View Full Version : Who are companies marketing to?
Tacti-square
09-04-13, 19:14
A friend sent me BCM/HSP's promotional video for the Jack Carbine, which I had already seen possibly the day it was released. It occurred to me that while the action sequences were fun to watch and well directed, it really didn't apply to me or my circumstances. For that matter, it didn't apply to any civilian living in this country. As far as I know, a soldier deployed overseas can't just order a Jack and have it shipped to him; I don't even think a unit can make a bulk purchase, even though the gun is mil-spec. Plus, those guys are already given free rifles which do virtually the exact same thing with 100% compatibility with the local armory. So that begs the question: if the military can't use it (and most likely doesn't need it), who is the gun for?
No one I know needs half the capabilities a fighting gun like the Jack has to offer. Sure, it's slick and functional, but what on Earth do people think they're gonna be up against? Are shooters that paranoid that they think they'll need more than a concealed handgun to defend themselves with? I can understand home defense purposes, but that really isn't how it's being sold, nor does the price tag fit the niche. The Jack, as well as countless other ARs, are being marketed as combat rifles even though virtually their entire buyer's market are non-combatants. Am I the only one who thinks that's a little backwards? Instead of a defensive rifle, like we claim they are in the political arena, many are being set up for instances of aggression.
What's so scary? Surely people don't intend to have an AR at arm's length when a psycho opens fire in the workplace, and unless you pack heat in your vehicle at all times you're probably gonna leave your long guns at home. Are people terrified of a massive emergency or a bug-out scenario to the point where they'll throw down 2-3k on a firearm designed for maximum lead on target? Some sort of Hollywood invasion/civil war where the military's overpowered (or worse, turns on its own people)? Something that we read about in comic books as kids and have subconsciously manifested into a legitimated concern (news flash: it isn't)?
I guess I have two main questions:
1. What are people so afraid of?
2. Why are companies pretending we're "operators?"
No one I know needs half the capabilities a fighting gun like the Jack has to offer.
What exactly do the people you know need? Would a video of some dude plinking at the range be more appropriate? It seems to me that the Jack would be perfect for LEOs and PMC employees who have to purchase there own carbines. I'm neither, but my training/HD carbine is a BCM that is set up relatively close to the Jack. I was in New Orleans less than 48 hours after Hurricane Katrina hit and if I'm ever in a similar situation in my home with my family, I'd definitely want a Jack.
I haven't seen this add. But generally advertisement's are not selling to enthusiasts. They are selling to those who are going to make knee jerk decision to buy the product. Also they are not selling a product so much as an image. If you buy this product you will feel like a bad ass soldier.
Tons of other products are sold this way. They are selling an image or a lifestyle. Most luxury cars and Harley Davidson come to mind.
I guess I have two main questions:
1. What are people so afraid of?
2. Why are companies pretending we're "operators?"
This is a weird thought process.
Some people demand the best, so companies like BCM build and market their rifles in such a way that shows it can perform anywhere. It doesn't mean that they are marketing towards "operators". Gatorade commercials have pro athletes drinking it, doesn't mean that the target audience is a pro athlete.
If you accept the idea that it may be possible to be forced to defend self or family using a fighting tool, you are going to make sure that it gives every advantage possible. Even if there is only a one in ten million chance that you will ever fire it in defense. Even if it is against one guy who has an ice pick, a rational person would want as many advantages as possible.
A friend sent me BCM/HSP's promotional video for the Jack Carbine, which I had already seen possibly the day it was released. It occurred to me that while the action sequences were fun to watch and well directed, it really didn't apply to me or my circumstances. For that matter, it didn't apply to any civilian living in this country. As far as I know, a soldier deployed overseas can't just order a Jack and have it shipped to him; I don't even think a unit can make a bulk purchase, even though the gun is mil-spec. Plus, those guys are already given free rifles which do virtually the exact same thing with 100% compatibility with the local armory. So that begs the question: if the military can't use it (and most likely doesn't need it), who is the gun for?
