Thinking Like A Businessman

Vincent J. Curtis

10 Aug 2020

Recent equipment purchases on behalf of the CAF – shockingly! - do not accord with business sense.  Only superficially are they sensible.  Let’s examine how a businessman might go about the acquisitions of the C-19, the Harry DeWolf class of patrol vessels, and an acquisition of handguns.

The C-19 is the new bolt-gun for the Canadian Rangers.  It is replacing the venerable Long Branch No. 4 Mk I* Lee-Enfield, last manufactured in the early 1950s.  The C-19 is a modified Tikka T3x Arctic.  It employs a Mauser-like two-lug bolt action, and has a ten round detachable box magazine.  The bolt handle and the trigger guard are oversized for work with gloved hands.  The bolt handle is angled to that the hand is placed next to the trigger on closing, and the bolt turns at a quick 60 degrees, mimicking the No. 4.  It has a 20” medium-heavy barrel with nice iron sights and a blaze-orange composite stock.  It comes with a Picatinny rail over the action for optic mounting.  The rifle offers good, but not superb, accuracy

A nice rifle, priced at $2,800 retail. The Canadian government paid $4,000 for the Ranger version.  The businessman would ask, “Why are we paying a premium to Sako when Colt Canada can make brand new No. 4 Lee-Enfield actions royalty free?”  The Lee-Enfield is what the Rangers were used to.  Into a Colt-built No. 4 action, Colt can thread one of their magnificent medium-heavy barrels and bed the barrelled action in a blaze orange composite stock like the Tikka.  This rifle can use the same iron sights.  The Lee-Enfield comes with a detachable ten round magazine.  A Picatinny rail can be installed over the No. 4 action by modifying the contour of the charger bridge to serve as the rear mount, and the front of the receiver for the front mount.  There’s your C-19 built around a No 4 Lee-Enfield action instead of a Tikka.  A better No. 5 carbine?

A strategic business benefit falls to Colt Canada.  Besides having a famous new product to sell, at least half a million No. 4’s remain in private hands in Canada.  Many need spare parts to remain serviceable, and Colt would be the manufacturer of these spare parts. There would be ongoing business for Colt Canada beyond the government.

Now, let’s take a quick look at the Harry DeWolf Arctic Patrol vessels.  A short detour.  Auto parts manufacturers used to buy moulds and dies from North American machine shops.  A bumper or a fender would be stamped out of sheet metal in one of these moulds.  Let’s say a mould cost $100,000.  During the recession of 2000-2002, China joined the World Trade Organization.  When the car business came out of recession, the parts makers went to China for moulds.  Of course, they came back out of spec, and the Chinese moulds were sent to the North American mould makers to be put right.  The parts maker paid the Chinese $20k for the mould, and $30k for the re-work.  The parts maker saved himself $50k.  Now, apply this to ships.

Let’s say a DeWolf costs $1 billion. We could buy an ice-breaker from Russia for $200 million, and then pay Irving $500 million to have the Russian vessel put into the condition we want.  Canada saves herself $300 million.

I’ve written about handguns before, and the sticking point seems to be that Canada wants only 10,000 of them and Colt Canada has to build them.  Glock isn’t going to let Colt build Glocks.  Likewise, Beretta, Smith & Wesson, Walther, and Sig.

But, the Colt M45 is a perfectly viable sidearm in today’s militaries.  As is the Browning Hi-Power.  Why can’t Colt Canada build new Hi-Powers?  During the War, Canada acquired the rights from FN to make 250,000, and built nowhere near that many.  We’re using Hi-Powers now.  Don’t let “tacticool” pistol snobs deflect you from making a good, practical decision.

Businessmen think different when it’s their money.

-30-