SamColtFan, you are on to something regarding ad money and fair coverage.
If Jan Libourel had done his homework in preparation for the publication of his article and talked to Colt at the SHOT Show - as I, a lowly gun retailer, did - he would have known that there were new improvements to the Gold Cup, as well as a new roundtop stainless model, ideal for carry. We have sold a half dozen of the new Gold Cups - and they are the best ever built.
And he has to know that Colt has never stopped selling to the public. This is indeed suspicious. That phony story is over two years old, originally a bit of speculation by Newsweek magazine that CNN picked up and created the "Colt scare" that emptied the warehouses and caused unnecessary Colt handgun shortages while Colt was understandably busy with an Army M-4 contract. Many gunshops still repeat the story as an excuse not to carry Colt because their profit margin is higher on cheaper goods - Kimber, Glock and Springfield.
I suspect the reason Mr. Libourel "misspoke himself" is because all gunwriter "journalism" of today seems to be connected to an ad payment check. Years ago publishers sold magazines based on interesting content which the public bought - and ads were extra money. At that time they could be journalistically objective and honest. Now the ad money is larger and more important. So objectivity is largely gone. Unless you are buying ads, we have nothing good to say about you. Kimber, Glock and Springfield are all buying large ads - some full page - that have to be worth $100,000 per issue. Colt isn't - thus they are "damned with faint praise", if mentioned at all. American Handgunner and Guns magazine have even been attacking Colt for the last six months - to the benefit of their major advertisers/sponsors, Kimber and Glock.
As for Colt's lack of advertising - they are still financially struggling, and the money isn't there yet for ads. They had large layoffs in the recent past - though they are now up above 1800 daily employees. A Connecticut union shop is an expensive way to make guns, particularly when you still forge and machine parts. Kimber and Springfield either largely use cheap ($3.00ea hammers, slide stop,etc) MIM sintered metal/epoxy parts or produce in Brazil, respectively, which gives them the huge profits to pay for big advertising budgets - which in turn drives even more favorable gun articles, which drives more sales. Colt actually puts more into building each gun, made in USA - but is less profitable as a consequence.
Even if the lack of ads was a legal defense to help Colt fight off the anti-gun manufacturer lawsuits, could you blame them? This is the anti's fault, not Colt's, for heaven's sake!
To sum up, Colt is and has been selling to the public all along. We get shipments regularly from Colt's Manufacturing - and the guns are highly satisfactory. The company's products are in many ways the best ever produced, by any maker. Also - Gunwriters can be slimey for commercial reasons, as well as being guilty of not doing their research before they write.
Yours for more objectivity in journalism, Col. Colt
"Beware of Counterfeits and Patent Infringements"
[This message has been edited by Col. Colt (edited 05-09-2001).]