Yesterday, SIG SAUER told the world the details their free “voluntary upgrade” for SIG P320 pistols. As they say, that’s gonna leave a mark. Yes, but how much will the recall cost the New Hampshire gunmaker? We got out a crayon and an evelope to find out. But first, know this . . .

SIG is hardly the only company to have experienced a production or design problem. Recent cases in point: the Ruger Mark IV and Precision Rifles. Then there’s the Remington 700 recall.

Go back far enough, and yes, even GLOCK (all fanboy protestations to the contrary) has had their problems. More recent ones, too. It’s hard to think of any gun maker of any size that hasn’t had a similar situation.

OK, so what do product recalls cost a manufacturer? Answer: a lot. Here’s our back-of-the-envelope guess at what the P320 fix might cost SIG SAUER.

When Jeremy and Jon were in New Hampshire last week, SIG CEO Ron Cohen told the assembled throng that his employer has sold 500,000 P320’s since its introduction.

A significant percentage of owners of the affected guns won’t take advantage of SIG’s voluntary upgrade. Some will never hear about the offer. Others will simply ignore it.

To be conservative, let’s assume that 40 percent of P320 owners will send their pistols to New Hampshire for the upgrade. That’s 200,000 guns.

SIG’s paying the shipping for owners who opt for the upgrade. Guns are shipped second day air, and that’s not cheap. SIG probably has a good corporate account; let’s say shipping runs them $25 per pistol.

Figuring 200,000 upgraded P320’s, that’s $5 million. Then there’s the process.

Despite the gun’s modular design, installing the upgrades isn’t a pop-open, drop-in affair. SIG will need to machine both the slide and the frame to accommodate the new trigger disconnect parts. Let’s say that’s only a total of one hour of handling per pistol and assume a rock-bottom cost of $15 per hour for the labor involved.

Figuring 200,000 upgraded P320’s, that another $3 million.

Then there’s the cost of the parts. It’s reasonable to assume that changing their processes to crank out the new parts — and producing enough inventory — will be a significant undertaking. Again, being conservative, let’s assume only $10 in upgrade parts cost per gun.

Figuring 200,000 upgraded P320’s, that’s $2 million. Let’s total that up:

Shipping: $25
Labor: $15
Parts: $10
Total: $50 per gun

Assuming 200,000 guns received at $50 per gun, the cost of SIG’s voluntary upgrade should be no less than $10 million.

Again, this is a conservative guesstimate. It doesn’t take into account lost sales going forward, or any damage done to the SIG brand. Still, this gives you an idea of the cost gun manufacturers can incur when things go wrong. Which is why companies like SIG work so hard and invest so much money to avoid problems in the first place.

UPDATE: Anonymous sources tell us that SIG is considering reducing its costs by sending armorers into the field to affect the repairs. More info as we get it.

68 Responses to What Will the SIG P320 Voluntary Upgrade Cost the Company?

  1. i hope it does and they better have learned something from all this. they seemed to have learned from Remingtons faux pas with the 700 triggers by at least ADMITTING there is a problem in the first place. now all thats left is to pony up and fix the mistake, which they are doing.

    • But they’re not admitting anything is wrong. They still assert that it is perfectly safe, and they are refusing to do an actual recall.

      • Because by all objective standards, it IS safe. Those standards were created for a reason by SAAMI and the military. Could they be improved? Yes, apparently. But that’s not something SIG can do.

        A SIG customer found a unique situation where the gun can unintentionally fire – so Sig is putting people’s mind at rest by making that scenario physically impossible to achieve as well, but do NOT confuse that for being drop safe. Its just not the same test, even though its being described in the same terms.

        No guns are “drop safe” in the way you think that means – if you drop any gun high enough, hard enough, for enough times it WILL discharge. That’s why an objective standard exists – to say “X” is acceptable, but anything below X is not acceptable.

        But the customers have spoken – and Sig cares about safety from even the most unlikely of events, so they’re fixing it as fast as they can, and at enormous expense.

        • “A SIG customer found a unique situation where the gun can unintentionally fire”
          He did so by getting shot in the leg when he dropped his 320. He hardly “found” a situation, the situation found him.

          Also, Do you have any authority for the “nothing is drop safe” statement? I’ve never heard that before. Are you just theorizing, or is this based in fact?

        • “Because by all objective standards, it IS safe.”

          But by all rational, sane, thinking standards, any gun that fires when it’s dropped, repeatedly, over and over, as tested by multiple testers and by the company itself, and further has actually fired when dropped and shot an officer, while the gun was still locked in a retention holster(!) is NOT safe.

