Actually, I
did read and understand it, and thought I alluded to the distinction between the firearms division and the larger S&W holding corp, when I mentioned the S&W name having unpleasant connotations in the global market place, which seems to be the case, given this totally un-necessary, (and likely politically driven) name change.
Not sure what all the fuss is about:
1852: Horace Smith and Daniel B. Wesson form a partnership, Smith & Wesson Arms Company, to build a repeating, lever-action pistol.
1854: Partners sell the company to Oliver Winchester, who later bases his famous Winchester repeating rifle on some of the pistol's features.
1856: Smith and Wesson create new partnership, Smith & Wesson, Inc., to begin manufacturing the first Smith & Wesson revolver, in Springfield, Massachusetts.
1873: Smith sells his interest in the company to Wesson.
1906: Wesson dies; the company continues to be owned and managed by members of the Wesson family.
1965: Wesson family sells the company to Bangor Punta Alegre Sugar Corp.
1984: Lear Siegler Corporation acquires Bangor Punta.
1987: F.H. Tomkins PLC (later Tomkins PLC) acquires Smith & Wesson.
2001: Tomkins sells Smith & Wesson to Saf-T-Hammer Corporation.
2002: Saf-T-Hammer renames itself Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation.
2016: Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation renames itself American Outdoor Brands Corporation.
Someone who actually takes time to read and understand what a news article actually says instead of just the headline!
Imagine that.
Also a neat bit of info on profitability: Smith & Wesson Holding Corp's Worst Business Segment in 2016 | Fox Business "While firearms sales recorded greater growth than did the outdoors and accessories segment, the latter carried better gross margins. Stripping out one-time expenses related to the acquisitions this year of Crimson Trace, Taylor Brands, and Ultimate Survival Technologies, the segment has margins of nearly 50% compared to around 42% in firearms.