No one I know needs half the capabilities a fighting gun like the Jack has to offer. Sure, it's slick and functional, but what on Earth do people think they're gonna be up against? Are shooters that paranoid that they think they'll need more than a concealed handgun to defend themselves with? I can understand home defense purposes, but that really isn't how it's being sold, nor does the price tag fit the niche. The Jack, as well as countless other ARs, are being marketed as combat rifles even though virtually their entire buyer's market are non-combatants. Am I the only one who thinks that's a little backwards? Instead of a defensive rifle, like we claim they are in the political arena, many are being set up for instances of aggression.
What's so scary? Surely people don't intend to have an AR at arm's length when a psycho opens fire in the workplace, and unless you pack heat in your vehicle at all times you're probably gonna leave your long guns at home. Are people terrified of a massive emergency or a bug-out scenario to the point where they'll throw down 2-3k on a firearm designed for maximum lead on target? Some sort of Hollywood invasion/civil war where the military's overpowered (or worse, turns on its own people)? Something that we read about in comic books as kids and have subconsciously manifested into a legitimated concern (news flash: it isn't)?
I guess I have two main questions:
1. What are people so afraid of?
2. Why are companies pretending we're "operators?"
I think you and I watched two different vids. I watched this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZjlxxPUQp4
In it, they clearly explain why the gun was built the way it is.
This gun is built for everyone from the contract shooter, to LE or Civy's. Yes Civy's. How/why you ask? Home defense, property defense, bug out, etc. Are people paranoid for wanting a good quality weapon for the future? I think not. If you have a crystal ball and know what our country and world will be like in the next 20yrs, I am all ears!
I would suggest staying away from telling people what they "NEED" and $2k for a quality gun with a weapon light, training certificate, one of the best rails and stocks on the market and an awesome paint job isn't bad at all. If you want to see some over priced guns, I will be glad to show them to you. ;)
One of my favorite sayings is, "It is better have it and not need it then to need it and not have it."
C4
One of my favorite sayings is, "It is better have it and not need it then to need it and not have it."
Exactly.
Boba Fett v2
09-04-13, 20:02
There are a lot of LE, private security, undisclosed DoD and non-DoD agencies out there who would be the likely target audience. Sales to your average joe private citizen armchair commando is a bonus.
There are a lot of LE, private security, undisclosed DoD and non-DoD agencies out there who would be the likely target audience. Sales to your average joe private citizen armchair commando is a bonus.
I think you have that backwards.
Whatever the case, it's a badass piece of equipment, and there's a viable market for badass pieces of equipment, so they make badass pieces of equipment and sell them to anyone willing to buy badass pieces of equipment. Who? Anyone who wants one. A lot of people have some Walter Mitty fantasies (I think that's what you're trying to get at)- they certainly aren't going to turn down their money. A lot of other people just want "the best." These guys make good money and spend good money, and BCM, again, isn't going to turn down their money. You also seem to have skipped over LE (or maybe not, my attention span isn't great today)- Not that most American cops are out there engaging in gunfights, but it's definitely totally legit for a martial professional to want something like this.
Your last two questions sum up your point of view well... all the pretense is unnecessary.
This is just my opinion, but I think they're marking to everybody. Especially the weekend warriors who plunk down money to take a class and play weekend commando. And if you are a real weekend commando only the best and most expensive gear will do so you can tell all the other people at the class "this is what the operators are using." I think you could say it's very similar to why Arcteryx is so popular. If they think as people love to say "tier one types" use it they will pay a premium for it.
I took a Costa class earlier this year. It was a great class. Chris is a phenomenal instructor, worth every penny. Out of the 19 people in the class my buddy and I were the only ones that were not in head to toe Arcteryx gear, and were some of the few not running around with a $3000 pluse 1911s. When some of the students were doing a gun show and tell one of the guys pulls out his Nighthawk "operators model" and shows me the bushing on the end of the barrel and goes on to tell me that its what the guys in the SEALs and Delta are using. Apparently that bushing makes him almost as cool as all the SF guys that use it. And if thats what some people think, then you can bet their going to spend the extra coin for things like the Jack.