          It wasn’t safe. It isn’t safe. It’s a defective design, which is fixed (er, I mean “upgraded”) in the new generation. If Sig was responsible, they’d NOTIFY their customers that they have a potentially unsafe pistol on their hands. Instead of putting the burden on the pistol owner to somehow discover this fact (and hopefully, not in the way that the shot officer discovered it).

          Saying it’s safe because it met some arbitrary test is like saying “gun control is common sense” — sure, it may sound like “common sense”, but it doesn’t work in reality. And guns that fire when you drop them are NOT drop safe, no matter how many tests it passed.

  2. The shipping is going to be less than $25 for SIG, but much more for a average gun owner. One thing I always dread is shipping out a handgun. The one thing that they should do is allow you to buy a ship[ping label from them.

      • I ship a LOT of stuff by overnight (FedEx Standard Overnight) air, right around the same weight ballpark as a handgun (3-5 lbs), and our contract gets us a rate less than $10 for most of them through FedEx. if you’ re a big enough outfit, there are definitely ways to negotiate the prices. I can even get Priority Overnight (that’s 10AM delivery) for a buck or 2 more.

        The nearest parallel to this deal is the old Ruger 3-screw to Transfer Bar conversion. I wonder if there will be a premium someday for non-upgrade P320.

    • IIRC gun companies sending out labels (or FFLs in general) can use the post officer which ends up being significantly cheaper than non-FFLs who have to use FedEX. Depending on your FFL it is sometimes cheaper to send it through them instead of doing it yourself (or do it by Fed Ex without using 2 day air, violating their policies but not the law)

      Why can’t regular gun owners use the USPS to declare and ship a firearm?

      Who knows.

      • When I went to ship a pistol to my son in another state, the FFL wanted a transfer fee (in these parts $75) to ship USPS, plus actual shipping costs, because they were required to put the gun on their books before shipping, and then take it off when shipped. I used Fed Ex instead, no problem.

    • Comment was before the correction that Sig was paying for shipping both ways. However, from past experience, I hate the cost of shipping a handgun if you are not a FFL

  3. I expect this voluntary recall will turn mandatory soon enough.
    It’s the only way they’ll be able to get a handle on all the slides and grip modules out in the wild that will not be compatible with the “repaired” stock.

    • There is no evidence so suggest the grip modules will be changing.
      Sig needs the receiver and the slide – in the 320 the grip frame and the receiver are two different parts.

    • Dan Zimmerman – “SIG will need to machine both the slide and the frame…”

      By “frame,” do you mean the grip module? I’ve spoken to 2 Sig support reps who insist the P320 upgrade in no way changes the grip module, and that info to the contrary is false.

      • We’ve asked their head guys a couple times since yesterday afternoon and haven’t yet received a firm response. They said, “we’ll update the FAQ with that answer soon” but I haven’t seen that yet. We’ll let you know when we hear something.

        Again, as you and I have discussed this before, we were specifically told that the grip module (the polymer part of the gun) requires modification. This was from folks a lot higher up the SIG food chain than customer service reps (no offense to them or to you intended). And again, the FAQ answers the question of “do I need to send in my entire gun” with a simple “yes.”

        Obviously it doesn’t affect me or TTAG in any way whatsoever regardless or whether they’re touching the frame or not. We’ll figure out what the deal is and let you know.

        As for the update at the bottom of the post citing anonymous sources, I cannot for the life of me see how that could be true, as this isn’t an upgrade that can be done in the field. The slide definitely has to be machined on a mill to make clearance for the disconnect. Unless they’re sending armorers into the field with a giant box full of pre-milled replacement slides (which they could technically do, of course), it simply wouldn’t work.

        • No offense taken, and thanks for following up with people who are in the best position to know.

  4. They will iron the bugs out eventually. Glad I didn’t get to be involved in the process No, the Glock is not perfect either. But it’s darn solid satisfactory, as far as it’s 3rd gen and I are concerned.

  5. We all know NO OTHER gunmaker has had any issues. ***COUGH, Glock, Taurus, COUGH, S&W, Ruger BS COUGH***
    and on and on and on.
    People respond to this like iPhone and Android fan boys.

    I don’t have the time to type all the gunmakers who’ve recalled or offered free fixes to their guns.

    At least SIG didn’t sell out to the GUN CONTROL crowd… Springfield Armory and Rock River Arms.

