Why aren't companies rising to meet the ammo demand?


PDA






breakingcontact
March 11, 2013, 01:07 AM
We have all read the response to folks complaining about the ammo shortage..."its supply and demand!"

OK, so you econ 101 wiz kids answer the other half of that equation...why hasn't the supply risen to meet demand? If the big ammo makers can't or won't expand production why aren't smaller ammo makers rising to get a piece of the pie. If the answer is they can't get the materials, they why aren't companies coming up to provide, primers, powder, lead and brass?

Are these manufacturing processes not as simple as I see them to be? Are their choke points in the supply chain that cannot be opened up during a time where demand has increased?

If you enjoyed reading about "Why aren't companies rising to meet the ammo demand?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
firesky101
March 11, 2013, 01:20 AM
We have seen these shortages before, they just do not last. If you are investing in new equipment to bump up the manufacturing you are looking at 10 years from now, not ten days. That equipment must produce a certain amount of product before it will pay for itself, and if your demand drops in 9 months and you idle that machine it is just a big fat red mark in the ledger.

frankenstein406
March 11, 2013, 01:22 AM
shareholders gotta make them happy

hoghunting
March 11, 2013, 01:44 AM
http://www.hornady.com/support/availability

A Word on Availability


The current political climate has caused extremely high demand on all shooting industry products, including ours. Empty retail shelves, long backorders, and exaggerated price increases on online auction sites – all fueled by rumors and conjecture – have amplified concerns about the availability of ammunition and firearms-related items.

If the information you hear doesn’t originate from Hornady Manufacturing, don’t believe it.

Here are some of rumors we’ve heard, and questions we’ve received:

Have you stopped production, or has the government forced you to stop?
Not at all.
Did you stop selling bullets so you could only make loaded ammunition?
Absolutely not.
Since we can’t find your product you must be selling it all to the government.
Nope, less than 5% of our sales are to government entities.
Why can’t you make more? Ramp up production? Turn on all the machines?
We’ve been steadily growing our production for a long time, especially the last five years. We’ve added presses, lathes, CNC equipment, people and space. Many popular items are produced 24 hours a day. Several hundred Hornady employees work overtime every week to produce as much as safely possible. If there is any question about that – please take a tour of the factory. You’ll be amazed at what you see.

We are producing as much as we can; much more than last year, which was a lot more than the year before, etc. No one wants to ship more during this time than we do.

We appreciate everyone’s understanding and patience. We don’t know when the situation will improve, so please bear with us a little longer. And remember, when it comes to Hornady Manufacturing, if you don’t hear it from us, please don’t believe it.

denton
March 11, 2013, 01:46 AM
It's simple. The structure of the market is that the military gets about 95% of the ammunition production in the country. The whole production chain from turning tree fiber into nitrocellulose onward is geared to fill that, with a little left over. Sporting ammo gets most of what's left, and reloading components make up the rest.

If one factory goes down, or if there is a small uptick in military demand, sporting ammo gets the whammy and reloading components get the double whammy.

Manufacturers know that the current bubble won't last. They are not going to invest capital to fill a demand that won't be there by the time they get the equipment set up, especially when their main customer doesn't care about having supply that they can't use.

Fred_G
March 11, 2013, 02:24 AM
We have all read the response to folks complaining about the ammo shortage..."its supply and demand!"

OK, so you econ 101 wiz kids answer the other half of that equation...why hasn't the supply risen to meet demand? If the big ammo makers can't or won't expand production why aren't smaller ammo makers rising to get a piece of the pie. If the answer is they can't get the materials, they why aren't companies coming up to provide, primers, powder, lead and brass?

Are these manufacturing processes not as simple as I see them to be? Are their choke points in the supply chain that cannot be opened up during a time where demand has increased?
I am not sure what your Econ question is. If a McD's is too busy one day on your lunch break, do you try to open one next to it for the overflow business?

As far as supply and demand, look at price, you left that our of your OP. Supply and Demand change the price. Right now, I can find very little 9mm .45ACP or .22lr. What is available in limited quantities and at a high price.

9mmepiphany
March 11, 2013, 02:40 AM
Are these manufacturing processes not as simple as I see them to be?
This is an accurate statement

It isn't geared to meet immediate gratification of short term shortages. That is also the reason no one is stepping in to fill the void

Shadow 7D
March 11, 2013, 02:54 AM
It goes BEYOND it
when you look up 'Global Supply Chain Management'
It used to be that a manucature stockpiled HUGE ammounts precursors, as they got them in LARGE lots, well, that leads to excess, now the goal is to NOT have surplus, rather have on demand, this means that what used to be a HUGE stockpile, is rolling stock, when they need more they order more and have X many days on hand waiting delivery of the rest....

That means that the 95th% spike, kills the surplus in the system (or in this case, they can't make ALL the calibers at the same time) and the reserve stockpile, there to give them time to change production.... what we are seeing is the actual production output. It's a MUCH leaner system, that mean this happens, not that it wouldn't in the past, just that reserves might have been higher.

ALSO, the wild card is IMPORTS, now, where are they?
THAT is what we should be wondering.

Telekinesis
March 11, 2013, 03:23 AM
Another reason new companies aren't "rising to get a piece of the pie" is that there are rather severe barriers to entry in manufacturing ammo, none of which are quick and easy to get through.

Any company that is going to even make a dent in the supply of ammo is going to be a fairly large manufacturing company, not your average guy in his basement with a single progressive loader. That means incorporation, lawyers, industrial machinery, a lease on a building in an area with the correct zoning, creating and maintaining relationships with both suppliers of materials AND wholesalers or retailers (and good luck trying to find raw materials right now!). Then you can get into the regulatory issues such as your FFL (and interviews) and other various fees/taxes/licenses like general business licenses, ITAR, liability insurance, and then HAZMAT training for your employees who are going to be near and/or handling low explosives.

Realistically you're looking at a minimum of 3-6 months to get everything up and running from the day you say go until your first box of ammo gets on the truck, then you're looking at a minimum of 12-18 months before you can start to make real profits. The general rule for an entrepreneur starting a business is that all profits will be rolled back into the company for that 12-18 month period (which means either no pay check or a very meager pay check for you, the owner). These kind of companies are not the kind of companies that pop up for the 4 moths of panic and then disappears until the next panic happens, these must be long term operations.

Basically it boils down to this: it is a good time to be in business, but it is a horrible time to get into the business.

apostle83
March 11, 2013, 03:49 AM
I toured Remington's mom plant in Arkansas in 2010. They were going full bore on equipment manufactured to fill the demand for WWII. WELL, except for packaging machines they bought from Germans that were originally used to package cookies.