Boba Fett v2
09-04-13, 20:24
I think you have that backwards.
Perhaps. But it doesn't negate the fact that there are a lot of armed professionals out there who can procure professional grade weapons who don't necessarily fall under the umbrella of national defense.
Why would you think that my wanting a fine rifle is out of fear? Is that why you would choose one?
Why do you think folks buy a rifle to protect themselves from psychos at work? In the workplace a handgun would be handier- if employees are allowed to arm themselves at all
What fighting capability does a Jack have that a standard Colt 6920 does not? They both put the same bullets on target. Does the Jack have a system to guide bullets to the target or a turbo to give them extra power?
Now, let's get to the heart of the matter- I have the firearms that I do because I am a free man. (I have other things because I'm a free man, but right now let's focus on the posession of a battle worthy rifle.) I am not a slave, I am not a subject. Why does a free man or a free woman have a battle worthy rifle? Because a battle worthy rifle in the hands of a free man or a free woman means it's less likely it will be needed to be used to defend our lives, our liberties and our freedoms and I don't give two flying donuts if anyone thinks I need one or not
I am not hurting anyone by owning ANYTHING.
I could own the most aggressive technology possible up to and including the forefront of human aggression: a damned nuclear weapon- and still do absolutely NO aggressive harm to anyone because I am a RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL.
If you think you can come into my life and dictate the way I non-aggressively live, then you can go straight to hell.
End of story.
No more needs to be said.
But...
If youre worried about the mere existence of aggressive technology, that it might fall into the wrong hands- then your issue is really that the technology is not properly regulated, (take ****ing note: "properly regulated," NOT "regulated enough"), that buyers, owners and possessors are not well vetted-enough- and I agree entirely. The individual liberty granted by The Constitution did not account for the possible development of unfortunate elements of modern culture and the general decay of responsibility, intellect, respectableness, etc. But that has nothing to do with defensive technology. So leave my guns alone.
And this is most certainly a stupid forum in which to bring up an issue rooted in an agenda which could be easily argued by any nutless monkey to be tyrannical in nature. Please go away, sir. This is America.
WOW..... so much to say about this but I hardly know where to begin. Why do people drive 200K sports cars? Why do people own private jets when they could just fly commercial?? I own all sorts of cars/toys that I dont need but since this is a free country I will continue to buy what I enjoy. If I am going to purchase a rifle/gun for self defense/range time/competition I am going to buy the best I can possibly afford. This type of thread post is the type of nonsense that helps fuel the anti-gunners.
I guess I have two main questions:
1. What are people so afraid of?
Nothing.
2. Why are companies pretending we're "operators?"
Marketing
I don't see an issue with offering a rifle of this type. If you want to buy one, that's fine, and if you don't want to buy one, that's fine too.
As a career LEO I was never concerned about what firearms someone owned or how many they owned. On and off duty, my concern was the illegal use of anything that might hurt me or somebody else, which entails a whole lot more than firearms.
As a homeowner and law abiding member of my community, I have no concerns about my neighbors owning a rifle of this type.
Nobody needs a Corvette, but they still buy them. Buying a high speed rifle is pretty much the same thing and I don't see a problem with that.
Bloom berg called, wants to know your thoughts on soda...
Seriously, wrong place dipshit. You're way off the mark and that video is just a corny promotional piece.
Tacti-square
09-04-13, 22:32
Got a lot more "GET OFF MY PORCH" aggression than I expected, which tells me this might have tapped the funny bone of some of our more passionate members. Honestly, taking things personally on the internet is a recipe for heart failure. I'm sure everyone on this forum is a law-abiding citizen with purely good intentions. However, that doesn't address my OP. Simply saying "BECAUSE I CAN" and regurgitating all that freedom jargon isn't answering questions regarding the legitimacy of such a purchase. I'm sure there are many independent contractors and LEO types who could have excellent use for something like the Jack. I was mainly commenting on the firearms industry cashing in on all the Gecko45s out there and promoting the operator image to a bunch of suburban gamers.