    • Yep, mechanical issue recalls happen.

      But failing to make a gun drop-safe generally doesn’t. It’s intellectually dishonest of you AND the article to pretend like replacing a magazine catch etc (I looked at the recalls mentioned up there) is anywhere near this issue, which has already led to a wounding accidental discharge without someone pulling the trigger. Let’s find where Glock, Ruger, etc has had that problem.

      Taurus… maybe. But no one buys a Sig thinking “Gee, I bet this is the same standard as a Taurus!”

  6. There’s no real way to know, but the Opportunity cost in lost future sales because of damage to Sig’s reputation, could be FAR GREATER than any calculated here & now upgrade costs.

    Will some remember this debacle while shopping for a new handgun 10 years from now? I bet at least some will.

    • I’d be willing to wager – despite all the self-righteous gnashing of teeth going on currently – that many will also remember Sig’s prompt response, and the expense with which they fixed the issue.

    • Perhaps some will remember; however this might turn people off of buying a 320, a new product with a short track record but not turn them off of buying, say, a 226.

  7. I think the labor and parts will be substantially lower. I would be surprised if the total labor is 15 minutes, or about $5 assuming that Sig pays someone $20 per hour. (Take down will be less than one minute, assembly will be less than one minute, machining setup will be a few minutes, and machining will be a few minutes.) And the parts will probably cost Sig less than $1 since we are talking a quantity of about 200,000 mainly stamped parts. Remember, the cost to build an entire modern polymer handgun is something like $250: there is no way that the labor and parts for this fix are any significant fraction of that total number.

    I therefore put the total cost at $31 per pistol (which includes $25 shipping). That is still a serious chunk of change of course at $6.2 million.

    • There is zero chance that stripping the chassis of its internals and reinstalling a new trigger, sear, sear cage, and entirely new trigger disconnect system can be done in anything like one minute, let alone also disassembling the slide to replace the striker assembly. AND milling the slide for disconnector clearance and refinishing the slide or that portion of it. Then function testing the gun, which SIG said they’re going to do. And you’ve neglected to factor in what happens when the gun arrives on their loading dock. Does it magically show up on the technician’s desk and when he or she is done it’s magically back on a UPS truck? There’s a meaningful amount of man hours that will be spent checking the gun in, inputting info into the system to connect it with the owner’s file, tracking it through the upgrade process, checking it back out, and doing the whole return shipping process. Plus the time of the customer service technicians (as of last week they had already hired 6+ additional, full-time phone support folks just to handle this P320 stuff) answering questions and helping people with the process, etc etc etc.

      The man hours alone are going to be huge. Plus the general cost of machine time — dedicating two CNC machines to P320 upgrades, swapping carbide bits more than usual because they’re now forced to mill nitrided steel, etc.

    • Jeremy S.,

      Internal shuffling/tracking will add to the cost a bit. Even then, I cannot see how it will take more than 2 minutes to check-in a returned P320. All the receiving clerk has to do is open the box, verify the return authorization number and serial number, check it in, and put it on a rack.

      And moving it will take a tiny fraction of 5 minutes since another clerk will move an entire rack (with something like 50 other returned P320s) to a machining station.

      As for the disassembly/reassembly, I don’t see that taking more than a couple minutes when the repair technician is doing something like 100 units per day. (They will be amazingly fast after the first week.)

      I cannot say exactly how long the machining will take … I am still having a hard time imagining it will take much more than a few minutes. Remember, they are not machining an entire slide from a blank metal block — they are simply machining a bit of material on the slide and whatever else. I would be surprised if the actual milling itself (the time that the milling bit is in contact with metal) takes much more than 30 seconds on the slide.

      I had not thought about drop-checking the repaired handgun … would that take maybe four minutes?

      Moving it back to shipping will be a tiny fraction of 5 minutes. (Again, some clerk will move a rack of 50 or more repaired handguns to shipping.)

      Shipping it back out should be fast (about 1 minute to box it and slap on a pre-printed shipping label which another clerk should be printing in large batch jobs).

      I agree that it would probably take well over an hour to process a single handgun. When they are looking at processing 200,000 handguns, they will streamline the entire process.

      Thus, even if we add a few minutes receiving/shipping and drop testing, the labor cost only increases to $7 from $5 in my original guestimate. That would put the entire cost at $33 == $25 (shipping) + $7 (labor) + $1 (parts) … which is still going to cost Sig millions of dollars.

