Marketing Project - S&W

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CTGunner

Member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
934
Hi Folks - I'm working on a Marketing project for an MBA class I'm taking. Surprisingly I was able to convince my teammates as well as the instructor that Smith & Wesson was an acceptable Company to research :) So I want to use this forum to conduct some real world research. I will try to incorporate responses into the paper.

1. Do you consider Smith & Wesson an innovator? Please explain.

2. When you think of product innovation in handguns what companies/products come to mind first and why?

3. How could Smith & Wesson be more effective in marketing handguns?

If you would prefer not to answer the specific questions but instead give general thoughts on S&W that would be great too.

Thanks for your help.
 
Here is a dated article that pretty much sums up my opinion on Smith and Wesson innovation.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/smith-wesson_dark.htm

In the sporting industy marketing plays a big part in overhyping a lot of mediocre products such as Benelli shotguns. I think S&Ws current marketing attempt at letting their reputation speak for itself is going to fall on deaf ears in the future coming years. With guns, it is hard for someone experienced to buy into something new because they have mastered the older way which works just as well if not better such as the trend towards Crimson Trace sights. We got along without them before for long enough so now I dont see the practicality in them after countless rounds downrange without using it.

A new shooter might think it a great thing though because it provides a "fast track" route to easy and accurate shooting. Is there anything wrong with that? Not inherently but you are relying on an electrical object now without really knowing how to do it the old fashioned way.

Really that is what marketing is all about. "Look how easy this is" "This is better than this because..." "We totally redesigned this so...." when all they actually did was change one part or something.

I dont know if this will help you but that is my general thoughts.
 
Thanks earl - I definitely have my own thoughts on S&W but value the opinions of others, hence the thread. Thank you for kicking it off!
 
Ctgunner,
if i were in your shoes i would look first at early smith revolvers.if memory serves they ha d real innovations with there early models,top breaks,number 3s ,etc.
kudos for your choice in companies.
 
Basically faking "innovation" may make quick SHORT TERM profits and satisfy stakeholders in the company and get certain key players big bonuses, in the long term such business practices can sink the company.
 
RobertRogers said:
Basically faking "innovation" may make quick SHORT TERM profits and satisfy stakeholders in the company and get certain key players big bonuses, in the long term such business practices can sink the company.
Click to expand...
How are they 'faking' innovation? What do you mean by that? Not disagreeing, just looking for clarification...
 
After a little more thought I will add a bit to my first post.

In more recent years S&W has no longer had Colt to compete with so they have kept up the illusion of being innovative. However all you have to do is look at who I believe to be their primary competitor,Taurus, and you quickly see who has better innovation or at least makes an attempt at innovation. Taurus has in the last few years come out with some pretty neat products. I dont own any of them but I do not deny them their fair slice of the market. The Judge, Total Titanium Revovlers, the 455 5 shot 45ACP revolver was easily my favorite. The coolest thing Taurus did in the last year though was not even a gun. It was the holster that was included with the TCP which looks like a cell phone carrier. Concealed carry in plain sight. I dont think a book on it will sell nearly as well as "The Standard Catalog of Smith and Wesson" but I for one would love to see a book of every Taurus product that has ever come out.

They made their M&P series in response to their dwindling LE contracts that were being replaced by Glock. In my opinion the M&P is a Glock clone where personal preference is going to be the difference in whether you like them or not. The M&P does have the grip straps which are a non issue to me but are a huge deal to quite a few others and may be included as a real innovation on their part.

Their newest "Bodyguard" series are just the same ol thing as everyone else except for an integral laser option which is not a real improvement over their crimson trace models but I bet it makes them more money not having to pay out to CT for the use of their product.

One of their better guns I think is the SW1911PD which is by no means an innovation. It does feel great though and is a lighter option to a Commander sized 1911 and I believe is a better buy that blows the doors off of any Kimber in a similar category.

