Rossi

[evanbly]

In most of this forum's threads there are comments regarding Rossi, the company that has produced the guns we've purchased. It seems like there should be a thread devoted to ROSSI.

As my revolt thread suggested, I think Rossi should be ashamed of itself. Yes, it has produced some really neat guns. But it does not seem interested in serving its consumers (us).

I generally do not do forums, but this one has captured my attention because of its collective experience and its diversity. I can hardly imagine Rossi not paying attention to what its clients have to say.

Part of the problem is that I do participate on a forum where the producers do take part--not in ownership, but in dialogue.

The Carbon Fiber Guitar Forum, sponsored by MacNichol guitars, is independent of any CF guitar maker. But everyone of the CF makers join the forum discussions and listen to the people using their instruments. And talk back.

In the CF guitar forum, suggestions have been taken by the various guitar makers, products have been approved, and the makers have obtained free focus-group data. Rossi should be paying attention.

So, that should be enough attitude to get the ball rolling. Let's get Rossi in our sights.

[Kiwi-Hunter]

Hi evanbly

I think Rossi should be ashamed of itself. Yes, it has produced some really neat guns. But it does not seem interested in serving its consumers

COST seems to run the show. when they work out they may make more money if the product has more supply.

I generally do not do forums, but this one has captured my attention because of its collective experience and its diversity.

I was the same but you don't wont to get into a rut! that's a COFFIN with the end's knocked out Welcome to the Rossi band of bothers.
KH

[Tuco Ramirez]

I agree with Kiwi 110%....... It is just not Rossi it's all of them even some of the high dollar companies are cranking out less than perfect weapons. I have heard others across the web call it the save-a-buck manufacturing approach. I think they are right. I have 2 Remington's 1 savage and 1 Winchester in my shop now. All but the Winchester that are less than a year old that need fixed/tuned. They all belong to family and are at the point of wrapping them around a tree.

The new ones are full of tool marks and burrs. Bad fitting mags and chambers that look like someone carved them with a pocket knife.

[mr surveyor]

and as for "spanking Braztec-Taurus-Rossi" .... I think the message has been sent from this site very well concerning their unwillingness to supply spare/replacement parts to US owners. Several threads that document that issue.

We're not all asleep at the wheel.


JD

[evanbly]

Mr. Surveyor;

I apologize if I seem to have suggested you and other members of this forum were sleeping at the wheel. The warning for Rossi buyers on this site indicates that you folks are very much involved. It just seems that more could be done. But I suspect that is the same with most of our contemporary issues. The people at the top are more oriented toward $s than quality, and maybe the fault is partly consumers who can only afford to pay less for less. It's a sad world.

[mr surveyor]

consider that we're talking about a "non-USA" based entity.

When you buy from a foreign based manufacturer that has a "world wide" market, your voice may not even be heard. BUT, the US market is probably responsible for the lions share of braztec-taurus-rossi sales and you would think they would take notice .... soon. There is an economic breaking point somewhere in QC that will still be profitable for them, and the additional bearable cost to the majority of buyers. Not sure where it is myself but probably somewhere between $50-100 per unit would smooth them out. As for the poorly designed revolver rifle .... probably not much to fix that as it seemed to die on the vine many, many years ago anyway.

JD

[rman]

I belong to several firearms forums and browse several others. Nearly all seem to be full of horror stories about shoddy workmanship, lack of quality control and poor customer service. Sometimes it's hard to tell if all of the complaints are real, or if some are from posters that enjoying flaming a product for some reason or the other. Don't get me wrong - I know that all brands have their problems. I guess I'm luckier than most. I currently have guns from Rock River Arms, DPMS, Remington, Marlin, Henry, Savage, Springfield Armory, Kimber, Smith & Wesson, Ruger, Para USA, Walther, CZ and Rossi. All of them have been good, serviceable guns. Out of all the guns I own or used to own, I've had 3 that gave me some problems. One was a Ruger P97, one was a Taurus 745 and one was a Smith & Wesson 1911SC Series E. Even these had minor problems and the factories made them right. It took Taurus a along time to return the 745, but when they did it was in good working order. I haven't had my Rossi long enough to make any decisions. I haven't even shot it yet.

I understand what the OP is trying say. Unfortunately, most of these companies are more interested in making a profit than they are satisfying their customers. I think we all do our part to make our feelings known, both through forums like this, and writing or phoning customer service departments. I can only think of two companies that I feel have outstanding customer service departments. My first place award goes to Henry Firearms and second goes to CMMG. Both of these companies watch the forums and take an active part in discussions, both good and bad. It's been my experience that these companies are proud of their reputations and will bend over backwards to satisty their customers. YMMV.

[akuser47]

Well to all concerened the current rossi ceo of rossi does watch this forum as he had evan contacted michael rd to see some of their progress slow as it is if we all stick together and keep this forum going. It gives them and us all info to deal with the issues

[Ranch Dog]

I sincerely believe that RossiUSA wants to do something about quality and parts availability but they are dealing with the mothership in Brazil. I've done business in that country and would rather take quite a whooping, daily, than do it again. As long as distributors continue to stock the product, the madness continues.