      What would be interesting to me is how much Sig’s call center staff costs them to process this. Like you mentioned, people will be calling and asking questions. I could easily see their call center person spending 15 minutes on the phone with each caller. I did not factor that into the cost of this process. I also did not account for any management costs associated with the process. Someone will be managing the entire event and someone has to handle purchasing of the replacement parts. That will add some serious expense as well.

      As with all things, the correct answer is probably somewhere between our estimates.

      • Sounds like you’ve got math class covered, but it doesn’t sound like you’ve ever worked in shipping, logistics, or a shop of any kind. Just getting the slide setup in the CNC machine is probably your whole time estimate. Imagine the increased cost if they machine the finished slide wrong and have to replace it. Imagine the cost if that 30 second-per-gun shipping employee ships my gun to your house on accident. They gotta nail this one, perfection every time, and they know it. This will be stupid expensive for them.

  8. What’s it gonna cost?

    Less than if they didn’t do this and someone bent over dropped one out of a Jackass Rig and shot themselves in the chest, throat or face…

    • . . . or maybe dropped the gun while it was in a retention holster, and it shot them in the leg. PER-ish the thought!

  9. I think it’ll hurt all of the other manufacturers more. The market comes out with a cry of foul on ‘dropping hazards’ after the weapon passed the standardized test. Sig fixes it anyway, ok, so now it’s the gun that won the west (contract). What have the rest of you done for me lately kind of thing.

    Personally, I think Kel-Tec is gonna drop something crazy just to be Kel-Tec.

    • And surely it can’t hurt SIG when their CEO says that making the gun too safe will only encourage people not to be more careful with them. “By God, if they’re gonna drop perfectly good guns, they shouldn’t be surprised when they get shot a few times! Teach ’em a good lesson! Make men out of ’em! That’ll make ’em be more careful, you betcha! Those that live’ll be a LOT less clumsy the next time!”

  10. I don’t know what it’s going to cost them, but it probably just got a little better for every major pistol manufacturer other than Sig right now. I have a hunch that Glock, S&W, and maybe FN are going to see an uptick in service pistol sales in the short term.

  11. Man am I glad I didn’t buy that P320RX I came OH SO CLOSE to convincing myself I really needed.

    Now we know that stiffing their customers with return shipping cost is at least one of the reasons Sig is playing this ridiculous semantics wink and a nod game they call the “Volumtary Upgrade”.

    And of course their corporate strategy of doing whatever it takes to repair as few of the 500K+ defective P320’s already sold is another reason Sig is avoiding that dreaded R word because a “RECALL” would commit them to repairing every last one of the more than half million dangerous if dropped P320’s out there right now.

    Double or triple that $50 per gun estimate for Sig and you’re probably getting close on parts, labor, & shipping for this so called “Voluntary Upgrade”; but those are just near term hits to the bottom line.

    The 10, 25, 50, or 75 million Sig could potentially spend to fix pistols they knew all along were not drop safe is chump change compared to the long term damage to the brand that will prevent folks like myself from ever buying a new Sig pistol or optic again.

    Sig Sauer will never win back the trust of a significant percentage of their customer base. Combine those lost future sales with the cost of this “Voluntary Upgrade” and the low ball US Army M17 $200+ per gun bid that at best Sig is breaking even on and you’re left with a company bleeding red ink that may or may not survive.

  12. Meh…will it put them out of business? Probably not. I would think stepping up quickly helps a bunch. I have no Sig guns( I use their ammo) but if I ever buy one I probably would.

    • They’re a huge business and still have a lineup of great guns (with hammers). I suspect they’ll be fine. Especially since it’s not like the army contract is going away…

      • Sig won the Army M17 contract with a low ball $200+ per gun bid.

        The gamble on that break even (maybe) low ball bid would pay off only after years of free advertising as the company supplying pistols to the US Army and millions of new customers buying a Sig because the US Army buys Sig.

        This P320 dropfire debacle could negate any future benefit of placing that low ball M17 winning bid.

        Whether or not Sig Sauer might be teetering on the precipice of insolvency all depends on how much reserve funds the company has set back to weather a huge loss.

  13. Whatever the “voluntary upgrade” costs SIG, it will be way less money than if the company didn’t offer it.

  14. Any way to quantify how many of the 500K P320s sold are in
    customer hands verses sitting in dealers display cases?

  15. Well at $500 per gun 500000 sold. That is 250000000. With 10000000 to replace defective parts. That is still s great profit.

    • You’re jumping to some mighty naive and simplistic conclusions on potential gross retail revenue vs net profit there Ron.

