PRIME AMMO INSTOCK

#51
Dthomas3523 said:
I also don’t know how their warehousing was setup, but the minute that ruag took ownership of the old stock, why didn’t prime sue ruag immediately?

At best, this is a series of very bad business decisions on Prime’s part.

I honestly hope their versions of the sorry are the facts, but there’s a lot of things that don’t add up on their part.
Click to expand...
You are absolutely correct. It seems that Prime got in over their head. It happens to thousands of businesses each year. It's not unique, these types of contracts clauses are extremely common. People like Ruag know what they're doing. They are not in business to float companies like Prime.

It sounds like many people on this thread have not read the legal documents. They are far more enlightening that anything else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jjviperzar1, silentheart and Timo Turl
#52
Contracts are just paper designed to be dissected by legal minds. He with the best lawyer wins.
Im pullin for team Prime, but it doesn't look good.
 
#53
Take a look at the excerpts below. Jim agreed to this clause. How he defaulted is also laid out in the legal document. Per the contract, Prime was to pay Ruag for Ruag owned inventory sales within seven days. This is one of many ways they may have defaulted.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2019-05-21 at 10.02.52 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2019-05-21 at 10.02.52 PM.png
    1.4 MB · Views: 199
  • Screen Shot 2019-05-21 at 10.03.13 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2019-05-21 at 10.03.13 PM.png
    775.6 KB · Views: 180
#56
Just because legal documents say this or that doesn't make something right. You're correct, I haven't read them, because I'm fairly confident I'd have no better understanding of the situation after investing the time. It's just fucking frustrating to see the shark ALWAYS eat the little fish. Whether or not something is 'legal' has little bearing on whether or not it's right... At least in my mind. YMMV
 
  • Like
Reactions: Changed and Stoweit
#57
J-Ham said:
Just because legal documents say this or that doesn't make something right. You're correct, I haven't read them, because I'm fairly confident I'd have no better understanding of the situation after investing the time. It's just fucking frustrating to see the shark ALWAYS eat the little fish. Whether or not something is 'legal' has little bearing on whether or not it's right... At least in my mind. YMMV
Click to expand...

Depends if ruag did actually abuse the relationship/trust of Prime.

Thus far, no documents released show this to be the case. Prime claims they agreed to an addendum via email. However, none of the documents produced thus far have shown that. There was an article written recently (or forget the publisher), with emails and none of them indicated an actual agreement between both parties.

Again, I want to believe Prime, but I’d like to see something that backs up the claims. Prime went public with the announcement and such, so it’s not like it’s some big secret.
 
  • Like
Reactions: silentheart and J-Ham
#58
The_Count said:
Take a look at the excerpts below. Jim agreed to this clause. How he defaulted is also laid out in the legal document. Per the contract, Prime was to pay Ruag for Ruag owned inventory sales within seven days. This is one of many ways they may have defaulted.
Click to expand...


The big company (bully?) may win the fight, but it's not as simple as the RUAG claim would like to make it sound...


- You linked to the original agreement... Prime claims there was amendment agreed upon in 2018. Where is the schedule for that agreement for the Balloon payments?

- Just cause it's written in a contract does not mean it's legally enforceable. Can RUAG require payment for ammo that it demanded be returned and admits to receiving? (made greater than whole?)

- contract portion you linked states "payment due within 7 days after product is sold". Is that sold to public or RUAG sold to Prime? (ambiguity usually benefits the party that did not draft the contract)

- RUAG claims no payments were made after Jan 2018. Prime claims 15 payments were made totaling over $500,000

- RUAG admits to not delivering the almost $400,000 of ammo that was paid in full up front in August 2018 as it's still "in production". How long does it take RUAG to make 355,000 rounds... according to RUAG's own invoices less than 2 months yet none has been delivered in 9+ months?

-RUAG allows for 24 months of ammo to be supplied to club members in the event of agreement termination. Has/is that being fulfilled?


None of the above absolves TSUSA from stepping on others while they are in the middle of a lawsuit. Hell, even the lawsuit itself asks for clarification that RUAG can "legally" take possession of and sell the ammo in dispute so it's far from a given.

