Quote:
Originally Posted by stevieboy
The fact that Smith is a publicly held company doesn't mean for an instant that an entity doesn't own a majority of the stock. And, rather obviously, it is in the interest of that entity to equip all of Smith's revolvers with locks, because it makes them. I'm not going to waste my time belaboring this issue except to say that Smith wouldn't sell lock equipped revolvers if the entity that owns the majority of its stock didn't think that doing so was profitable.
|
Your scenario is of course possible. However the facts are there is no entity, there is no majority stock holder and nobody is making locks other than the S&W plant in Springfield. The locks are a cost incurred in building the guns and are profitable to no one. You can't take a small part of what was true years ago, embellish it with a bunch of supposition and declare it today's facts...doesn't work.
It amazes me that this "lock maker" stuff keeps coming up when it is so easy to get the straight scoop on a publicly held corporation these days.
Bob