warrany.

Posted By: charlesb

Re: Stag Arms troubles - 12/24/15 06:09 PM

Originally Posted By: hunting.nut

I wonder what happens to their lifetime warrany.

When the gun breaks, it's lifetime is then over - so the warranty no longer applies.

Posted By: Brother in-law

Re: Stag Arms troubles - 12/24/15 09:13 PM

Originally Posted By: hunting.nut

And if they sell out the quality will probably suffer

You said quality.

Posted By: Fatdaddy

Re: Stag Arms troubles - 12/26/15 01:57 PM

Originally Posted By: Brother in-law

Originally Posted By: hunting.nut

And if they sell out the quality will probably suffer

You said quality.

You ever owned one?

Posted By: QuitShootinYoungBucks

Re: Stag Arms troubles - 12/26/15 02:44 PM

Wonder if Wyndham could step in

Posted By: charlesb

Re: Stag Arms troubles - 12/26/15 03:11 PM

I would normally express regret in hearing about a gun manufacturer going under - but we are talking about an AR manufacturer here.

The "Bubba factor" bit in this case because everybody and his dog manufactures AR's. - From a statistical angle, it was inevitable that one or more of them would go under - and it will happen again.

When we get down to less than half a dozen AR manufacturers, then I'll be slightly more concerned when one of them goes tits-up and starts circling the drain. - Very slightly.

Clue: These manufacturers exist in the first place because the markup on ARs was astronomical for a while there, and because any machine-shop 101 graduate could set up to manufacture the things. They've all cashed in on the AR hysteria sucker pool, and the price is dropping rapidly now that the feeding frenzy is over. The market is saturated - so guess what? - This won't be the last time that you'll hear about an AR manufacturer biting the big one.

Soon, they'll be dropping like flies.

Posted By: TDK

Re: Stag Arms troubles - 12/26/15 04:07 PM

Did you even freaking read the article? This has nothing to do with financial reasons.

Posted By: Brother in-law

Re: Stag Arms troubles - 12/26/15 04:33 PM

Originally Posted By: hunting.nut

Originally Posted By: Brother in-law

Originally Posted By: hunting.nut

And if they sell out the quality will probably suffer

You said quality.

You ever owned one?

Of course not. I'm sure they work fine and I know they have a lot of left hand options that many don't. I do think they have one of the coolest marks on their receivers

Posted By: TxHunter80

Re: Stag Arms troubles - 12/26/15 04:46 PM

It's unfortunate when any firearms manufacturer folds, especially over something like this. As much as AR's are in the news days, manufacturers don't need any black eyes. In terms of quality, I own one and it's fit/finish is at least as good as my Colt.

Posted By: charlesb

Re: Stag Arms troubles - 12/26/15 11:30 PM

Originally Posted By: TDK

Did you even freaking read the article? This has nothing to do with financial reasons.

Did you read my reply before freaking out?

I never said anything about the company going under for financial reasons. - I blamed the "Bubba factor", as in the guy being too stupid to keep his paperwork straight. Going under is going under - no matter what the reason might be. It indicates going out of business.

Try reading the post before you wig out, next time.

You don't want people thinking that you are a troll.

Posted By: TDK

Re: Stag Arms troubles - 12/27/15 01:29 AM

It was pretty open to interpretation, but whatever. Maybe if you would be a little less vague. No troll here, my work speaks for itself.

Posted By: charlesb

Re: Stag Arms troubles - 12/27/15 01:40 AM

Originally Posted By: TDK

It was pretty open to interpretation, but whatever. Maybe if you would be a little less vague. No troll here, my work speaks for itself.

In civilized circles, people ask for clarification if there is doubt, as an alternative to jumping to conclusions and engaging in personal attacks.

I thought that I had made it pretty clear that the fellow at Stag Arms had fallen off of the learning curve, making a boo-boo that one would not generally expect to see in a firearms manufacturer. This is likely to happen among AR manufacturers because they tend to be a scruffy lot. - And we can expect to see more of this among them now that the AR feeding frenzy has quieted down and the market will no longer support the ridiculous markups. The "Bubba" types will tend to lose concentration now, and make the same kind of mistakes that the fellow at Stag Arms did.

As I said before, they'll be dropping like flies.

Asked politely and with the kind of basic respect that civilized people both give and expect, I am always happy to clarify.

Posted By: QuitShootinYoungBucks

Re: Stag Arms troubles - 12/27/15 01:49 AM

Originally Posted By: TDK

It was pretty open to interpretation, but whatever. Maybe if you would be a little less vague. No troll here, my work speaks for itself.

I agree it was vague-lots of talk about market saturation, etc. Sounds more to me like the guy was a crook and they let him off easy.

I also agree that there are not enough slices of the AR pie to go around anymore.

Posted By: charlesb

Re: Stag Arms troubles - 12/27/15 01:58 AM

I don't think the guy was a crook, just dumb and maybe a bit disappointed to see the profit margin starting to shrink, with no light at the end of that particular tunnel.

It at times like that that a manufacturer must shift gears, find another area to excel in and move on. Not all of them have the will and the imagination for that though... They get depressed and lose heart instead, and next thing you know they are filing for chapter 11, or doing like the guy at Stag Arms did, neglecting the basic work required in order to stay in business.

I had the impression that he had very good intentions but in the business world, good intentions will not pull you through if you are not on the ball.

If he had been on the ball, his company would still be afloat and his lifetime guarantee still good, as no doubt he intended.