Also: all this "I'M NOT A CROOK" stuff is irrelevant and shows insecurity. I never accused anyone of being a criminal and it isn't the point of this thread.
Got a lot more "GET OFF MY PORCH" aggression than I expected, which tells me this might have tapped the funny bone of some of our more passionate members. Honestly, taking things personally on the internet is a recipe for heart failure. I'm sure everyone on this forum is a law-abiding citizen with purely good intentions. However, that doesn't address my OP. Simply saying "BECAUSE I CAN" and regurgitating all that freedom jargon isn't answering questions regarding the legitimacy of such a purchase. I'm sure there are many independent contractors and LEO types who could have excellent use for something like the Jack. I was mainly commenting on the firearms industry cashing in on all the Gecko45s out there and promoting the operator image to a bunch of suburban gamers.
You question the legitimacy of the rifle? How is it illegitimate?
Perhaps the problem is not the weapon, but that you're falling way too hard for the way it's being marketed. What makes you think this gun is any better than the home-built under my mattress? Aside from the trigger (which I'm sure is sweet), I guarantee this gun won't make me any deadlier than my own.
Edited to add - and the trigger isn't going to make me any "deadlier" either- I'm just sure it's sweet.
it really didn't apply to me or my circumstances.
Maybe they just weren't thinking about you?
DD drops theirs out of a helicopter and I don't own a Helicopter. They weren't thinking about me.
But in the BCM video, they DO tell you who its marketed toward. ;)
Don Robison
09-04-13, 22:51
"Because I can" is a legitimate reason. So is "Because I want (insert item here)".
Why does there have to be a "need" in order to have something? Who gets to decide if it's a legitimate need? If I only bought what I need I would be living in a 100 square foot house, driving a Prius and eating/drinking only those things that are needed to sustain life. Screw that boring way of life.
Who are they marketing to; those who want or may want their gear.
I'm not sure why you are so confused about the promotional video. Your questions are really irrelevant without trying to sound to harsh. The simple answer: it's a marketing campaign to sell a product.
Example: do you really think that super hot female models eat Hardees double bacon cheeseburgers everyday in bikinis? What about sports cars that are sold in commercials tearing up the twistie roads when no place other than a race track is it legal to do so. Again I pose to you that it's marketing.
I would also like to point out that you may be missing part of the message trying to be conveyed which is: this product is good enough for those in the most austere environments and toughest of situations; therefore you will not be disappointed in its performance when it's needed most...even if that is merely a class that you spent over a thousand dollars on...I mean who wants to spend that kind of money only to have your weapon crap out on you? Not me!
I have a hard and fast rule which is: NEVER SKIMP ON GEAR! Particularly if you may place your life on it one day. That goes for all my outdoors gear from camping, hiking, weapons or just about anything else in similar realms.
Just a bit of food for thought for the OP.
OP, maybe this is a better question for a marketing/advertisement forum. I mean, seriously... why does ANY company advertise?? They're trying to SELL A PRODUCT using whatever approach works: bandwagon, sex appeal, individualism, elitism, fads/trends, etc., etc., etc. There's no rationalizing how people react to their internal wants when something is put in front of them. The company's job is to get the product to appeal to as many people as possible.
Got a lot more "GET OFF MY PORCH" aggression than I expected, which tells me this might have tapped the funny bone of some of our more passionate members. Honestly, taking things personally on the internet is a recipe for heart failure. I'm sure everyone on this forum is a law-abiding citizen with purely good intentions. However, that doesn't address my OP. Simply saying "BECAUSE I CAN" and regurgitating all that freedom jargon isn't answering questions regarding the legitimacy of such a purchase. I'm sure there are many independent contractors and LEO types who could have excellent use for something like the Jack. I was mainly commenting on the firearms industry cashing in on all the Gecko45s out there and promoting the operator image to a bunch of suburban gamers.