My opinion, take it for what it's worth to you, is that there are too many companies and vendors that act with honor, respect and morals each and every day to do business with those like TSUSA that do NOT just to make a quick buck. I'll take my money else where going forward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ravenworks, Zorrosdens, patriot07 and 3 others
#59
goosed said:
- You linked to the original agreement... Prime claims there was amendment agreed upon in 2018. Where is the schedule for that agreement for the Balloon payments?
Click to expand...

This is my biggest issue. If there was such an agreement, one would imagine Prime would have already produced it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Steel head and silentheart
#60
Dthomas3523 said:
This is my biggest issue. If there was such an agreement, one would imagine Prime would have already produced it.
Click to expand...

Not necessary at this point in time. This is just the question and answer faze.

Will need to be presented for trial, but Lawyers won't release that until required. Simply because you don't want to give your opponent any additional time to come up with counter arguments.
 
#61
goosed said:
Not necessary at this point in time. This is just the question and answer faze.

Will need to be presented for trial, but Lawyers won't release that until required. Simply because you don't want to give your opponent any additional time to come up with counter arguments.
Click to expand...

They already made the claim that it was a handshake deal with follow up emails.

Zero chance ruag legal team hasn’t scoured emails and such to validate the claim.

Once you make the claim public as Prime has in a video announcement and a podcast, there is no reason not to release it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SIlabs
#62
Based on everything made public I'm having a hard time faulting RUAG. I get that Prime is the hometown company but it doesn't sound like RUAG just up and screwed them over. All of the filings, Prime's included, show that Prime defaulted on their written agreement and failed to pay the past due balance. What is RUAG supposed to do with the inventory they have a contractual right to sell? I'm going from memory but did Prime actually make an argument in their counter claim that they had a verbal agreement? For some reason I recall they didn't but I could be wrong.

After the RUAG inventory is gone I think that will be the last you see of the brand. I just don't see this working out for Prime given what has been made public.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: Primus, Changed and silentheart
#64
J-Ham said:
Just because legal documents say this or that doesn't make something right. You're correct, I haven't read them, because I'm fairly confident I'd have no better understanding of the situation after investing the time. It's just fucking frustrating to see the shark ALWAYS eat the little fish. Whether or not something is 'legal' has little bearing on whether or not it's right... At least in my mind. YMMV
Click to expand...
Are you asserting the legal documents and stipulations everyone agreed to dont matter? It sucks for Prime, but they knew what they were getting into, and shame if they didnt because its pretty clearly laid out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: silentheart
#65
Winny94 said:
Are you asserting the legal documents and stipulations everyone agreed to dont matter? It sucks for Prime, but they knew what they were getting into, and shame if they didnt because its pretty clearly laid out.
Click to expand...

Even Jim has stated in hindsight he put too much trust on people to do the right thing.

But there is plenty of evidence provided of negotiating the second addendum to convert the leftover ammo/value into a loan. There’s a signed copy by Prime (note: haven’t seen the signed copy by RUAG).

RUAG accepted payment based on the second amendment for months. There’s seemingly an awful amount of time between the end of the original contract and any action by RUAG to claim prime defaulted on their agreement. All the while accepting payment based on the second addendum the entire time.

I have yet to see any documentation or response from RUAG stating they tried to negotiate and could not come to terms and thusly are enforcing the first contract. In fact they don’t make any mention of it.

and then there’s the whole 6.5 GAP and 6creed(?) fiasco. Requiring full payment for it upfront bc of the outstanding debt and then not providing it at all.

I’m certainly not a lawyer. it seems there’s not quite enough evidence either way to predict the outcome. But no way is this clear cut based on the what was made public.

I certainly hope the best for Jim and Prime, that this gets resolved and Prime makes a comeback.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zorrosdens and J-Ham
#66
I'll add another piece of my thoughts to this. The ammo itself is an Insignificant matter in this disagreement inbetween prime and RUAG. Like everything else this comes down to dollars and cents. If Prime comes out the Victor in this they will be made whole with dollars and cents, not paid with ammo. Who is selling the ammo in dispute here is completely insignificant. Another company legally bought a commodity to sell. Target sports has nothing to do with any of this.