At the same time, as chronicled on these pages, when the stock slows down the consumers just howl for more!

I know that RossiUSA is familiar with the forum as they are with TaurusArmed.net. They don't participate on either and I understand that.

How many of you levergunners remember the Marlin sponsored MarlinTalk. What a disaster that was for Marlin and it took place in their heyday on their dime. They couldn't shut it down fast enough! Same with H&RTalk.

[AJMD429]

Unfortunately, most of these companies are more interested in making a profit than they are satisfying their customers.

True enough, but as a business person myself, I know that in the long run, satisfying my customers IS the most profitable way; you can only 'rip-off' people so long, then the gravy train goes elsewhere.

So, when you praise Henry or CMMG - keep in mind that they are just as "profit-driven", but they are at a point where they can budget for the increased costs of satisfied customers, and they know that in the process of doing that, they will LOSE customers just looking for the 'most affordable' product. Right now, Rossi is having to cater to many of us who ARE looking for the 'most affordable' product, and has to please enough of us to gradually enter the 'best made' arena later on (if they choose to target that consumer base), once they have some momentum.

It is a rational decision, in that there are already several sources of 'expensive, but very well made' leverguns, and they would be hard to beat, especially since some have century-old and well-recognized brand names (even if now made in Japan or wherever in some cases, or not the same 'company' as the original of same name, in others). Rossi knows that there are LOTS of new shooters out there who want 'cheap but functional' leverguns, and even lots of old ones (like me), who want field-grade 'shooters' and don't care much about cosmetics, and/or are comfortable fixing stuff like loose screws, burred parts, and so on ourselves, and will probably replace the sights and follower within 24 hours of opening the box.

Still, it seems like one employee could handle each firearm prior to shipping, and go through a minimal check-list for basics like "is the barrel on straight", and "are any screws broken or loose", and perhaps even cycle five or six dummy rounds through it, and probably process a hundred guns per day per employee, which would add only a couple dollars to the price of production, minus the cost of 'rejects' (which are going to likely be rejected ultimately anyway by the consumer). Some of the rejects with purely cosmetic issues could be likely sold on a discounted 'blemish' basis for less dollar loss than repairing them (i.e. if there is a deep scratch on the receiver), others could have a part swapped that would cost less than the loss of a blemish-sale, and yes, a few would be not cost-effective to fix, but I'm betting that would be less than one percent, given the huge numbers of "positive" reviews of Rossi's, vs. the negative ones. That would add perhaps $5.00 to the per-unit-shipped cost.

So, for maybe $10 more on a $400 gun, it seems feasible to 'catch' MOST (some would still slip through) of the really bad 'rejects', and it would go a long way to help their reputation.

The improvement in customer service and communication could cost more, depending on what changes they needed to make. Some would be cheap.

Having said "only $10" though, I know that the actual 'margin' per gun might be not a lot more than that, so they could truly be asking shareholders or owners to take a 50% pay cut with just that 'minor' change. In my office (family physician), our average per-visit charge is $150 or so, and insurance only allows us to collect maybe $100 total, of which they will make the patient pay about half - so we get $100 for what typically is a 30 minute appointment. The problem is that our overhead is typically between $3.00 and $4.00 a minute (and our office is NOT at all fancy), so on a good day, if we're efficiently operating at $3/minute, and the patient's visit is only 30 minutes long, we've used $90 to net $10. If that patient says "Oh yeah, I wanted to ask about my knee pain...", and we manage to 'only' spend another 4 minutes getting the additional history, examining their knee, and invoking some treatment plan, it changes to having spent $102 to net a NEGATIVE $2.00 (due to the 'cap' of 99214 office-visit coding, meaning we will be paid that same $100 unless the visit extends to over 40 minutes, and we can 'prove' we really needed that time, at which we may be allotted $120 - so we will still lose money). Thus I know from my own experience that that "tiny extra service" - spending a mere 4 minutes dealing with a sore knee - literally can bankrupt me, because it would be a 120% pay cut if I allowed that to happen consistently...!!! (Now you know why doctors make you take another day off work and return, or order some test you don't really need, just so they can justify getting you back 'to go over test results' and actually be PAID for the time it takes to thoroughly evaluate and treat your problem - at least the doctors who still 'accept' insurance.) Now at least Rossi, unlike us, has the option of simply raising prices $10, if they think the market will support that. (We are stuck with government/Medicare-proportioned fee schedules, and aren't even allowed to offer the patient the option followup via telephone for a reduced charge after-hours, so people don't have to miss work.) The question is - would we all pay $10 or $20 more for our Rossi's, if 99.9% of them were fine, vs. 99% - how many fewer sales would result...??? It's enough to keep the bean-counters speculating, for sure.

Anyway, just some thoughts on the economics of Rossi and their business. I hope they hone off some of the rough edges (literally and figuratively), and that they can manage to do it and still be profitable.