Paying for a few letters in a particular order.

[Pond, James Pond]

So when I see people propagating this notion I do my best to try and dispel it, if only a little.

OK, but unless you know the reason that people buy HK is not the name, then you can only really dispel the notion in relation to your personal motives for buying that brand.

[Dashunde]

OK, but unless you know the reason that people buy HK is not the name, then you can only really dispel the notion in relation to your personal motives for buying that brand.

Well, quality is not necessarily an issue unless customers endure bad quality and/or a high price simply because it has Kimber written on the side.

Are they doing that? This is what I'm trying to establish in this thread.

Its impossible to establish that.
People buy a name for many reasons; past experience, design/feel, appearance, quality, machining, etc etc...

Buying a name is much more than simply buying it because it has that name.. the name often comes with a overall "style" that appeals to the buyer no matter if its over-priced.
Its NOT just about quality.. its about having a certain something the buyer wants.

Trying to dig into whether or not a HK or Kimber or some other brand is worth the money is pointlessly subjective and quickly distracts from the other worthy aspect of this thread... "what guns are sold under different names elsewhere for more/less money, etc etc"
I'd suggest steering away from the motives of the buyer and perceived quality aspects and focus on the factual existence of sibling products and their subtle differences instead.

Which companies managed to raise their retail price by virtue of their name?

First remember supply & demand.. as a product/brand becomes more popular their "stock" goes up as word spreads and their product becomes more popular.
So the next logical step is to increase the price to balance supply and demand while profiting as much as possible without chasing buyers away.

I can think of a few, but my opinion is purely based on what I've read here and not on any real hands-on experience of the wider gun market, so I'll just see what others come up with.

I found the parts in bold to be a little comical... it seems your doubling-down on internet fodder??
Your still not getting any hands on experience and still getting only our opinions on the matter.

[jimbob86]

So the next logical step is to increase the price to balance supply and demand while profiting as much as possible without chasing buyers away.

....or to increase the supply while retaining that price point that the buyers found desirable .... the trick is to do it without compromising on the qualities of the product that made it desirable in the first place.

[Dashunde]

....or to increase the supply while retaining that price point that the buyers found desirable .... the trick is to do it without compromising on the qualities of the product that made it desirable in the first place.

Easier said than done.
Sometimes the capitol isnt there, and even if it is, spending thousands upon thousands to increase supply so that you can drop the price doesn't make much sense unless the sustainable sales volume is shown to be worth the expense, effort, overhead and complexity.
A non-specific example:
Nowadays, adding just one more employee to run one more cnc machine can throw a company's healthcare requirements into another category that can cost them tens of thousands plus the cost of the new cnc.. thereby erasing the profits of expansion.
Like I said, non-specific, but it gives the idea of snowballing expenses if its not very well planned out by sharp business-minded folk.

Additional investment makes sense if the product line is expanding with new models, compacts, long slides and so on.
By that time the brand has a following and shown that the products sell at their price, the expansion just gives the buyer something new to buy, and if they continue to buy why bother dropping the price?

[jimbob86]

By that time the brand has a following and shown that the products sell at their price, the expansion just gives the buyer something new to buy, and if they continue to buy why bother dropping the price?

I did not say anything about dropping the price:

while retaining that price point that the buyers found desirable

the expansion just gives the buyer something new to buy,

It is the sign of a saturated market that you need to get marketing in gear to create demand - "give them something new to buy" .....

Either you have a good, desirable product, or have junk that needs hyped.

[Pond, James Pond]

Its impossible to establish that.
People buy a name for many reasons

To be fair, I'm not looking for a definitive answer to life, the universe and everything.
However, I do believe that there are some brands where simply the name carries more weight than others. Sometimes enough that people will pay extra.

Seeing as many people have answered this thread, I'm clearly not the only one to think that is possible.

Trying to dig into whether or not a HK or Kimber or some other brand is worth the money is pointlessly subjective and quickly distracts from the other worthy aspect of this thread...

This is not a question of being worth the money. Clearly they must be to some or none would be sold. This is about why they might have spent the money. For the product itself, or the name?

I can assure you that most people here who wear Armani are doing so for bragging rights not the quality given that abut 85% of the Armani badges proudly wobbling on someone's hindquarter pocket is from a knock-off bought at the local market for about €15 and most people here would rather have a shagged BMW/Merc than a nearly new Mazda or Opel. I know my local market, but I don't know TFL's.

I'd suggest steering away from the motives of the buyer and perceived quality aspects and focus on the factual existence of sibling products and their subtle differences instead.

Or someone can start a whole new thread on that topic if they wish. I am interested in both aspects of the issue and will gladly read any info on either part of that equation but as I said earlier sibling brands are not a prerequisite for posting a response.