  16. how can you make the decision to produce that many without drop testing it first

    colossal incompetence and mind numbing lack of attention to detail

    • Sig did drop test and knew full well the P320 could drop fire which is why they’ve printed on page 25 of the P320 user manual the following simply worded disclaimer;

      “If dropped the pistol may fire. Keep the chamber empty unless actually firing!”

  17. Would Sig’s insurance cover some of this, or only the liability and punitive damages when they hurt/kill the user?

    It will cost me 4-6 weeks whenever they get around to me.

    • I doubt their liability insurance would payout on a voluntary recall. And it’s likely that if they filed a claim of this size that the subsequent increase in future premiums would be significant.

      That being said, it’s likely that the company has a rather large warranty reserve sitting on their books that will more than offset the cost of the recall. Believe it or not most companies plan for failures like this to occur. Sig management understands that regardless of how safe or amazing their products are, the law of averages will catch up to them eventually and an issue like this will occur.

      It’s going to sting a bit and year end bonuses might take a slight hit as a result, but Sig will be just fine in the long run

  18. $15 an hour is just what the employee gets, but the company still pays plenty more per hour for employees. Adding $10 to that estimate is about right, but these are skilled workers and should make much more than that. I would imagine that they will put all new parts on that don’t have to have serial numbers on them.

  19. SIG is doing the responsible and morally right thing. So if everybody will simply STHUp and leave their unsolicited and unneeded opinions at home, things will work out. By the way, there is not nor has there ever been a completely safe firearm. I have several SIGs and yes I have a 320 and I am in no rush to jump on the SIG bashwagon with all you morons and self proclaimed “experts”.

    • Well, boy howdy, you sure shut me up.

      (and you might not want to drop that P320 of yours, apparently its “drop safe” design includes firing when dropped.)

    • And I own a P220, P226, P226 DAK, and P239 all of which will not drop fire. Fortunately I “almost” became a P320RX owner, boy am I glad I passed on that purchase. Amazing how many Sig apologist just can’t bring themselves to admit there is no excuse for ANY modern handgun to drop fire, NONE.

  20. Half a million P320s floating around for the last few years and only a single alleged incident. I’d say that’s a damn good track record. And considering that this pistol has met or exceeded every required standard test, just like all other pistols being sold, I think that Sig is going above and beyond by even making the offer for a free modification. Especially since dropping a gun is considered to be a negligent act.

    • Totally agree with you. The p320 is still on my list of guns I need in my safe. 1 guy “dropping” his belt into his trunk (according to the article I read anyway) will not keep me from buy it or other signs in the future. I mean why put a chambered gun in your trunk? Loaded yes but chambered belongs on you. Just my opinion anyway

  21. [Dan]-

    Given the whole spectrum of manufacturer responses to firearm/ accessory ‘effups’ (some inconsequential, some life threatening), my follow-on question is:

    What manufacturer(s) have set the standard for transparency/ integrity and as close to an ideal response for customers regarding product issue(s)?

    For me, the response by Richard Fitzpatrick/ Magpul to the initial release of the Glock PMAG 17 GL9 with the “OK we screwed up and here’s how we’re fixing it” was about as close as I could want.

    Anyone else?

    • I’d say Springfield’s reaction with the XD-S was about perfect — “hey, a customer notified us that this happened… we were able to recreate the situation. There’s never been any other report of any incident of it happening, but just because it COULD happen, we’re going to recall every damn one of these we’ve ever sold, and fix it.”

      Now, sure, they screwed up the implementation of the recall by recalling guns before they knew how to fix them, so it took a while to get your gun back, but — to me, the acknowledgement and proactive outreach to customers was the exact right way to go about things. Selling us out in Illinois was the exact wrong thing to do, of course.

      On the other hand you have Remington, which denied for DECADES that there was anything wrong with the 700’s trigger, and was eventually shamed into having to recall every Remington 700 ever made. That’s the exact wrong way to go about it.

    • I think another decent example is S&W’s recall of the Shield. They found that under certain circumstances the trigger safety could become damaged, theoretically impairing the pistol’s drop-safe design. So they issued an immediate order to all customers, in all caps: “STOP USING YOUR PISTOL IMMEDIATELY UNTIL IT HAS BEEN INSPECTED AND, IF THE CONDITION IS FOUND, REPAIRED.”

