Gun company advertising

[RealGun]

It occurred to me that I never see a gun company advertise outside of a gun magazine. If sales are good and concealed carry/home defense is becoming more ubiquitous, at some point it would be a common enough item to be more widely advertised. Would gun companies be free to do that, or would they find it difficult to get an ad accepted in a mass medium?

The gun shop I have patronized most has a full sized billboard on the main thoroughfare nearby. I would guess even that would be resisted in many locations.

It's as if a gun magazine and High Times are lumped together as based around illicit activities. Also, I could say the treatment is not unlike pornography, legal but restricted.

 

[armoredman]

Big tobacco lost the advertising war. Big tobacco makes in three days what thefirearms industry makes in a year. They can't win.There are some gun shops advertising in the MSM, every once in a very great while, usually on the radio, but TV spots for gun shows, too. That is, of course, in Free AZ. In Cali it's probably a hangin' offense.

 

[RealGun]

Equating gun ownership to use of tobacco implies that gun ownership or an interest in guns is "sinful". Many would probably try to make that case, but that is exactly the sort of thing I am talking about. There seems to be this barrier but there is no actual prohibition that I am aware of.

I don't know that a gun company has a "right" to advertise but believe there is strong social and economic pressure against it. If it is politically incorrect to own or have interest in guns, we might want to look at changing that.

If my nurse friend was surprised to find that, when asking around, most of the doctors and nurses in the hospital were packing, why wouldn't a medical profession magazine be a perfectly good place to advertise small arms?

I have noticed shooting instructors advertising in the regional newpaper along with local gun dealers, but the gun dealer part is usually wrapped in a "sportsman" cloak.

 

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

Here is a recent thread on the topic: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=262388

Would gun companies be free to do that, or would they find it difficult to get an ad accepted in a mass medium?

They would find it expensive to get an ad accepted, particularly for the potential return.

 

[armoredman]

Equating gun ownership to use of tobacco implies that gun ownership or an interest in guns is "sinful".

Explain. Tobacco is a legal product to purchase, and use. Firearms are legal products to purchase, and use. Both lawful products, and thier consumers, are attacked on a daily basis, mostly based on information provided by the Main Stream Media. The similarities are there to be seen. The big differance is that tobacco was never consitutionally protected, though, if the Framers had thought it might become a problem, they would have put in an 11th Amendment to the Bill of Rights, "The right of the people to smoke tobacco shall not be infringed."

 

[SASS#23149]

cable tv has gun ads.

Not sure how well they do with them,but all the hunting and shooting shows have gun and gun-related ads.
A local talk show host in Portland has ads for Leupold and Crimson Trace,and I applaud him for that.He is a 2a supporter and carries as well.
There is hope.slim tho.

 

[RealGun]

I already pretty much knew that TV ads would be too expensive. The better medium would be magazines, where the reader could romance a great picture. What the gun makers are doing is advertising to those who already have a gun or the interest and missing a lot of potential first time buyers. I would view and design the ads as more of the institutional kind, gradually reinforcing the idea that owning or carrying a gun is perfectly normal and something to consider. That sort of thing might need to be a message funded by a gun industry organization rather than individual vendors but then in the same venue accompanied by advertising of real brands and models. I just think the industry is hiding in these gun rags, doing little but enticing fanatics to buy yet another gun.

 

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

I already pretty much knew that TV ads would be too expensive. The better medium would be magazines, where the reader could romance a great picture.

Did you look at the link to Time's pricing provided by Zundforge in the thread I posted? Even if Smith & Wesson devoted their entire advertisting budget to even if Smith & Wesson devoted half of their advertising budget to trying to get in Time magazine, they would still only be able to afford 12 full page ads a year, which is less than one out of 4 issues.

It really is about targeted marketing. Do you spend $100,000 reaching 200,000 people of which 10% will buy a gun or do you spend $10,000,000 reaching 20,000,000 people of which .2% will buy a gun? Sure, you look at that and say .2% of is 40,000, that's twice as many guns. But when your advertising cost per gun goes from $5 to $250, you know that is going to hurt profits.

That sort of thing might need to be a message funded by a gun industry organization rather than individual vendors but then in the same venue accompanied by advertising of real brands and models.

From where is all this money coming? The gun industry seems to be pretty busy fighting litigation and legislation trying to put them out of business.

 

[RealGun]

From where is all this money coming?

Easy answer. Stop trying to cover every gun rag, marketing only to those already interested enough to buy or scan the magazine or even be in a place where they might encounter it.

 

[230RN]

I asked the NRA about that in the period that GCA 68 was in the air and they said that mainstream publications would not accept their ads.

However, there are thousands of local papers which are looking for advertising revenue and would probably accept A2-consciousness-raising ads. According to a recent TV program on the newspaper industry, local news is slowly becoming more important to the average person who reads newspapers. This indicates that the small local papers might start to have a slight circulation edge against many of the big papers in the near future.

Which, in turn, means that NRA-type advertising dollars might be effectively spent in these news outlets --which so far, are not being Corporationized.

Ms. Froman, Mr. La Pierre, are you listening?

As far as individual manufacturers are concerned, it would probably not pay to advertise in these small local media for the reasons mentioned in the above posts.

I do note, however, that in the Denver Daily News (a small local upstart newspaper), advertisements for concealed carry classes are appearing, even on the front page.