Also: all this "I'M NOT A CROOK" stuff is irrelevant and shows insecurity. I never accused anyone of being a criminal and it isn't the point of this thread.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-1OqqGHS7ByQ/TyVo3pZDWAI/AAAAAAAAABI/IpWSeC4pyWg/s1600/Straw+Man.jpg
I guess I have two main questions:
1. What are people so afraid of?
2. Why are companies pretending we're "operators?"
http://i744.photobucket.com/albums/xx83/_Stormin/Rifle/NotSureM4C.png
http://i744.photobucket.com/albums/xx83/_Stormin/Rifle/NotSureM4C.png
:lol:
No one I know needs half the capabilities a fighting gun like the Jack has to offer.
I don't understand you. On one hand you start lots of threads that indicate you have an interest in ARs and like them. The next minute you seem to be questioning the propriety of people being able to own such firearms.
Where do you personally draw the line at what people should and should not be able to own.
Is it okay to own a Colt 6920, but a BCM Jack is somehow too lethal?
Should the line be drawn at a Colt 6920, a lesser brand AR, a Ruger Mini-14, an SKS, a pump action shotgun?
If you don't think citizens should be allowed to own ARs, why are you starting so many thread about them on a forum devoted to them.
What are people so afraid of?
You know, you're sounding like officials in California who don't believe anyone needs, or should be allowed to have a gun that holds more than 10 rounds in the magazine--and they are trying to get it reduced to less.
Do we really need to explain to you why an AR is an effective home defense weapon, especially when we are talking multiple rounds against multiple home invaders?
Got a lot more "GET OFF MY PORCH" aggression than I expected, which tells me this might have tapped the funny bone of some of our more passionate members. Honestly, taking things personally on the internet is a recipe for heart failure. I'm sure everyone on this forum is a law-abiding citizen with purely good intentions. However, that doesn't address my OP. Simply saying "BECAUSE I CAN" and regurgitating all that freedom jargon isn't answering questions regarding the legitimacy of such a purchase. I'm sure there are many independent contractors and LEO types who could have excellent use for something like the Jack. I was mainly commenting on the firearms industry cashing in on all the Gecko45s out there and promoting the operator image to a bunch of suburban gamers.
:confused: I don't know where you are going. You are all over the place.
In one thread you are comparing the Jack to a BCM and saying you like the Jack: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=131085
Now you're saying:
No one I know needs half the capabilities a fighting gun like the Jack has to offer.
Further, in one thread you are considering buying a double barreled shotgun for home defense: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=130608
Then in another thread you are talking about buying an FN FNX-45 Tactical:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?p=1498974#post1498974 which I am not even sure you can buy in California, where according to another one of your posts, you are a college student: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=132038
Are you asking why we need an AR-15 or specifically the Jack? In your OP you said the Military can do the same with their M4's so there is no reason to get the Jack. Thus, you can do the same with your bare bones Colt as you can do with the Jack. The Jack is just dressed up.
I am not really afraid of anything.
I, however, shoot a lot, and will shoot A LOT more once I move, and start taking classes. So, it is wise for me to get Mil-Spec carbines.
I personally do not care about promotional videos. They do nothing but offer entertainment.
Why are companies pretending we are operators? Marketing. They say: "This rifle can be used by operators, therefore, you can rest assured it is quality."
A company, such as BCM and HSP, making a rifle then giving out a training certificate probably is not aiming towards Mall Ninjas.
Everyone knows, to protect the mall you need a .338 Lapua anyway.
Jesus...
http://imageshack.us/a/img824/7008/uniqueandspecialsnowfla.jpg
Please read this before you decide to start another thread, particularly any threads like your most recent attempts: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=70019
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.