      That sounds to me like a company that’s more interested in acknowledging and fixing the error, regardless of what it costs. They didn’t issue a “voluntary upgrade” if and only if the customer manages to find out about it; they let the customers know that even though the Shield had certainly passed all “drop safe” tests, there was still a potential danger that could develop, and they put their customers first.
      http://www.gunsandammo.com/blogs/news-brief/smith-wesson-issues-safety-recall-for-mp-shield-pistols/

  22. Is Sig issuing a recall on unsold 320s? Moving forward will Sig be manufacturing and shipping new 320s with the upgrade or will they just make the same gun and keep offering upgrades?

  23. Funny, no one mentions the Walther CCP recall. The gun is terrible anyway but the recall must have cost them a fortune. I asked Walther to buy it back or take and give me some type of credit for another Walther. No dice so I am stuck with the turd.

    Between parts, shipping, customer service to answer the calls, techs to fix and test fire the guns, etc it must be costing them a fortune. Not to mention the bad press must be costing them quite a bit. I figured throwing me a $200 bone to buy another Walther would be cost-effective but Walther did not agree. So I will never touch another Walther product, ever again.

    If a manufacturer uses it customers as beta testers then should at least offer to buy back the gun………

    • Apples and Oranges comparison. For the better part of the last 3 decades the Sig Sauer 220 series of pistols were associated with top tier quality required in LE duty pistols. The series of Walther pistols you refer to are 3rd rate at best and not of sufficient quality to be acceptable as a duty pistol which is why practically zero LE agencies issue them. Unfortunately, after this P320 debacle, the percentage of LE agencies that issue the P320 will plummet and even more agencies will transition to Glock.

      • So guns that are not drop safe are “Apples and Oranges” cause Sig. SO acceptance by LE is what makes a pistil “top tier”? I agree the CCP is a pile of 5th rate junk but plenty of cheap pistols won’t try to kill you if you drop them.

        • No, Sig built a reputation on precision and quality which is now irreparably damaged with the P320.

          Top tier until now basically shakes out with Glock having a lock on the LE duty pistol market as the gun 70-75% of LEO’s carry and Sig occupied 2nd place with whatever was left over in LE sales. Then there are other pistols that are of sufficient quality for duty carry that account for an even smaller percentage of LE sales, but Walther isn’t one of them which is why it’s irrelevant to even mention Walther in a serious discussion about the implosion of Sig. It’s no coincidence that the same pistols most popular with LE and the military are top sellers in the civilian market. Sig got caught with their pants down on the P320 and will lose LE and military customers they’ll never get back. Walther was never in the game, so yes, Apples and Oranges.

    • Apples and Oranges comparison. For the better part of the last 3 decades the Sig Sauer 220 series of pistols were associated with top tier quality required in LE duty pistols. The series of Walther pistols you refer to are 3rd rate at best and not of sufficient quality to be acceptable as a duty pistol which is why practically zero LE agencies issue them. Unfortunately, after this P320 debacle, the percentage of LE agencies issuing the P320 will plummet and most of the agencies dropping Sig will go with the tried and true Glock.

  24. In my experience with Sig, they have always bent over backwards to repair or correct ANY issue I have had (not many), and to make sure I was a happy customer. And I am. This issue with the P320 had not reduced my enthusiasm for Sig products in any way.

    • Purchased a P 320 3 months ago. Really sad and disappointed. thought Sig Sauer was better than this.
      Why would I ever buy another sig if they don’t pay for everything and announce a COMPLETE RECALL?
      Totally and Extremely disappointed….
      And our Boys are going to use this in War????

  25. As big as S&W is, they are still part of a larger holding corporate group. Money shouldn’t be a problem whatsoever.

  26. If Sig handles this well – and is timely / creative in getting one’s firearm back to him I’d imagine that it could turn into a giant customer support bonus for them.

    In order to operate in business Sig has to prepare audited financial statements for investors, banks, IRS, etc, I’d bet that Sig books an accrual cost for “voluntary upgrades” as well as “compulsory upgrades” every year – whether there is a problem or not – probably by product line and probably a lot more than one might think. Generally these accruals will be higher for new products than for the older products. Those accruals are “stored” on the balance sheet and can stay there for years if there are no costs to charge against them. The cost for an “upgrade” is charged against the accrual and not against income.

    So, the net effect on Sig’s income could be zero or near zero since they will have already provided for these costs in the accrual balance on their balance sheet.. They may have to jiggle the income by product line a little..

    But if they respond to their customers in a timely manner they stand a lot to gain in terms of standing behind (not in front of) their product.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *