Lawdog Dago Dom Posted May 5 Posted May 5 Ruger and Beretta Holding S.A. Announce Strategic Cooperation Agreement - The Tactical Wire | The Tactical Wire 1 4 Quote
Blackwater 53393 Posted May 5 Posted May 5 I’m going to reserve judgment on this for a spell. These things usually take time to shake out and I want to see where this winds up when the dust settles. 7 Quote
Eyesa Horg Posted May 5 Posted May 5 I start to get nervous when too many of our suppliers all get under the same flag. If that conglomerate fails, we lose them all. 🤞 3 Quote
sassnetguy50 Posted May 5 Posted May 5 https://berettaholding.com/ruger-and-beretta-holding-s-a-announce-strategic-cooperation-agreement/ https://ruger.com/news/2026-05-04.html Quote
Stump Water Posted May 5 Posted May 5 3 hours ago, Blackwater 53393 said: I’m going to reserve judgment on this for a spell. These things usually take time to shake out and I want to see where this winds up when the dust settles. Yep. What I read: Ruger said to Beretta, "OK. You can buy up to 25% of the company stock, but you gotta be quiet for three years." So the "dust" is settled... for three years. After three years is when there's gonna be a dust up. 1 2 Quote
Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933 Posted May 5 Posted May 5 This from the Beretta website - As part of the agreement, Beretta Holding has committed to a three-year standstill, during which it will not, among other things, initiate or support any proxy contest or similar action. Kind of sounds like the Iran nuclear deal. 3 1 Quote
Chickasaw Bill SASS #70001 Posted May 5 Posted May 5 havin' delt with folks from Europe in the past I DON'T trust em at all CB 2 Quote
Rye Miles #13621 Posted May 5 Posted May 5 (edited) Agreement Reflects Mutual Commitment to Long-Term Value Creation & Stability So they both agreed! I don’t see a problem here! Edited May 5 by Rye Miles #13621 Quote
Blackwater 53393 Posted May 5 Posted May 5 32 minutes ago, Rye Miles #13621 said: Agreement Reflects Mutual Commitment to Long-Term Value Creation & Stability So they both agreed! I don’t see a problem here! Scenario: You are under pressure to do something that you really don’t want to do. The person who wants you to do this thing is holding some of your people hostage AND they have your arm held in a wrist lock and they’re pulling it up behind your head from behind!! About the time they get your arm up above shoulder blade level, you “AGREE” to their demands! You may not want to AGREE but you’ll do what it takes to survive! 1 1 Quote
Pat Riot Posted May 5 Posted May 5 I am not sure why this is good. I’ll reserve judgment for later. 3 1 Quote
Rooster Ron Wayne Posted May 6 Posted May 6 Its only a matter of time and Ruger will no longer exist as we currently know it as an American owned company. 😪 3 Quote
John Barleycorn, SASS #76982 Posted May 6 Posted May 6 Ruger has some real problems that need addressed. No New Vaquero’s available anywhere. SASS Vaquero’s forget it, probably been two years since a got a new set from a distributor. The Ruger Marlin, same none available. Want Montado or SBH hammers, sorry we don’t sell them. I guess they are just too busy making 5.7s and Security 9’s. They really need new management. 3 2 Quote
Rye Miles #13621 Posted May 6 Posted May 6 42 minutes ago, John Barleycorn, SASS #76982 said: Ruger has some real problems that need addressed. No New Vaquero’s available anywhere. SASS Vaquero’s forget it, probably been two years since a got a new set from a distributor. The Ruger Marlin, same none available. Want Montado or SBH hammers, sorry we don’t sell them. I guess they are just too busy making 5.7s and Security 9’s. They really need new management. Thanks for that info! I don’t think Ruger is stupid enough to enter into an agreement if they didn’t need the help. I hope this works out for them. 1 Quote
Stump Water Posted May 6 Posted May 6 See what Larsen quoted above. Google "proxy contest". I'm afraid that, after the three year "standstill", Ruger (and Marlin) will be joining the 20+ other brands under Beretta Holdings. Quote
El Sobrante Kid Posted May 6 Posted May 6 22 minutes ago, Stump Water said: See what Larsen quoted above. Google "proxy contest". I'm afraid that, after the three year "standstill", Ruger (and Marlin) will be joining the 20+ other brands under Beretta Holdings. Which then brings up the next pressing question; how have the 20+ brands held under the Beretta Holdings umbrella fared in terms of independence, management, and product quality? Quote
Rye Miles #13621 Posted May 6 Posted May 6 (edited) 2 hours ago, El Sobrante Kid said: Which then brings up the next pressing question; how have the 20+ brands held under the Beretta Holdings umbrella fared in terms of independence, management, and product quality? Well hers some of them that seem to be doing pretty well under the ownership of Beretta Major firearm brands Beretta owns Here are some of the key firearm-related companies/brands under the group: Beretta Benelli Franchi Stoeger Sako Tikka A. Uberti Chapuis Armes Holland & Holland They also own several optics and some ammunition companies. Edited May 6 by Rye Miles #13621 Quote
Chuck Steak Posted May 6 Posted May 6 iT JUST seems odd TO ME that American gun companaies keep selling out to European companies... 1 Quote
Rye Miles #13621 Posted May 6 Posted May 6 2 minutes ago, Chuck Steak said: iT JUST seems odd TO ME that American gun companaies keep selling out to European companies... It’s all about the Benjamins $$$ 1 Quote
watab kid Posted May 7 Posted May 7 On 5/5/2026 at 8:53 AM, Blackwater 53393 said: I’m going to reserve judgment on this for a spell. These things usually take time to shake out and I want to see where this winds up when the dust settles. im in agreement with you , this looks like another slow buyout of an american gunmaker - are there any left that dont have foreign investment or control ? Quote
Rooster Ron Wayne Posted May 7 Posted May 7 21 hours ago, Rye Miles #13621 said: Thanks for that info! I don’t think Ruger is stupid enough to enter into an agreement if they didn’t need the help. I hope this works out for them. They entered in to the agreement too prevent a hostile takeover and lose everything. Quote
Rye Miles #13621 Posted May 7 Posted May 7 (edited) 3 hours ago, Rooster Ron Wayne said: They entered in to the agreement too prevent a hostile takeover and lose everything. Thats not how I see it, they needed money period and they welcomed the cash from Beretta. Edited May 7 by Rye Miles #13621 Quote
Blackwater 53393 Posted May 7 Posted May 7 There has been NO INDICATION of Ruger being in financial difficulty. Beretta had been quietly buying shares of Ruger stock for the sole purpose of instituting a hostile takeover. Someone tipped off the folks at Ruger and they set out to foil the attempt. Beretta then published a letter saying that they felt that Ruger was underperforming in a further attempt to acquire proxy votes to complete their attack. This “AGREEMENT“ is the result of the conflict! Beretta, in this case, is nobody’s “White Knight” 2 1 Quote
Rye Miles #13621 Posted May 7 Posted May 7 (edited) But there are warning signs too: Profitability dropped sharply in 2025. Ruger actually posted a small full-year loss after being profitable in prior years. They’ve been restructuring operations, cutting jobs, and trying to lower costs. The firearms market overall has cooled compared with the huge demand spike from a few years ago. There’s also pressure from Beretta, which bought a sizable stake in Ruger and pushed for influence over the company’s direction. Theres got to be a reason that Ruger let them buy shares. I guess we’ll never know for sure but it was THEIR decision. Edited May 7 by Rye Miles #13621 Quote
Blackwater 53393 Posted May 7 Posted May 7 (edited) Take your last two points and read them carefully!! This is the reason for Beretta’s takeover attempt in glaring neon lights! Ruger holds rights to several designs and at least one brand name besides their own that Beretta would dearly love to own!! The “AGREEMENT “ is just a tactic to forestall the takeover long enough to get their restructure completed and regain better control over their own future. NOTE: Remington suffered this sort of thing several years ago and when the dust settled, Remington was bankrupt and those responsible for the takeover had paid off all of their own debts with the assets they took from Remington!! They then sold off what was left in pieces and pocketed that money too! It used to be called “corporate piracy”! Edited May 7 by Blackwater 53393 1 1 Quote