I found the parts in bold to be a little comical... it seems your doubling-down on internet fodder??
Your still not getting any hands on experience and still getting only our opinions on the matter.

It is unwise to form one's opinions solely on other people's opinions, but it is equally unwise to completely discount other people's opinions: During my time on TFL I have read threads and in doing so, I've also read between the lines based on thread titles, content of responses and tone of those responses.
From all that I gain an impression of people's view of certain brands.

Now, I am asking a direct question to see if what I have summised is a shared view or not.

As for doubling-down on internet fodder, I don't know about you, but I give the content on TFL a tad more credence than I do other random stuff online.
And if I'm wrong to then what are any of us doing on here in the first place?!

[Dashunde]

I don't know about you, but I give the content on TFL a tad more credence than I do other random stuff online

Originally Posted by James Pond

Now, had you bought the gun and accepted the inflated price tag that HKs tend to command largely because there was "HK" on the side, that would be a different story and also the crux of the thread.

I give the content provided by many credence, those who have shown they provide good info over the years, who have owned the products, and those who are not just parroting others.
Folks who have never owned a HK but are here grinding on them based on others opinions? No, no credence given.

I'm no fanboy of HK btw, for largely the same reasons, their recent prices vs value balance is off for me.
They used to be a good value when I bought my first USP, but not at current prices.
But who knows why their prices rose... is it capitalizing on their name? Perhaps.
Maybe it just goes back to a time when the dollar was weak and they found out we still bought their products, so they kept the prices there from then on?

This is not a question of being worth the money. Clearly they must be to some or none would be sold. This is about why they might have spent the money. For the product itself, or the name?

Who's going to come out and say they bought a BMW or HK because of the name?? Of course they're reasons will be backed up by some sort of product-based reasoning other than pure prestige, hopefully.
The info and clarity your seeking is not readily available.

Originally Posted by Dash

I'd suggest steering away from the motives of the buyer and perceived quality aspects and focus on the factual existence of sibling products and their subtle differences instead.

Originally Posted by James Pond

Or someone can start a whole new thread on that topic if they wish. I am interested in both aspects of the issue and will gladly read any info on either part of that equation but as I said earlier sibling brands are not a prerequisite for posting a response.

Isnt that kind of what you did with this thread by comparing the Audi & VW's? Seeking info on what brands are "piggy-backing" another brand (ie =XD?)
If not, there sure are several others who thought so by mentioning Mausers and so on.


Jimbob, if you increase supply the price will eventually fall.

[Pond, James Pond]

Isnt that kind of what you did with this thread by comparing the Audi & VW's? Seeking info on what brands are "piggy-backing" another brand

That was an example to illustrate how, for some, the badge carries a certain monetary value in and of itself.

I am interested in knowing which are the brands where the brand name justifies a higher price tag in the eyes of the buying.

I explained in one of the first posts that there being a like-for-like product where one is more expensive but bearing a cooler brand rollmark is not a pre-requisite for a response on this thread but any examples that exist are welcome. Such as the Mauser case.

I'm not sure about the confusion here: I think the question behind the thread is fairly clear.

[45_auto]

Well, I'd like to know which are the brands for which, to all intents and purposes, the buyer is paying a premium for the letters stamped on the side of the slide?

Do you think that people would pay as much if this .22 caliber 1911 had "WALTHER" in big huge letters on the slide?

http://www.waltherarms.com/government-1911-a1/

It does have "Walther" stamped into the frame in small letters on the opposite side. Kind of funny how they don't even show that on the Walther website.

http://www.tanfo.de/0_WA/WALTHER_1911_0011.jpg

[ninjarealist]

Originally Posted by 45_auto

Do you think that people would pay as much if this .22 caliber 1911 had "WALTHER" in big huge letters on the slide?

Would it be worth less than dirt if it had "Umarex" on the slide?

EDIT

Saw your edit and it seems that Umarex is on the gun as well

[45_auto]

Originally Posted by ninjarealist

Would it be worth less than dirt if it had "Umarex" on the slide?

Probably so.

[Panfisher]

Somethings I willing to pay a little more based on the name. Let's say Ruger if there were essentially identical products, one was a Ruger and one was a company you never heard of then to me it is worth a little more due to customer service/warranty and better resale value. Re sale value comes into play as well with AR's a Franken version likely isn't going to be a easily sold as one with Colt on everything. But then again the Franken may have been MUCH lower priced to begin with. Some things I am willing to roll the dice on, like few hundred dollar shotgun, but wouldn't on a new pick up truck, I will pay more to stick with a brand/dealer I know and trust, it is all a balance and choice.