This is all coming from a guy who carries a S&W Model 60 J frame nearly everyday so it is not so much me not likeing S&W as it is me seeing they are really not innovative.
 
Without implying that S&W doesn't innovate, they don't particularly strike me as innovative. When I hear innovate and firearms in the same sentence my mind jumps to Kel-Tec straight away. If I was S&W I think I would lean more towards the "tried and true" marketing philosophy rather than "new and improved".

You seem focused on innovation which is a great marketing theme for companies like Kel-Tec but less so for an established giant like S&W.

IMO, the best marketing slogan I have seen belongs to Sig. "To hell and back reliability"
It is short, memorable, accentuates an important selling point, and in most people, will invoke some type of emotional response (even if it comes from something unrelated to the product itself).
 
1. They unfortunately were great innovators in locks.
2. Don't care much for them (locks) myself.
3. Take away locks, their business would boom even more.
Not a Smith hater, have some of their products and I enjoy them. I just personally feel that many firearms manufacturers are "safetyizing" themselves out of customers.
Smith does not have a monopoly on this.
IMHO the best thing they could do would be to have a "Back to basics" campaign.
YMMV
 
Sorry I can't aswer your questions but I have an interesting tid-bit of info.

I was watching the history chanel or something and there was a guy from smith and wesson. He said there was a poll of the general public asking what company made the best, or most, or most famous, or something like that assault rifle. The #1 answer was S&W. The correspondent asked if S&W even made assault rifles, the guy aswered to the effect of we do now.
 
as for innovative companies, i'd have to give it to Taurus and Kel Tec. S&W has name recognition and good customer service. In my opinion thats what keeps them going.
 
I don't see S&W as an innovative company at all. They have done a little bit with materials in revolvers, but the last real "set the industry on its ear" innovation was the use of stainless steel in the Model 60 - in 1965.

Nowadays they focus on quality of the product, nostalgia and "me too", i.e. the M&P pistols and rifles.

I don't know if it fits your assignment, but if you want to do a real knockout marketing paper, describe the unique challenges faced by the firearms industry marketing a product that has a life cycle measured in decades, where a fifty year old example is better made than most of what you can buy today, for example a 1955 Winchester Model 94 vs a 2005 Model 94. How many products can you say that about?
 
The current company calling itself S&W uses the word "innovation" to cover up their cost cutting measures (MIM parts, two piece barrels, cheap finishes) and poorly designed internal locks.

The final product costs little to make, and S&W consistantly asks more $ for it.

I stopped buying NEW product S&W's in 2001, and there is little hope they will produce something I would need, or want.

I buy over a dozen LNIB used S&W's every year. S&W is competeing with itself, whether they realize it or not. Why pay more for a cheaply made ugly knock off when you can buy the real thing for less?

The current S&W has me longing for the Bangor Punta days.

Ruger is the manufacturer I think of when "innovation" is mentioned.

Good luck with your project! TJ
 
And as it was mentioned befor the m&p 45 is an attempt to take away from glocks massive le sales market. I have shot plenty of s&w but have never owned. I like them and they do what they are intended to do, fire projectiles. I gotta say I have to agree with the trend of this post and say that it has been too long since s&w has done anything truly "innovative". It just seems to me that a lot of their new "features" are just making things cheaper. They make good weapons but I wouldn't call them innovative at all. Just my .02. Take it with a grain of salt
 
Taurus innovation-yes
Taurus QC-NO :barf:

Yes, I did break down and buy a PT145 a few years back because of it's features etc (2nd generation). I knew I was taking a chance due to Taurus' spotty reputatation, but their revolvers seemed to have been getting better over time, and it also appeared (and I hoped) their semi-autos were also.

Mebbe they had a window when QC was improving, but possibly due to the upsurge in all gun sales, their QC has gone out the window.