Point being I don't even know if we have the expertise left to make new equipment for mass ammo production.

-v-
March 11, 2013, 04:31 AM
Simple, because the factories are already running at 100%, and to expand capacity not only takes time, it also takes *A LOT* of $$$ to build the new building (after all, Federal isnt going to just park this in a grassy field), buy and wait for the new machines to be built, and have them installed, fine tune the production line, crank it through a few times to get the QC right and start manufacturing everything.

From the managerial decision of "we need to add another line" to it shipping its first box of ammunition will take quite a bit of time.

If every company decided on December 14th to expand capacity, I'd be shocked if those new lines and plants were up and running by about the same time next year, never mind 3 months from the event.

An other element is I am quite sure most manufacturers realize (thanks to prior trends) that this is a temporary run that will resolve itself in 6-8 month's time. Why spend millions on a temporary bump?

The technical expertise is also quite there. The whole ammunition manufacture process is fairly simple. The machinery that makes ammunition is actually quite a bit simpler then the machinery that makes a bottle of Coke from start to finish.

blarby
March 11, 2013, 04:34 AM
Because this demand won't be here 1 year from now.

The costs from tooling up to meet this sudden spike in demand will be.

c4v3man
March 11, 2013, 04:42 AM
Point being I don't even know if we have the expertise left to make new equipment for mass ammo production.

With the advances that we've made in manufacturing technology, robotics, computer driven QA checking, I fail to see how that's possible. While I agree that we make very little anymore, that's due less to a lack of talent, and more to a lack of cheap labor. As stated above, equipment is expensive, especially with reliability required in dangerous ventures such as manufacturing ammo, where mistakes can and do cost lives, create massive lawsuits, etc. Creating more equipment for small spikes is not profitable since you're not going to want to pay %20 more for ammo to cover the expense after the demand has been filled. I'd imagine it's a pretty low margin industry, which makes it difficult to have equipment go unused and still turn a profit.

evan price
March 11, 2013, 07:38 AM
Simple solution- if you feel the industry isn't meeting the demand and think you can do better, feel free to startup your own ammunition manufacturing concern and start producing ammo for sale to fill the niche.
Should be a pretty simple thing for you to find brass, bullets, primers and powder, plus the machines to make it, a building to put it in, insurance, federal, state and local licensing & taxes, insurance, employees, insurance, taxes, permits, and insurance, and a marketing plan?

Blackstone
March 11, 2013, 07:43 AM
So the choke is not at the raw material availability?

Tony50ae
March 11, 2013, 08:22 AM
The structure of the market is that the military gets about 95% of the ammunition production in the country.

I just can't see that being possible. Our military is not even that large anymore and in fact cuts are being made to personnel right now. We are no longer in Iraq and Afghanistan is winding down.Even Hornady says only 5% of their ammo goes to government contracts. Any sources for this info? No saying that this is a lie, but I suspect that this is a rumor that started somewhere.

Queen_of_Thunder
March 11, 2013, 09:02 AM
Lets start with finding land for a factory.

Once found is it properly zoned forthis type on manufacturing.

Utilities must be put in.

Environmental impact studies must be carried out. (lead) That could take a year or more to get done.

Now the permitting process begins. This is a long process.


So we have completed the environmental study and its been approved, zoning has been approved and we have our permits. Now what.

Well we need suppliers of powder,primers and cases which BTW the competiion has a lock on. So where does the new supply come from?

We also have to order the equipment to bring the primers,cases and powder together to produce the ammo. This equipment is custom built so lets say another year to wait.

Then there is employee hiring, training and such. Wharehouse for finished stock and materials.

We haven't even talked about the money side yet.

JohnBT
March 11, 2013, 09:39 AM
"The structure of the market is that the military gets about 95% of the ammunition production in the country."

This theory still doesn't explain the shortage of .22 LR.

SaxonPig
March 11, 2013, 09:44 AM
Denton- I do not believe the military gets 95% of ammo production. Hornady said 5% of their sales are military.

I'm sure all ammo makers are working as fast as they can. This panic has happened before, and will happen again. Have enough on hand to ride out these bumps in the road.

HoosierQ
March 11, 2013, 09:51 AM
It's simple. The structure of the market is that the military gets about 95% of the ammunition production in the country. The whole production chain from turning tree fiber into nitrocellulose onward is geared to fill that, with a little left over. Sporting ammo gets most of what's left, and reloading components make up the rest.

If one factory goes down, or if there is a small uptick in military demand, sporting ammo gets the whammy and reloading components get the double whammy.

Manufacturers know that the current bubble won't last. They are not going to invest capital to fill a demand that won't be there by the time they get the equipment set up, especially when their main customer doesn't care about having supply that they can't use.
Maybe in the Second World War. This is false.

alsaqr
March 11, 2013, 09:53 AM
The structure of the market is that the military gets about 95% of the ammunition production in the country.

Show me!!

baz
March 11, 2013, 09:58 AM
To the OP: I'm not saying anything that others haven't posted before me. I'm just putting it into a slightly different perspective. You asked: "Why aren't companies rising to meet the ammo demand?" How do you know they aren't? Given the lead time to bring new production on line, they could be "rising to meet the ammo demand" and you wouldn't see the results of it for some time.

Now, I don't know whether they are doing this or not. But if not, it would be for reasons that others have posted, such as the fact that they view this as a temporary spike in demand that will not last, and thus doesn't justify the cost of additional long term investments in production.

Bottom line, and again just repeating what others have said: be patient, and as demand returns to normal, slowly stock up some, so as not to be caught unprepared the next time it happens.

Creature
March 11, 2013, 10:01 AM
Because this demand won't be here 1 year from now.

That is debatable.

And the crux of the whole problem.

The ammunition manufacturers are surely betting that the bubble will burst, but it is very possible that we are looking at a whole new 'sea level' of demand. Manufactures have been wrong before. But because the market is so volatile right now, it is very difficult for manufacturers to gauge how much they should increase their future production capability.

beatledog7
March 11, 2013, 10:28 AM
I've commented before that ammo makers must have ramped up, and I'm still calling it that way. The above Hornady comments back that up--running at capacity, overtime, etc.

Successful companies in any industry have to think long-term to remain successful (companies in those industries that are favored by the politicians in power excepted of course). An ammo maker that's acquiring as much raw material as it can without busting its purchasing cost parameters and operating at capacity has a hundred considerations to make before expanding its production capability, and most will include political realities in that list.

If I were a manufacturer in the firearms industry, I'd be trying to balance current market demand and its opportunity to make big profits with the pitfalls of investing in capacity which might, by the time I could have it up and running, be forced into dormancy by new regulations.