Stump Water Posted May 7 Posted May 7 3 minutes ago, Blackwater 53393 said: The “AGREEMENT “ is just a tactic to forestall the takeover long enough to get their restructure completed and regain better control over their own future. And Beretta said, "Ok. We'll wait." Then winked at each other. Quote Over that [three year] period, Beretta Holding will also vote its shares in alignment with the Ruger Board's recommendations on all matters (except in cases where leading independent proxy advisory firms, ISS or Glass Lewis, issue an adverse recommendation or in certain extraordinary transactions not involving Beretta Holding). Except... 2 Quote
Rye Miles #13621 Posted May 7 Posted May 7 (edited) We’re all speculating here, no one knows what’s really going on so I’ll wait and see also. Edited May 7 by Rye Miles #13621 Quote
El Sobrante Kid Posted May 7 Posted May 7 3 hours ago, Rye Miles #13621 said: But there are warning signs too: Profitability dropped sharply in 2025. Ruger actually posted a small full-year loss after being profitable in prior years. They’ve been restructuring operations, cutting jobs, and trying to lower costs. The firearms market overall has cooled compared with the huge demand spike from a few years ago. There’s also pressure from Beretta, which bought a sizable stake in Ruger and pushed for influence over the company’s direction. Theres got to be a reason that Ruger let them buy shares. I guess we’ll never know for sure but it was THEIR decision. Ruger is a publicly traded stock Anyone can buy their stock at any time, assuming they have the money. Ruger did not "let" Beretta buy the stock, because Ruger has no say as to who can buy shares. 2 Quote
Rye Miles #13621 Posted May 7 Posted May 7 18 minutes ago, El Sobrante Kid said: Ruger is a publicly traded stock Anyone can buy their stock at any time, assuming they have the money. Ruger did not "let" Beretta buy the stock, because Ruger has no say as to who can buy shares. Ok didn’t know that. Quote
El Sobrante Kid Posted May 7 Posted May 7 16 minutes ago, Rye Miles #13621 said: Ok didn’t know that. That's why they typically call this kind of action a "Hostile" takeover. A person/business/corporation/etc. will slowly purchase stock in a company they want to take over. Sometimes it is done in the background as quietly as possible, other times the purchases are very public and out in the open. At some point they have enough stock that when they exercise their voting rights they can force a company to make changes. Once an entity, or voting group, owns 50+% of a companies stock, they basically run the company. One tactic is to convince other stockholders that the targeted company in question is doing a lousy job, and the company trying to take over could do a better job. If enough stockholders believe that, and turn over their proxy vote to the company wanting to take over, that just speeds things up. This is an enormously expensive undertaking requiring very, very deep pockets. 1 Quote
Stump Water Posted May 7 Posted May 7 1 hour ago, El Sobrante Kid said: Ruger did not "let" Beretta buy the stock, because Ruger has no say as to who can buy shares. Sure Ruger has a say. A corporations bylaws can limit the maximum percentage of stock that any one entity can buy. It's pretty common and sounds like the case here. 19 minutes ago, El Sobrante Kid said: That's why they typically call this kind of action a "Hostile" takeover. A person/business/corporation/etc. will slowly purchase stock in a company they want to take over. Sometimes it is done in the background as quietly as possible, other times the purchases are very public and out in the open. As a defense, a corporation can issue more shares to existing shareholders, thereby diluting the percentage the "hostile" owns. 1 1 Quote
Stump Water Posted May 7 Posted May 7 https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/STURM-RUGER-COMPANY-INC-14238/company-shareholders/ 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.