Just because their name has been.mentioned many times I will say I own a kimber and know two others who do as well, one of whom puts many thousands of rounds a year through his, we are all quite satisfied with them. I too have read the many negative posts, but so far hasn't happened to us.

[44 AMP]

This is about why they might have spent the money. For the product itself, or the name?

Consider all the Colt SAA clones. The public buying them want the design, but don't feel its worth paying for the name.

Regardless of the actual quality of the product (within limits) a recognized brand name makes things worth more, except to those who value function above all else, and those folks don't set market value, the general consumer does.

I have a guitar, its rather nice. A Seville Jazz bass. A professional has played it and said it had a "sweet buttery action", which I gather is a good thing (I'm not skilled enough to be able to tell, ). What I am skilled enough to know is that if it said Fender on it, it would sell for about 3x more.

[SHR970]

What would you rather buy...
Browning Citori or Miroku MK series?



Love to say that Browning Citoris are made BY Miroku So is the A5, Cynergy, and BPS.

They even tell you that on their site...Brownings site.

[Taco-XL]

Im a Benelli guy, myself.

[JohnKSa]

Good example of paying for a stamping is the HS 2000 made in Croatia. Its now sold in the US as basically the same gun but Springfield stamped "XD" on them and, of course, raised the price.

Well, to be fair, you're paying for a little more than the stamping. Having a respected U.S. company guaranteeing an item and providing service and support can be worth a good deal. Try buying a replacement part from a manufacturer in Croatia or trying to get a pure importer to provide customer service for a gun that's not an obvious warranty issue and it becomes apparent that at least some of the extra money Springfield is charging is well spent.

[Taco-XL]

The XD is still made by HS Produkt though. And Springfield puts their own name on it. Also, i think S&W makes the PPK for Walther and they put walthers name on it. And Walther makes the m&p 22 pistol and puts S&W on it. Crazy. It doesnt matter too much when both are good, known companies, but sometimes you dont know who really makes what.

[Nickel Plated]

Winchester/Browning/FN fall pretty well into this category. They are owned by the same company, and share many designs. With the only real difference between them being the aesthetics and a couple hundred dollars on the price tag.

For example:
The Browning Gold/Winchester SX2/FN SLP. Same gun different style.
Or Browning BAR/Winchester SXR/ FN AR. Again, same rifle, with minor feature changes.
Or Winchester SXP/ and FN P12

I'm sure there are several others there.

[Dashunde]

^ Do any of those come with a better warranty or noticeable advantages?

A few years ago the Ford Escape and the Mazda Tribute were identical underneath the exterior sheetmetal... but the Mazda came with a 50K bumper-to-bumper and the Ford was 36K.
I dont recall the price being significantly higher on the Mazda tho.

[JohnKSa]

The XD is still made by HS Produkt though.

Sure. But Springfield stands behind it, provides spare parts, factory service, etc. Trying getting all that from a maker in another country and it becomes obvious that at least some of the extra cost that you pay now that it's marked "Springfield" is worth it.

And Springfield puts their own name on it.

That's pretty common in the firearm world and has been for many years. Walther and Manurhin is one notorious example that comes to mind.

Springfield also rebadges some Imbel products in addition to the Croatian guns.

STI sold the Grand Power K100 as the STI-GP6 for awhile. Sears put the J.C. Higgins name on a number of of makers' products.

Sometimes the rebadging is advantageous to the buyer, sometimes it's a wash, sometimes it can cause problems when a lower quality product is sold under a brand that is generally considered to be a premium mark.

[Snyper]

Love to say that Browning Citoris are made BY Miroku

The fact they are made by the same company doesn't always mean the end products are similar

Miroku builds Brownings to Browning's specifications, and uses Browning's designs

[LeverGunFan]

Back to what I think was the original question, I'd propose Marlin/Glenfield and perhaps some models of Savage/Stevens. There were also number of firearms that were sold by department stores under their brand name, Sears for example. Sears sold the Winchester '94 with the Sears name on it, I don't think it would bring the same price at auction as a Winchester roll stamp.

[Husqvarna]

To be fair, I'm not looking for a definitive answer to life, the universe and everything

the answer is 42 even if you didn't ask

[jimbob86]

There were also number of firearms that were sold by department stores under their brand name, Sears for example. Sears sold the Winchester '94 with the Sears name on it, I don't think it would bring the same price at auction as a Winchester roll stamp.

There was a time when Sears sold Winchester 94's under the "Ted Williams" label.

Marlin Model 30 (336 ) was sold there under the J. C. Higgins label......

IIRC, Ted Williams was a baseball player ..... and "J. C. Higgins" was a made up name taken from "John Higgins", a book keeper at Sears.

[WVsig]

Back in the 90s there were a few European car brands known for their, shall we say, loose interpretation of the word "quality".

Two examples were the Spanish marque, Seat ("Sei-at") which produced cars unable to cope with the weather outside the Iberian peninsula, whilst being somewhat inefficient, and unreliable, but cheap. Then there was the Czech marque, Skoda, whose existance spawned no end of poor jokes

(What do you call a Skoda with two exhaust pipes? A wheel-barrow! Haha-hoohoo! Why do Skodas have heated rear windows? To keep your hands warm as you push...! Guffaw!! You get the idea.)

Anyway, in the late 90's both these brands were bought out by VW who also own Audi. After an extensive and very successful re-branding campaign, Seats were seen as the youthful peppy brand for those young at heart, whilst Skodas became the smart shopers choice of a quality product without the price.

All this is to illustrate that you can essentially buy a Seat or Skoda and be buying the same engine, chassis, build and similar performance/style as an Audi priced 40-50% higher.

In other words one of the only remaining reasons to specifically buy an Audi, beyond some exclusive performance models, is the badge. For day-to-day driving it is just that badge that will show any difference in the quality of one's journey.

The connection with guns?

Well, I'd like to know which are the brands for which, to all intents and purposes, the buyer is paying a premium for the letters stamped on the side of the slide?

Which companies managed to raise their retail price by virtue of their name?

I can think of a few, but my opinion is purely based on what I've read here and not on any real hands-on experience of the wider gun market, so I'll just see what others come up with.

(PS, let's keep this civil, eh? They're just brands, not family honours!)

Being a car guy and a gun guy I like the this topic.

I think that there are a few problems with your initial analogy. In the US, the market I am familiar with, the same argument can be made for VW vs Audi. A Passat is a basically a A6 and the Jetta is an A4. There is a difference in price but that is not really the issue.

I would argue that the difference is not just a few letters. The cars chassis and guts are the same but the chips on the engine are not. They are setup differently. They perform differently. The fit and finish on a Audi in the US is superior to the VW. I have owned both. Real napa leather vs bonded leather plastic and even options like alcantara inserts. VW does offer some napa but only at higher premium price. There are more features and options in the Audi brand. The guts might be the same but the end product differs.

Also the support you get from the dealership is not the same. Every Audi dealer I have ever dealt with handed me a loaner car anytime my car was in for service. VW has never given me a loaner. The facilities are nicer. There scheduling system is better. I have been able to develop a relationship with the service manager of Audi dealerships, in order to get parts faster and cheaper, that I could not do with WV dealers. I could go on and on but you get the gist of what I am saving.

These subtle differences may or may not be worth the extra $$$ only the individual consumer can decide for themselves but presenting that it is an apples to apples comparison is simply not the case.

To the world of firearms one of the best recent example of the question you are asking is the Sig P225 vs the Sig P6. The Sig P225 is a commercial gun imported into the US by Sig Sauer/Sig Arms and sold to the general public. They were sold in their day for $500- $650 depending when you bought them.

Then there is the P6 which was a contract gun sold to German LEOs which were imported into the US by people like PW Arms as surplus. They were sold at one time used as low at $250 and unissued guns around $325-$350. They were a great deal and you will see most people refer to the P6 as a P225 and vice versa.

However there are differences. Not all P6s will shoot hollow points. The older feedramp was designed for ball ammo. They have a heavy mainspring IIRC 28#s which make the DA horrible. They did this to ensure it would fire hard primers. It also has a funny hammer with a ring/hook so that LEO armorers could tell if the gun was dropped. Generally speaking IMHO they are not finished as well as the commercial versions but that point is often debated. These can all be fixed but does it make the gun a P225?

The market says it does not. If you put a used P225 in a classified you can get $500 to $650 depending on condition a recent batch of P6s and they sold in 15 minutes for $419 from Dan's Ammo. The market says their is a difference just like the market says the Audi A6 is worth more than a VW Passat.

You can make the same analysis of the Beretta 92FS vs the M9. There are small differences and the price difference is smaller here but they are essentially the same gun but the market says they are different.

People keep bringing up the Sears guns of old. I will also point out that every single Sears appliance is a re-branded model from a major manufacturer yet the Kenmore name is still stronger than some of the brands that make the Kenmore goods. People actually pay more for the Kenmore brand.

Whenever you ask questions of "Value" you get subjective answers because it is fundamentally a subjective decision. Even when it is a true apples to apples comparison subjective factors move people to make choices. No way around it. Trying to break it down to an objective analysis is not possible IMHO but it is a fun discussion.