My thumbnail analysis says the right answer is: 1) Add a shift, amplify efforts to get the materials we need, run at safe capacity. 2) Make no new investment in physical plant capacity, for now.

Sniper66
March 11, 2013, 10:29 AM
I talked with people at Sierra and they say the same thing. They are running at max speed and are simply flooded with orders. I did mange to order some Sierra bullets from Natchez, then got an email from Midway letting me know they have some. I'm hoping they are catching up, but as far as ammo is concerned, I think the demand will continue for months to come..

bassdogs
March 11, 2013, 10:47 AM
Want to understand the problem. Head to the grocery a day late the next time a huge winter storm or Summer Hurricane is about to hit your area. Try to buy bottled water, milk, batteries, and of course beer. You're likely to find empty shelves and or long lines to get the last couple of cases. When 90% or more of these storms pass and don't produce the damage that was predicted, give it just a few days and head back to that same store. The shelves are full again and most of this stuff is on sale for what ever weekend is coming.

Will the ammo shortage disappear in a few days? No. Will it eventually just go away? You bet ya. And since many in the shooting community have a boat load of ammo stockpiled in their basement and garage, you'll be able to buy all you want and a whole lot more than you need.

Its just a spot shortage, but the "spot" will be measured in months.

pendennis
March 11, 2013, 10:49 AM
Even with spare capacity, companies can't just ramp up production. Part of the supply chain is the materials end. All of the ammunition manufacturers operate with fairly long-term materials contracts for copper, lead, tin, and all the other components. If they need additional materials short term, they will have to enter the spot market, and prices there reflect the supply on hand that's not already spoken for in existing contracts. Spot market prices tend to be greater than those of definite term contracts.

Labor is also a factor. The ammunition manufacturers have trained operators in their plants. They just don't go to "Operators 'R' Us", and hire someone to run the bullet jacketing operation. It takes time to train them, and to what end? When the current rush is over, the layoffs come, and that costs the companies even more money in unemployment.

And equipment can't just be "turned up" to produce more ammunition. Down time and maintenance are necessary. And when the process is "turned up", more down time and maintenance are required because of increased wear and tear.

The timing of the shortage is also a factor. It happened at the end of the fiscal year, and most forecasts were made, and contracts were already let for 2013. Sales and purchase contracts were probably already completed for 2012, so you end up with a "perfect storm" of ammunition shortages.

Tirod
March 11, 2013, 12:10 PM
The storm analogy is a good one, and the laws that specifically curtail stockpiling exist for both. The government is deliberately taxing large inventories held back at high rates, and do it repeatedly on a yearly basis now. That's one reason why industry has shifted to Just In Time production. It also curtails beating up the local labor pool with constant hiring and firing due to jerky production scheduling and layoffs.

I watched a new owner of a commercial cabinet shop run a $5 million a year business into the ground doing that. The previous owner kept a 6 month backlog of work at all times, and it was fairly easy to manage it that way on a continuing basis. The new owner dropped all the pending contracts, and then sought new business. He'd get a job to pay the bills, and layoff the crew. By the third time in two years, none would come back. Nobody with experience and skills will hire on just to be fired in three months. It's stupid.

The ammo companies won't do that either. They can run everybody on overtime, which is cheaper because there aren't higher medical insurance premiums to pay, no higher unemployment payments, and no higher recruiting costs. You keep a stable workforce, which is trained on how to handle the glitches and keep production running, instead of stumbling into new and creative ways to throw a wrench in the works. You don't pay for more machinery, you just use it to it's full capacity, which is hard enough to do in normal times. And you have warehousing issues, too - all that stuff needs to be shipped NOW, it's the space that tomorrows production has to sit in to get shipped. Building a new warehouse in a week's time cannot possibly happen, much less a plant, or new equipment. It all takes months lead times - whereas, it only took about 20 minutes on a quiet school day to create the demand. And it's all coming from people who refused to plan ahead, or even understand the concept.

Should make you wonder who the zombies really are . . .

Hangingrock
March 11, 2013, 12:41 PM
In a lean manufacturing environment there is no surge capacity.

Killian
March 11, 2013, 01:00 PM
On another post, a fellow pointed out that Federal is making .22LR to the tune of 4 million rounds per day, and he wondered why it was still impossible to find ammo. I wrote this below as an analysis of the situation as I see it. So I started at the premise of it being 4 million rounds. Later I did it at 20 million rounds a day and including the estimated production from 5 other ammo producers. I applied similar low percentages of demand (which demand is not low right now). I would suspect that because centerfire ammo is physically larger that it would be equally difficult to produce--and in fact, probably MORE difficult to produce. So I think these figures can be applied to most ammunition right now.

4,000,000 rounds divided by 50 rounds per box. 80,000 boxes.
80,000 boxes divided by 50 states in the United States. 1600 per state per day.
1600 divided by 3, the number of boxes Walmart allows you to buy at one time (Walmart used as an example) eqauls 533.33 people buying .22 ammo in your state per day.

I live in Mississippi. Population around 2.5 million. Gun ownership is reckoned to be around 57% here, which is high compared to a national average. .22 is a very popular gun, so I'll say 60% of these 57% own a .22. 2.5 million times 57% is 1,425,000 times 60% is 855,000 possible .22 owning citizens of the great state of Mississippi (fires celebratory gun in the air at arithmetic usage).

Figure a nice low number of "hoarders" and "panic driven" (perhaps now we should relabel them as "far sighted") forgot to stockpile 3 foreign-invasions worth of ammo, like 10% of the 855,000 (the truth is, probably more like 40% or higher did not have an active stockpile, only buying ammo when they wanted to hunt or visit the range..but I'll use 10% as a nicely illustratively low number).

85,500 people in Mississippi would thus be frantically trying to purchase .22 as it becomes available. At the rate of 533 people per day being supplied, to satisfy the demands of these 85,500 Mississippi residents, it would take 160 days. Or roughly 5 months.

Some things to consider. 1) Mississippi is a very low population state. Some of you live in states were one CITY may be 2.5 million people....but the same 533 people per day are being satisfied in your state. If you have a state with a population of 10 million, then multiple 160 days times 4 to figure out how long it could take to satisfy the demand for THREE boxes of .22, per person demanding, per state. 2) I deliberately kept my figures low in terms of calculating percentages. .22 firearms in Mississippi? It's probably not 60% of gun owning residents having one. Probably more like 90%. And the figure of only 10% of .22 owners looking for ammo right now at 10%? That's a crazy small number. I'd say almost every .22 owner is looking for ammo right now...even if they've got a million rounds they wouldn't pass it buy if they saw it on the shelf.
3)I had noticed even before this current panic that ammo was never particularly easy to find for about the last 2 or 3 years. My Walmart was often understocked or completely out of ammo. That was in "normal" times.

Arkansas Paul
March 11, 2013, 01:12 PM
Should be a pretty simple thing for you to find brass, bullets, primers and powder, plus the machines to make it, a building to put it in, insurance, federal, state and local licensing & taxes, insurance, employees, insurance, taxes, permits, and insurance, and a marketing plan?

You forgot to mention insurance. :)

9mmepiphany
March 11, 2013, 02:32 PM
Nobody with experience and skills will hire on just to be fired in three months. It's stupid.
It is more cultural and I think industry specific.

Most tech industry and almost all art/entertainment industry folks work on a project basis...it is just part of their culture. That is why they command more in compensation, because they know they are working themselves out of their job

lilguy
March 11, 2013, 05:56 PM
I was at Knob Creek in fall 2011, no panic at that time and I have never seem so much ammo in one place in my life. The product being hauled out of their on a daily basis was mind blowing.Regular folks buying 10,000 rds and more was the norm. At the time 2 wars cranking and all other agency going full tilt, prices normal, no problems, Ammo everywhere.
Obama gets reelected and a school class gets slaughtered and we Americans panic and start buying everything in sight.Now you have MILLIONS of Americans buying thousands of rounds and sitting on them and then continuing to shop for more.Where do you think the ammo is going, try buying a black rifle now.ITS US that's driving this shortage. our wars are winding down but we are getting our info fed to us by Alex Jones and the tin foil hat crowd. Deal in reality not fear, gold merchants are having a field day with the panic. Don't fall for extremists who profit from your fears.

Ignition Override
March 11, 2013, 06:36 PM
Shadow 7D:
Foreign ammo shipping time?

I asked that question three times, over two weeks ago, wondering about Serbian Prvi ammo and Russian Tula/Ulyanovsk.

Nobody seems to have any idea (or keeps quiet) about production increases for the US or shipping times from Russia through the Bosporus, Med etc.
It would interest some of us, even if academic.

mrvco
March 11, 2013, 07:07 PM
You forgot to mention insurance. :)


Twice?

Should be a pretty simple thing for you to find brass, bullets, primers and powder, plus the machines to make it, a building to put it in, insurance, federal, state and local licensing & taxes, insurance, employees, insurance, taxes, permits, and insurance, and a marketing plan?




And as the response from Hornady mentions... they have been ramping up their production capabilities... for the last 5 years now.

breakingcontact
March 11, 2013, 07:21 PM
So what will cause the demand to drop? Will people ever have "enough" to stop buying. I wonder how many boxes per gun owner are produced per year? Would it equal just a box or two per individual or are we talking about a much larger number? The average gun owner I don't think we could call a shooter.

So will people reach a happy place with their ammo stocks? I suppose different people buy for different reasons. I've never been a hoarder but when it was on the shelves I would buy a box or two per week. I reached a place where I had enough and just replaced what I shot. Whoever is feeding the flippers at gumshoes, on gunbroker and other places need to stop then we may have some back on the shelves.

browningguy
March 11, 2013, 07:46 PM
Actually everyone telling you it's supply and demand, or market economy, or capitalism simply don't have a basic understanding of economics. Economics really doesn't address extremes that may happen in a market and people are trying to apply long term concepts to a short term issue. In fact the prices really haven't changed from a producer perspective, and the good companies like Midway, Natchez and a few others haven't changed their prices. The profiteers of course have changed their prices and are screaming SUPPLY AND DEMAND.

You are correct though that in the long term the supply will rise to meet the demand. Meanwhile in the short term people will gouge you for whatever they can, that's called greed or profiteering or price gouging, but it's not capitalism. Some people would like to change the definition so it wouldn't be greedy. The whole idea of capitalism requires a free market devoid of extremes with willing buyers and willing sellers. Some economists go further and believe part of the definition should include pricing based on cost and value added.

kgpcr
March 11, 2013, 07:49 PM
I sure hope the imports start hitting our shores to loosen things up a bit. .22lr, 9mm and .223 would be great to see shipping containers full of them on the docks

hso
March 11, 2013, 07:52 PM
Or put another way, would you invest a LOT of money in an expensive piece of equipment that you would use such a short period of time that you'd never recoup the cost if you were running a business?

c4v3man
March 11, 2013, 08:01 PM
I have to wonder if we would be completely screwed in the event of an actual war? If running at/over capacity isn't enough during (relative) peace, then we're screwed if we ever actually need that ammunition.

As national security is the fed's job, in my opinion spending should increase enough in over-purchasing/surplus sales to cover the cost of additional factories by the manufacturers. If the government maintained a large enough inventory of fresh ammunition, cycling out surplus to us civvies, then we shouldn't have this big of a dip in availability, at least in government relevant calibers.

How about the government giving you an $8,000 rebate for ammo purchases if you purchase a surplus military weapon, like the money we throw away on hybrids...

Telekinesis
March 11, 2013, 08:52 PM
Actually everyone telling you it's supply and demand, or market economy, or capitalism simply don't have a basic understanding of economics. Economics really doesn't address extremes that may happen in a market and people are trying to apply long term concepts to a short term issue.

Nothing against you Browningguy, but anyone claiming that the study of economics can not explain the current market has a very superficial understanding of the field. It may not be explained in the first week of an econ 101 class, but economics DOES address the short term and DOES allow a way to account for extremes in pricing. There are even ways to explain the individual variations of prices between sales by using the Utility curves of the individual buyers and sellers.

In this case (or at least what we're talking about: the final market price of a good) the producer's cost doesn't have as much of an effect on the actual market price because it is insulated or diluted by the actions of both the wholesaler and the individual retailer. It does play some part in the final price, but is not the most important factor. In the current situation where we have (in the short term) an effectively limited supply and a massively increased demand (when compared to our previous equilibrium), price is the only factor that will change to make a new market equilibrium. Anything different and we will see a noticeable shortage (like we are seeing with a lot of the products sold by midway an others) or a surplus (where people are asking too much for a specific item).

In the long run, supply will increase (likely slowly and only to a supply ceiling defined by the producers desire to not invest in new equipment) and demand will decrease once the purchasers (us) decide that we no longer need/want the ammo as much as we previously did (most likely due to either saturation of the market or a decreased threat of restrictive legislation). The actual price will be dependent on the specific amounts that producers are willing to increase supply and the amount that consumers are willing to decrease their demand. Historically after events like this, we end up with an equilibrium market price slightly higher than we began with.