Man, I still miss the squeaky floors and the old Remington calendars that used to characterize a local hardware store I frequented long ago, even though the calendars were pretty much strictly hunting-oriented.

But in those days, self-defense was a very minor part of shooting. Nowadays, it's rapidly becoming a necessity, and I look to the SD-concealed carry shooting movement as being a major part of what is going to ultimately save the Second Amendment from the "folks" who want all our thinking to be funneled through the Big Media Outlets.

 

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

Easy answer. Stop trying to cover every gun rag, marketing only to those already interested enough to buy or scan the magazine or even be in a place where they might encounter it.

I'm afraid you lost me here. You start out by claiming that gun marketing to too targeted and they need to be more mainstream and even have an industry-wide push for more advertising. Then, when asked where all this money is coming from, you suggest even more targeted marketing than is already occuring.

Also, my question was specifically referring to your suggestion that some kind of industry group public awareness campaign. I was asking where that industry money was coming from.

 

[6_gunner]

In my area, gun stores advertise on the radio pretty frequently and on TV occasionally. But I've never seen gun manufacturers advertise in mass media.

 

[Outlaws]

There would be gun advertisements on prime time TV but you have to market to people who are watching. Most are not interested in guns past the old 38 they have in the night stand.

Companies spend money where it will be most effective. For guns, that is in hunting/fishing/shooting magazines, hunting TV shows, and a few internet areas.

The cost of getting on prime time television is so great that you really have to have a product that sells. Pay attention to what is advertised at 7pm-9pm...it isn't stuff that lasts for 100 years, and it isn't niche market stuff. Its throw-away stuff and other BS that you will use up in a months time tops...that and maybe a car or two. During the day you get furniture and other things (lots of cars), but those are mostly housewives watching and we all know what the average housewife thinks of firearms.

It isn't cost effective.

 

[RealGun]

The cost of getting on prime time television

I don't even watch legacy network TV. A better focus for advertising to break into the TV market would be specialty channels, starting with essentially guy stuff such as Outdoors, Speed, and DIY, and I am not talking about sporting guns or hunting. As viewers get used to it, broader markets might open up or offer affordable rates for less premium time slots.

 

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

Several manufacturers already advertise on just the channels you are mentioning, at least the Outdoor Channel and the Outdoor Life Network. I've seen plenty of ads for Taurus, DPMS and others that are definately not hunting related.

 

[RealGun]

Several manufacturers already advertise on just the channels you are mentioning, at least the Outdoor Channel and the Outdoor Life Network. I've seen plenty of ads for Taurus, DPMS and others that are definately not hunting related.

That's very important to know and appreciate. Thanks. I would love to see more of the it-ain't-just-about-huntin'-an'-shootin'-paper stuff.

 

[SWModel19]

I just think the industry is hiding in these gun rags, doing little but enticing fanatics to buy yet another gun.

That is why it is our job to "forget" our old issues in waiting rooms in doctors offices or auto service departments.

 

[aka108]

Depends also about the area where you live. In Elko, NV you'll see some gun advertising weekly in the local news paper. In Tallahassee (true blue area), very seldom. Gun advertisers can sometimes be their own worst enemies when they show the pseudo military and swat wannabies in pseudo tactical situations. Makes non gun owners think all gun owners are whackos. See a few of these types at the range on occassion, all costumed up. Most are harmless guys, sort of like Star Treck treckies. Does make you wonder however.

 

[cbsbyte]

I have seen Ruger and Smith ads touting their latest small frame handguns for camping/backpacking protection in some non hunting/fishing outdoor magazines and even in Popular Mechanics. You probably won't see ads in major national newspapers or on TV duing the Superbowl. But that has to do with the fact gun manufactures are not billion dollar companies, and don't have the revenue to justify expensive advertising. I also remember not too long ago Dodge and Ruger teamed up to create a special addition Ram truck with many features geared towards firearm owners. I am not sure if it ever went into production.

 

[SniperStraz]

That kinda depends on where you are. Upstate NY you won't see any billboards, but in rural GA you see them sometimes.

 

[22-rimfire]

Firearms companies advertise where they get the most bang for their buck. They want to market to the audience that buys their products just like everyone else. So, it's advertising on hunting & fishing cable shows, shooting, hunting, sporting magazines is the place to be. They are not trying to change the world, just sell their products.

 

[SWModel19]

But that has to do with the fact gun manufactures are not billion dollar companies, and don't have the revenue to justify expensive advertising.

Whhhhaaaaaa???

But... but.... but..... They have such a powerful lobby! They must have money.

Sorry to trump the thread with politics. But observations like this only serve to remind me how moronic the gun grabbers are in assuming the "powerful" gun manufacturers are behind the NRA and not We the People.

 

[cbsbyte]

But observations like this only serve to remind me how moronic the gun grabbers are in assuming the "powerful" gun manufacturers are behind the NRA and not We the People.

Most intelligent gun grabbers know full well where the money comes from to fund the NRA, they just spout off that nonsense about gun companies funding the NRA to fool the sheeple into believeing the companies control the NRA. On the other hand, gun manufactures do donate alot of money to the NRA so it not fully without fact.

 

[Glenn Kelley]

There's nothing to get paranoid about here,lots of consumer goods are not advertised on Tv.Cameras for instance.

Glenn