Wed Dec 19, 2012, 06:25 AM
Omaha Steve (42,855 posts)
Investors turn against gun makers after massacre
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) - Investors shunned some of the nation's largest gun makers Tuesday, putting up for sale the manufacturer of the Bushmaster semiautomatic rifle used in the Connecticut school shooting and worrying that the attack could soon bring stricter gun laws.
Stocks of other gun companies fell, and one sporting-goods chain said it would temporarily stop sales of military-style firearms. In Washington, some former opponents of gun control signaled that they may change their position, potentially giving stricter gun laws their best chance of passage in years.
The most notable rejection of the gun industry came when the private-equity firm Cerberus Capital Management announced it would sell the maker of the rifle used in the massacre, which it called a "watershed event."
The shooting "raised the national debate on gun control to an unprecedented level," Cerberus said in a news release. "We are investors, not statesmen or policy makers."
FULL story at link.
Read more: http://apnews.excite.com/article/20121219/DA38GMC00.html
This March 27, 2006 file photo, shows a Bushmaster AR-15 semi-automatic rifle and ammunition on display at the Seattle Police headquarters in Seattle. The maker of the Bushmaster rapid-fire weapon used to kill schoolchildren in Connecticut on Friday, Dec. 14, 2012, was put up for sale on Tuesday, Dec. 18, 2012, as investors soured on the gun business. (AP Photo/Ted S. Warren, File)
10 replies, 1400 views
Investors turn against gun makers after massacre (Original post)
|Omaha Steve||Dec 2012||OP|
|brer cat||Dec 2012||#1|
|Sherman A1||Dec 2012||#3|
|quaker bill||Dec 2012||#5|
Response to brer cat (Reply #1)
Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:12 AM
JustABozoOnThisBus (10,679 posts)
2. That's why they (or we) are called "investors"
And the activity is mostly driven by a desire to "buy low, sell high", even for liberals trying to build a retirement account.
I don't own any gun company stock, not directly. But mutual funds are like sausage, you don't know (and may not want to know) what stocks are in them.
I suppose there are "humanitarian" funds, or "green" funds, but most investors just want a good return and enough diversity to stay relatively safe.
Response to brer cat (Reply #1)
Wed Dec 19, 2012, 07:23 AM
Sherman A1 (13,725 posts)
This is the market place at work. If public opinion turns these companies into bad investments, I am for one happy with the results here. There is no one answer or one simple workable solution, but it is a step in the right direction.
Response to rateyes (Reply #6)
Wed Dec 19, 2012, 10:38 AM
starroute (11,744 posts)
9. It isn't that simple
About five or six years ago, Cerberus bought up a whole bunch of old-line gun manufacturers -- they were in bad odor after the Beltway sniper, so they came cheap -- and rolled them up into what it called the Freedom Group, which now controls up to a third of gun and ammunition sales in those categories.
When gun sales boomed after Obama became president, they announced their intention to take the company private, but they called that off last year after sales fizzled again. They haven't given up pushing gun sales, though -- and their ad campaigns are particularly implicated in promoting semi-automatics for civilian gun owners.
So now they're stuck with this major unit that does nothing but make guns and ammo (and that I think also includes their weapons training facility, the Tier 1 Group) and that is joined at the hip with the NRA. It can't stop making guns, because that's what it does. They have to either sell it at a loss or stall and hopes the bad news blows over and they can quietly retract.