Got a relative that's a gunsmith at a local shop-can't tell you how many times I've seen him working on a brand new Taurus before the storeowner can put it out for sale! Once made 4 trips to the shop-he was working on a new Taurus 3 of those times-not very good odds! The majority of guns the shop gets back in on trades are also Taurus.

Taurus better forget about innovation/new products and get a handle on their QC or they'll eventually drive the company in the ground.

So...does your marketing class focus on the short term or long term health of a company?
 
1. Do you consider Smith & Wesson an innovator? Please explain.
2. When you think of product innovation in handguns what companies/products come to mind first and why?
3. How could Smith & Wesson be more effective in marketing handguns?
Click to expand...

I believe S&W was an innovator with it's M&P line of semi-auto pistols. The lines of the weapon and grip straps allows almost any shooter the option of a .45 caliber handgun. I do not believe that the M&P is another glock, look at the gun and handle the gun and you will see that some thought has gone into how to make the pistol fit the hand. You can also see this when firing the gun as recoil is reduced by the design.

I do not see how S&W could be more effective in their marketing unless they send reps out to police departments and allow the staff making decisions fire the weapon. Something they probably do already.

They could also sell guns to gunshops that offer rental guns at a reduced cost. More people come into contact with a gun as a rental when making buying decisions than are given credit for.
 
natman said:
I don't know if it fits your assignment, but if you want to do a real knockout marketing paper, describe the unique challenges faced by the firearms industry marketing a product that has a life cycle measured in decades, where a fifty year old example is better made than most of what you can buy today, for example a 1955 Winchester Model 94 vs a 2005 Model 94. How many products can you say that about?
Click to expand...


Thaddeus Jones said:
I buy over a dozen LNIB used S&W's every year. S&W is competeing with itself, whether they realize it or not. Why pay more for a cheaply made ugly knock off when you can buy the real thing for less?
Click to expand...


Exactly.
QED.
 
Hand in hand with a discussion on innovation, is a discussion of how well your innovations track with the tastes of your market segment. A successful innovator chooses projects that are consistent with the desires of their target segment(s).

It is a fine line to walk--staying on the cutting edge of innovation, while still producing products that are appealing to your segment--vs. being so enslaved to segment's desires that you end up with a stream of "me too" features. Innovations that are too ahead of their time (i.e., out of step with their segment) will fail without massively expensive marketing campaigns. But companies that listen too closely to their customers often end up with products based on a kludge of yesterday's technology and/or tastes (think of the classic Simpsons episode where Homer designs his dream automobile).

You may want to examine S&W's "innovations" in the context of their timeline for intro of such new features vs. what competitors release (are they really pioneers, or fast followers???).

You may also want to do a little home-brew conjoint analysis of potential features, by posting a few "a or b" polls on THR...

Good luck. Have fun!
 
My thoughts are you need to approach this from a different view point. Example is S&W a firearms manufacture or a manufacture that happens to produce firearms. The same may be said of others example Ruger etcetera, etcetera.

Examine the manufacturing processes.

Ruger thru the lack of capital to acquire machinery to produce complex shapes went with investment casting process. They acquired over time expertise in that field of manufacturing thus Pine Tree Castings subsidiary of Ruger.

Smith & Wesson one of their manufacturing abilities is forging with I believe customers out side of the firearms industry.
 
Didn't Smith & Wesson originate the original .38 Special cartridge and .40 Smith & Wesson?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

USBP379
  • Locked
PoliceOne.com M&P Compact Review
Replies
18
Views
1K
Lloyd Smale
L
Onmilo
  • Locked
S&W Shield Safety Recall
Replies
1
Views
532
Robert
Robert
X
  • Locked
$230 S&W 915 9mm and range report
Replies
0
Views
621
xr1200
X
W
  • Locked
S&W Enters the Shotgun Market
2 3
Replies
58
Views
4K
CZguy
C
K
  • Locked
Milwaukee PD Switching to M&P .40
Replies
1
Views
318
Zerodefect
Z
Back
Top