TexasCHLforum.com

You know, maybe Dick's should buy up all the MSR's they can get their hands on, and destroy them all. That would really show they were serious!

Of course, destroying weapons just means an increase in demand, and possibly, a short term spike in prices. That should be obvious to anyone with half a brain. The total amount of weapons sold will still be equal to the total amount that people actually want. Basically, Dick's actions just equate to a transfer of wealth from the stockholders of Dicks to the stockholders of all gun manufacturers. There will be no long term impact on the number of guns that are owned.

And openly admitting to destroying company assets is grounds for a shareholder lawsuit, even if the stock price increased thanks to unrelated actions by Trump's administration. An unnecessary $5m expense, by definition, reduced earnings compared to what they would have been without that expense. This is ignoring the $250m negative impact to sales, which the CEO also admitted to intentionally causing.

puma guy wrote: ↑Wed Oct 09, 2019 12:32 pm

longtooth wrote: ↑Wed Oct 09, 2019 12:31 am

puma guy wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 4:47 pm Until I see the inventory list with S/N and some documentation that removes these weapons from the data base for tracking them with ATF I don't believe a word of what Dick's says they did with them.

Exactly. One sentence summary or whether or not Dick's really did destroy them.

I hope they try to take it as a business loss and someone calls the IRS is they do.

That's a really good point. I'm not sure if it changed with the latest tax reform, but the standard used to be that something had to be a "reasonable and ordinary" business expense to qualify as a deduction. Intentionally destroying your inventory does not seem to meet this standard.

This might definitely be worth a note to the IRS.