Creature
March 12, 2013, 10:48 AM
Originally posted by Telekinesis
Historically after events like this, we end up with an equilibrium market price slightly higher than we began with.

Agreed.

But like I said in a previous post and if the last Del Mar gunshow is any indication, the demand will be remain much higher than just slightly.That show which averages 8,000 is estimated to have been over 38,000. Not even the Chargers can get that many people to attend a home game.

http://www.examiner.com/article/record-breaking-attendance-at-del-mar-gun-show-on-saturday

An interesting observation as stated by the article was a new event: the required gun safety class. I have it from an eyewitness that the ratio of females to males waiting for entry to the class was 8 to 1. New shooters. And all these new shooters are now part of the demand side of the equation.

Another interesting outcome of that gunshow, local news outlets are pointing out that the police are reporting that there were no incidences crime both days of the gun show: there were ZERO incidences or reports of crime or disturbing the peace.

M2 Carbine
March 12, 2013, 12:08 PM
I sure hope all you folks that can't get any (reasonably priced) ammo have learned a lesson and you stock up a couple year's worth of ammo when it becomes available again.

Even if you have a tight budget (I know the feeling) you can buy a extra box or two once in a while and stick it in a corner for the next shortage.


In the last couple months I've given friends over 5,000 rounds of ammo and before it's over I'll probably give them another 5,000 rounds.
I will be telling them they are on their own the next time, and there will be a next time, count on it.


.

breakingcontact
March 12, 2013, 12:08 PM
Interesting point about the classes. I pulled up to my local range recently before it opened. It was packed. I thought "oh no!". Then people got out of their vehicles and it was about half women. "It's a class!" Glad I was right...both for them to be taking a class and for me to have access to the range.

BoilerUP
March 12, 2013, 12:11 PM
This has all happened before...and will happen again.

Mr. D
March 12, 2013, 02:00 PM
I think the way Hornady (and probably most other manufacturers) is doing it is the way to go: slowly increase production year by year at a pace that can be supported by their sales. That way, if the bubble bursts, they won't be left holding the bag for millions of dollars-worth of new equipment. If the increased buying continues and a new norm is established, the manufacturers will eventually reach that level of production.

This means that we'll need to exercise some patience in the short-term but it is safer for all involved, IMO.

~D

Bubbles
March 12, 2013, 02:03 PM
Builders kept building and demand exceeded supply and prices were in the toilet.
Ammo makers are a bit smarter - they're not going to make multi-million dollar capital investments in response to an artificially created spike in demand.

jerkface11
March 12, 2013, 02:07 PM
The OP seems to be under the impression that a factory can be expanded and new machines ordered, delivered, and set up overnight. Not to mention the hiring and training aspect for operators to use these new machines.

DeadFlies
March 12, 2013, 02:34 PM
Ammo manufacturers make ammo to make money, not satisfy demand. If they are already selling 150% of what they make every day then they're happy even if we aren't.

I'm sure they'd rather deal with too much demand and not enough production capacity than have the reverse happen.

primalmu
March 12, 2013, 03:36 PM
I think what many people fail to realize is that probably 75% of gun owners don't keep more than a few boxes of ammo on hand at all times. The remaining 25% shoot enough to justify* having a stockpile (*notwithstanding the arguments in favor of preparedness). Normally its this 25% that buys the bulk ammo. Suddenly, when there is a gun ban scare, the 75% come out of the woodwork. The guys who only shoot during hunting season start telling themselves, "Well, maybe I need to have a few more boxes on hand just in case." Simply put, the manufacturers aren't tooled up to support all the shooters in the US because most of them don't shoot high volume. Plus, these doesn't even take into account all the new gun owners that are just now getting into shooting due to the hysteria.

9mmepiphany
March 12, 2013, 03:49 PM
The OP seems to be under the impression that a factory can be expanded and new machines ordered, delivered, and set up overnight. Not to mention the hiring and training aspect for operators to use these new machines.
A more likely perception is that ammunition manufacturers are operation at less than full capacity.

Just by the rules of efficiency, the factory would be working at capacity. When demand increases, they'll incurred the additional cost of adding overtime shifts...that increases the manufacture cost of the product, which is naturally passed onto the buyer. When they reach that 150% of normal capacity, they really can't do much more unless they decide to increase capital investment. The question would then be how much could they increase their price to recoup that expenditure in a reasonable length of time.

Killian
March 12, 2013, 03:51 PM
Sooner or later supply will match demand.

And, make no mistake, this is not an artificially created spike. These are genuine shortages we're seeing.

What do you base the idea of supply eventually meeting demand on? I would argue that--unless there is a substantial increase in the amount of ammunition being produced--demand might not be met for many years. This is assuming that ammunition is not expended and subject to resupply issues. Expended by target shooting, training sessions, hunting, and, of course being that I'm from the South, Dueling. :D If everyone buys ammunition--and never uses it--then supply will of course eventually meet demand. If the demand curve has shifted because people perceive there is a shortage and they want what is now missing, then they will actively seek to acquire ammunition when it is available. This is no longer a casual "I'll pick some up when I get to the store." This is "I'm actively hunting it wherever and whenever I can with desperation." That's a demand shift.

I crunched some numbers for my state regarding .22 ammo supplies, as I posted previously, and I was shocked at how long it might take to supply even 3 boxes of 50 rounds each to 85,000 residents of my state. I had kept my demand ratio low (10% of gun owners in Mississippi owning .22 caliber firearms...which is a low side joke when I think of how many .22s are probably actually owned) which make my figures all the more shocking. At current production levels in the US it would take something like a 5 months or more I estimate to meet the current demand in my state (at my ridiculously low estimate of .22 owners). And that was in order to supply everyone with Walmarts "3 box limit". Do you really think people would be satisfied with that amount of ammo? People are going to buy their limit....then be back in line the next day when Walmart opens in hope of buying more until they feel they "have enough". I would argue that everyone's definition of "Enough" has radically changed in the last couple of months. 3 or 4 times more than you ever thought before was enough would be what I'd estimate most people would think now.

B!ngo
March 12, 2013, 03:54 PM
I too think this is just poor planning/spending on the part of Remington's management. Manufacturing has undergone a renaissance in the past dozen years and is still accelerating. The only reason that Remington doesn't have modern machinery is that they haven't invested in it. Perhaps they are so inefficient that they are not profitable enough, despite rising demand (not just the last four months, but the last three years) to be able to invest in new equipment, but again, that's their own fault.
I cannot accept that they haven't been able to partner with advanced machine and manufacturing proces companies to upgrade their gear. Look no further than the new plants that have been constructed in Detroit to manufacture cars from new materials, with new processes and lower costs. Or Boeing building airliners out of carbon fiber. It's remarkable.
B

Big_John1961
March 12, 2013, 03:59 PM
Simple market economics, folks. No conspiracies, no mysteries. Demand outstrips supply, which causes scarcity, which causes prices to climb. The exact reverse happens when supply exceeds demand. Nobody's out to get your bullets. I'd wager that the ammo companies are doing everything they can to get their ammo to the shelves.

larryh1108
March 12, 2013, 06:39 PM
I believe that most of the ammo being sold is being stored, not shot. The ranges I've been to seem to have less shooters. I believe the regular shooters are holding back because we can't replace what we shoot. This doesn't take into account the competition shooters, of course. Everybody has their own comfort level with their reserves. This varies between each shooter but there should come a time when they feel they have enough in reserve to quit buying. I don't think the new shooters have more than a few boxes in reserve because they see 200 rounds and feel they have an arsenal. The shelves will fill up again when the serious buyers have enough. The thing is, the ammo will continue to roll in and so many people will be at their maximum reserve that the ammo will start to sit on the shelves. Recreational shooting will increase again and the "normal" flow of ammo will occur but there will be millions upon millions of rounds in reserve for years to come. Just like last time... and the time before... and the time before....

However, this time I feel it will take a bit longer because there are a lot more new shooters out there but we'll get back to normal unless they pass some kind of taxation or restrictions. If that happens, all bets are off.

c4v3man
March 12, 2013, 06:57 PM
Unfortunately, the fear of taxes/restrictions drives the purchase of more ammunition. I was able to grab some decent .308 a couple weeks ago online, and if I see some high-grade/low-end match 308 come up at a decent price I'm liable to stock up even more.

If we get taxed per round, or if manufactured ammunition shipping suddenly requires the same $27.50 HAZMAT charge that components do, then paying 10-30% more per round than summer 2012 prices may seem like the steal of the century. That fear is keeping me on the lookout for "Decent" priced ammo. It'd take an open war to drive me to spend gunbroker-level cash though...

Killian
March 12, 2013, 06:57 PM
Just like last time... and the time before... and the time before....


So you're saying that what is happening now is exactly what happened before? I've got to express some doubts on that. This time seems very very different to all the other times I've seen shortages. Not even the gun ban in '93 had ammo completely gone like this.

I think that right now even "non serious" people are looking for ammo--and not finding it. Until they do, I think all of them are "serious buyers".

For the last 3 years, when I've gone into Walmart to look for ammo, I have often not found any on the shelf, or found them out of one caliber or another. I think we (the US) were running at a thin edge of "just in time" shipping even then. Now that demand has doubled--Tripled? Quadrupled?--that thin line is gone.

Until ammunition production is increased, I'm thinking shortages are going to last. It's really simple. More people want ammo. A lot more. And, as was said, if ammo companies are pumping their production to 150% with overtime, they have peaked out on production. So until they build new factories to make more--or convince some people that they can really do without ammo and they need to stop wanting it (reduce demand)--this is it in terms of production level. And I firmly believe the earlier poster who said that no company is going to invest in buying new multi million dollar equipment just on what appears to be a short term spike in demand is absolutely correct. Until they become convinced it is long term demand, they don't need to muck around with increasing their supply. They are selling ALL of their ammo now. Why mess with that?

Or, even better from ammo makers point of view, just keep their current production levels and all of them simultaneously begin raising their prices to make 300% more in profits. If I was an ammo maker, that would be my choice. You'd be selling all your ammo at a higher price--and STILL have constant overwhelming demand as people tried to get ammo.

mrvco
March 12, 2013, 07:10 PM
At some point these people are going to get tired of eating ramen noodles and sitting on ammo boxes.

Killian
March 13, 2013, 05:03 AM
You're entitled to your opinion. You're wrong, but that's your prerogative.

And I'm entitled to mine. And you think I'm wrong.

Time will tell.

I don't think you're wrong. I think you are being short sighted and projecting your hopes on what you wish will happen rather than looking at the situation as a whole, doing some math, and recognizing that there are 10's of millions--literally--of other people who are seeking the same product. And that as long as they are, this situation is only going to marginally--if that--improve. So my objection to your statements are that they seem rooted in what you WANT to happen rather than what is actually going on....in my opinion.

About supply, on a long enough time line, you're probably right. On a short range time line, I'm probably right. Now we have to decide what we mean by "long" and "short". Days, months...years? In all seriousness, the level of ammunition output is not meeting demand. The fact that you have crowds of people who can't get ammo and return every day shows that supply is not up to demand. What I object to from a logical standpoint is the argument that continuing at the CURRENT output is going to satisfy demand(???). Either you increase production and supply more than people want....or you reduce demand. Typically you reduce demand by providing a substitute product. If Coke is in short supply, you hook people up with Pepsi. This reduces demand for Coke. So all we need now is something other than ammunition we can shoot in our guns. This will compete with ammo makers, and demand will go down.

The other way to reduce demand is to raise prices. When a box of ammo is $100 a box...then demand will go down. I've already seen that. I've seen .22LR selling for a hundred a box. Maybe some of you have seen that too. It reduced demand. For sure. But some people still paid. I saw that too.

If you are arguing that demand is going to go down and you have good reasons to show why it will and must go down, then I'll accept that you are right. If you are saying that continuing CURRENT outputs are going to eventually "catch up" and meet the demand (with prices staying the same or similar to pre-panic prices), then I'm saying that--as a numbers measure, assuming demand remains at the current percentage of the gun owning population--you may still be talking about 1 to 2 years before some people get a chance to get a couple of hundred rounds through the traditional "go to the store and buy it" method. On that time scale, with the same production outputs, I think ammo could "be short" for a very very long time. For sure it will be months. Could be 2 or 3 years.

Seriously. Crunch some numbers people. It's not that hard. Get some estimates on the major ammunition companies and how many rounds all of them collectively produce. Do it by caliber. Rounds produced, per day, divided by 50 states. This tells you how much ammo is coming to your state per day. Then an estimate of how many guns of that caliber are in your state, and an estimate of how many people you think who will want to purchase it. (My suggestion on calculating how many people you think will want ammo....figure "a lot" or "all".) Then calculate how many days it would take for those people to get ammo. When I did it, I was shocked how long it would take even in a relatively underpopulated state like mine, using very low figures of demand (10% of the gun owning population was what I used) for them to get 3 boxes of ammo.

Show me some numbers that show I'm wrong. Show me how ammo makers in this country, or through imports, or by a sudden growth of cottage reloaders is going to meet the demand. Believe me, on this issue, I won't mind being wrong. But wishful thinking in the face of logic is not helpful. Recognize what the situation is and accept it, that's what I'm saying.

Ignition Override
March 13, 2013, 05:12 AM
Is there any 'intell' on whether the Russian or Serbian companies have increased production for US distributors?

If my ammo ever were to run low, I would check a mid-town shop on prices for a basic longbow and arrows.
Might do that anyway as a distraction or new hobby.

Killian
March 13, 2013, 05:28 AM
If you extend logic and marketing theory a bit in our current situation with ammunition, what are some things for the future if demand remains high but supplies don't increase?

In my opinion...
1. Increased prices. That's in the "short" term. Like 4 to 6 months. Ammo makers will keep their current styles of packaging, like the 50 round box, brightly colored with their logo, with cute little individual plastic separators inside of those boxes. Same shipping methods. Same procurement. I'd figure .45ACP at $60-70 a box of 50. 9mm at $45 or 50 a box. Both of these for the cheap FMJ, or what use to be cheap I should say. What am I basing that on? 1973 gas price increase rates during that shortage.

2. Longer term. Get ready to see 25 round boxes of FMJ as opposed to 50 round. Probably not in brightly colored boxes with design logos, but plain brown cardboard without plastic insert. Cost saving measures they can pass on to you so that you'll swallow a bitter pill more easily. Maybe 25rd boxes for .45ACP and revolvers and 30 round boxes for 9mm and other "hi cap" type guns. This idea of smaller packaging is based on what's happened the last few years with meals at restaurants. They haven't increased prices and kept meals the same size. Instead they've reduced the size of the meals and saved costs (or both reduced size of meals and raised prices). Upside is you will be paying $15 or $20 a box. Downside is you use to get twice as much for the same price.

3. Procurement cost increases. Plastic and cardboard suppliers aren't fools. They'll see ammo guys raking in money hand over fist and eventually their suppliers will bump up costs on cardboard, lead, brass..whatever else is needed.

And a host of other things that I'm too tired to get into now.

JohnBT
March 13, 2013, 09:20 AM
"Show me some numbers that show I'm wrong."

Do I have to use real numbers or can I just make up some numbers using assumptions, estimates and guesses like you did? :)

I look at the record setting number of gun purchases - especially first-gun buyers - last year and figure very few of them will become weekly or maybe even monthly shooters. Maybe they will, but I think not. The ones I know want a couple of boxes so they can shoot their new guns a few times. Very few folks in my experience are ever interested in buying case lots of ammo. They get a few boxes and go back to their other hobbies and paying their bills.

One day soon maybe I'll calculate what I could get by selling my retirement stash of ammo. Not that I'm going to, but for a start 4 cases of .22 LR is 40 bricks @ $80 = $3200. It's tempting to take the profit because I paid $15 a brick for the Wolf Match Target and $18 for the Extra. Ammo has done better than gold recently.

Everything is expensive (I'm starting to sound like my grandparents "It costs how much?"). I bought 2 dozen jumbo minnows a month ago and paid $27.30. They were sickly as it turned out and I caught a 9.25# largemouth on a $5 spinnerbait.

Baldman
March 13, 2013, 10:31 AM
Saw this, this morning answers some of the questions but not all.

http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/2221753142001/concerns-over-gun-control-legislation-lead-to-bullet-shortage/?intcmp=obnetwork

rodregier
March 13, 2013, 12:20 PM
In a different thread I saw lead times of up to 5 years mentioned for the specialized high-volume ammunition production equipment used by the "big boys". Probably no regular production line for that industrial machinery, so it's all custom built on demand in low volume.

kind of like commissioning a sculpture...

Queen_of_Thunder
March 13, 2013, 12:25 PM
Understand that there is no ammo sitting in wharehouses just waiting to be shipped out. What ammo you do see is what is coming right out of the factory and we all know that as soon as it shows up its gone. Ammo production cannot match the demand for it. At some point in the future things will right themselves but until then the shortages will be a fact of life.

Personally I need 20 cases 9mm and 20 cases of 45acp ammo to take care of my shooting needs for the year. Getting that ammo will be next to impossible.

LemmyCaution
March 14, 2013, 10:28 AM
Americans have short attention spans. Demand will slacken as soon as the next shiny thing crosses our screens.

I predict this will occur at roughly the point the next asset bubble bursts and we're in a recession, again. Possibly later this year.

Pilot
March 14, 2013, 10:42 AM
The ammo shortage is already starting to lessen. Yes, .22LR is still widely unavailable, but more centerfire is available, and reloading components are still available. Through this shortage, I have still been able to get primers of all types and sizes. That was not the case in prior shortages, and panics. With primers, I am able to reload all the centerfire cartridges I shoot.

I would think .22LR will also start to become available as soon as people realize they've hoarded enough to shoot for years. I have limited my .22LR shooting, and refuse to over pay for ammo, and I refuse to hoard beyond keeping the amount if ammo I've always had on hand.

evan price
March 14, 2013, 05:30 PM
Killian, have you ever worked in a high-volume, high speed manufacturing environment??

The ammo manufacturers are running balls-out to make product. The demand is outstripping the ability to produce.

Companies normally do their production planning far in advance of actual production. That way they have the materials and manpower in place to start manufacturing. The big dealers and distributors turn their projected orders in a year in advance. What gets made up is excess capacity. Plants try to minimize that excess capacity, but they have to allow for downtime on machine lines for maintenance or emergency repairs.

If they can keep the machines running they may skip preventative maintenance (A losing proposition, eventually the spectre of mechanical failure rears its ugly head) or try to not change over to make lesser-demand product (witness the problems getting 380 four years ago- they just kept running 9mm because there was so much demand they saw no need to change over to 380).

Factories do not want to keep unproductive excess assets around for the emergencies like the current shortage.

A good comparison is airline ticket sales. The airlines have invested heavily in predictive algorithms which help them determine on a particular flight, how many of reservations won't show up. They oversell the seats by a different amount based on flight time and destination, weather, traffic patterns, moon phases, calendar, season, etc. to maximize occupancy of seats and minimize empty seats. The airlines don't keep a fleet of extra jets parked somewhere to make up for extra ticket sales. That would eat up maintenance and depreciated assets and all the other expenses.

If 500 extra people per day suddenly want to take flights, there is just no more seats.

It's not a conspiracy. It's a combination of poor planning by certain people (Production AND customers!) and a perfect storm of anti-gun sentiment due to Sandy Hook and the re-election of Omamma to the White House. It happened in 2008-2009 just like this.

JohnBT
March 14, 2013, 06:56 PM
"kind of like commissioning a sculpture..."

Or a roller coaster. A few years ago I heard some of the details of the design and planning process from a guy who was in town to build a new roller coaster at Busch Gardens. Or maybe it was King's Dominion.

But why can't the ammo companies hire the unemployed and buy a train load of Lee Loaders or something? :uhoh: Think of the boost to the economy.

joeschmoe
March 14, 2013, 07:07 PM
Have you ever walked into a restaurant to find a crowd of people waiting for a table. You're told it will be at least a 45 min wait.
Did a bunch of workers suddenly show up, at that moment, and build an addition to the restaurant and unload tables to fill the need so you didn't have to wait? Or did another restaurant pop up next door and open while you waited to "fill the void".
It takes months/years for these changes to occur. Not days/weeks.
If things haven't improved in the next year or two, then this thread would be valid. 60 days is a temporary spike/shortage.

This is a lesson why you need more than just a couple of boxes of ammo on hand. I don't know why people buy ammo 25 rounds at a time. To me a "box" is 100-500 rounds.

breakingcontact
March 14, 2013, 07:16 PM
Joe, that is great. Funny image of them building on immediately and waiters descending onto the tables. Suppose it may go on for a long time and perhaps eventually some small makers will come up or the big guys will expand if they see profits long term.

joeschmoe
March 14, 2013, 07:17 PM
At some point these people are going to get tired of eating ramen noodles and sitting on ammo boxes.
lol. I just ate Ramen and I'm looking at cases of ammo that are almost 10 years old and boxes of reloading gear and components I've never even opened.

The only thing I would change is I wish I had bought more when it was "cheap".

Killian
March 15, 2013, 12:24 AM
Killian, have you ever worked in a high-volume, high speed manufacturing environment??

The ammo manufacturers are running balls-out to make product. The demand is outstripping the ability to produce.


I believe that was my whole point. That at current demand levels, backorder levels, and production levels, we should be estimating a return to "normal" in years, not months. 1 year at least. 1.5 if we are lucky. Probably more like 2 years. Even in a small population state like mine, and using ridiculously low demand ratios such as 10% of the gun owning population looking for ammo now (realistic figures?...try 65 or 70 or 75%)...even at 10% it still ended up being 5 months, or 1 month if I calculated an estimated production of all .22LR makers in the US at 20 million rounds per day produced. That 1 month, if I up the demand to 70%, becomes 7 months of demand before everyone in my state gets 3 boxes of 50 .22LR. The rest of you with populations 3, 4, or 10 times the population of my state--which pretty much means the rest of you in the US--are looking at 7 months times whatever population percentage you have greater than Mississippi. Florida...you've got 10 times the population of my state, but you still get the same cheesy average of 8000 boxes of .22LR per day that my state gets. 8000 boxes is 20,000,000 (20 Million Rounds Per day of estimated .22LR US production), divided into 50 rounds per box (400,000 boxes) divided into 50 states (8000 boxes per state, per day). If citizens buy the Walmart limit of 3 boxes per day its 2666.6 people who buy .22LR per day in your state. At an estimate I'd say Florida has 5 million gun owners. That could be low. This chart says roughly 25% of people in Florida own guns. http://usliberals.about.com/od/Election2012Factors/a/Gun-Owners-As-Percentage-Of-Each-States-Population.htm I'll assume that a cheesy 10% of these 5 million people are looking for .22LR ammo right now. 500,000 people. (How many people own .22's? A lot..so this estimate is probably wayyyy low.) At 2666 people per day getting 3 boxes of .22LR, it will take 187 days to get that 10% 3 boxes. 6 months. Now figure it at a more realistic demand level like most all gun owners in Florida wanting ammo right now. Peel off 40 percent who stockpiled, hoarded, or prepared for Y2K, Red Dawn and Dec 21, 2012 and you probably still have 60% of gun owning Floridians looking for .22 ammo. Could be an over estimate, but even if it is, it still means a whole LOT of people want .22LR. Probably around a million or so. To get them all THREE BOXES of 50 rounds .22LR could take them 2 or 3 years. 187 days times 60% versus my cheesy 10% estimate. 6 months times 6. 36 months. Maybe.

Since centerfire ammo takes more time to make and is more involved (adding primers and such) the production levels are lower. At least that is my assumption. So figure a lot lower than 20 million rounds per day. Still the same 50 round boxes. Still the same 50 states in the Union.

This is now my second or third time to try and explain this concept. I'm not going thru every state in the union. I'm done. If some of you get it, fine. If some of you aren't following the logic by now, then you never will. If some of you don't agree with the logic, then we'll just have to wait and see. Apply it to your own states using all kinds of different brands of ammo. It should apply to all of them. But I'm done trying to point out simple logic here. If the production levels I'm using are wrong, then my assumptions are wrong. So if someone wants to attack me, find the actual amount of ammo produced per caliber per year in the US. That's where I will be wrong, because I freely admit that I Do Not Know how much .22LR, 9mm or .45ACP is produced in this country per year. So find out how many millions of rounds that is. If you find out I'm too high in my estimates, say so. But if you find out I'm close, or if I've underestimated, then point that out too.

If I am right about the production levels, then I think I'm giving a realistic time frame on what most of us should expect.

That's it. I'm done.

Ignition Override
March 15, 2013, 02:12 AM
joeschmoe:
With surplus 7.62x54R still pretty cheap, are you or many other people going to buy some spam cans of it, Just Because of the Price, if you don't already have some?
Although my Russian MN 44s were not at all accurate with surplus Bulgarian (and the rifles were sold), a couple of spam cans might be nice for the long term, along with a better 91/30.

mrvco
March 15, 2013, 02:15 AM
Saw this, this morning answers some of the questions but not all.

http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/2221753142001/concerns-over-gun-control-legislation-lead-to-bullet-shortage/?intcmp=obnetwork
Is she drunk?

joeschmoe
March 15, 2013, 02:53 AM
joeschmoe:
With surplus 7.62x54R still pretty cheap, are you or many other people going to buy some spam cans of it, Just Because of the Price, if you don't already have some?
Although my Russian MN 44s were not at all accurate with surplus Bulgarian (and the rifles were sold), a couple of spam cans might be nice for the long term, along with a better 91/30.
No. But if I had anything that fired that round I'm sure I would already be sitting on several cans. I'm not shopping in this current panic.

Queen_of_Thunder
March 15, 2013, 08:36 AM
Wonder what the impact on ammo supply would be if no ammo was delivered to such states as CA,MA,CO,ILL or any other state with gun restrictions.

Robert
March 15, 2013, 08:45 AM
This has been answered a few times over and has since wandered away from the op. Done.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why aren't companies rising to meet the ammo demand?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!