Now I believe I remember reading that prime had some custom loads worked up with their own IP that RUAG has manufactured and sold. I think that's a much more interesting court battle than RUAG repossessing their ammo. I don't believe I read any contract agreements about RUAG being the owner and allowed to solely profit off Primes IP
 
  • Like
Reactions: GBMaryland, equilibrium and Primus
#67
Seems to me that once DoD selected 6.5CM, and Prime was a probably the leading contender to provide the ammo, RUAG's dollars and cents meter went into overdrive as Prime was the only authorized US agent. Manufacture a situation to get the little guy out of the way using your deep resources in combination with the Swiss government's backing, and take the lucrative DoD contracts, and maybe while using using the supposedly misappropriated GA formula.

Did I put enough qualifiers in there not to get sued by RUAG???
 
#68
Defender3 said:
Seems to me that once DoD selected 6.5CM, and Prime was a probably the leading contender to provide the ammo, RUAG's dollars and cents meter went into overdrive as Prime was the only authorized US agent. Manufacture a situation to get the little guy out of the way using your deep resources in combination with the Swiss government's backing, and take the lucrative DoD contracts, and maybe while using using the supposedly misappropriated GA formula.

Did I put enough qualifiers in there not to get sued by RUAG???
Click to expand...
Hornady seems a much more logical supplier. Or Lake City starts to manufacture. Prime was never likely a contender
 
  • Like
Reactions: GBMaryland, Ravenworks and silentheart
#69
Got the email and knew that PRIME wasn't aware of this ammo being sold.

PRIME is a great group of folks, I've always had good dealings with them....however..

How long did they think this whole "You make our ammo and we will sell it" business practice could go on before they wanted to chop the middle man's head off?

Just business. Fuck RUAG, though.
 
#73
Dthomas3523 said:
Ironically, “if” Prime succeeds legally, this is probably better for them.

I’d imagine a ruling would give them the profit they would have made from the ammo plus damages.

If Prime is truly confident of their claims, money in the bank eventually.
Click to expand...

Lol our legal system is beyond broke Anyone who has been involved in it knows that
 
#74
Once you have to call a lawyer your basically fucked unless its a special case and you get a big jury award. I had a small case 1.2 million in claims, after the arbitrator came in it got reduced to 500K. Three years later my own lawyer tells me we have to stop the bleeding so we had to settle for 400K which 300K went to the lawyer.

Lawyers are only good when your a suspect in a murder with gunpowder residue on your hands with some DNA of the victim spatter on your clothing, then you need a lawyer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ravenworks, nexusfire, bunsen27 and 1 other person
#76
TacticalDillhole said:
Well fuck. Mine already shipped and they charge a 10% restock.
Click to expand...
Send it to Prime along with a letter explaining where you bought it, how you thought it was really legitimate and then found out otherwise. Mainly as a favor/courtesy so they have physical proof for any future litigation. Either way, I'd return it to TSUSA less 10% or send to Prime and they might help you out.

My two cents.
 
#77
Problem number #1: If you don't pay your debt when owed you have defaulted on your obligations. You are subject to default provisions in the contract.
Problem number #2: If you restructured the Agreement and then default on paying your bills you have again defaulted on your obligations. You are subject to the default provisions in the contract.
Problem number #3: You contend that you reach an unsigned agreement that changes terms when there is a prior written agreement. The other party starts to enforce prior written contract...
Problem number #4: You agreed that the producer could sell the product for non-payment and default....

The rest is up to a court to sort out....

If you don't have the facts......argue the law....if you don't have the law....pound the table and put out a video...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zorrosdens, silentheart and Primus
#79
NOTE TO ANY THAT PURCHASE: Per Shooting Sports Return Policy, they do not accept Ammo returns.

LUCKY FOR ME: I ordered 8:06pm online, about 1230am I sent contact message email canceling the order, went to bed, got up 930am, email already in inbox confirming ready for UPS and tracking number given, called immediately .....bottom line, they are rerouting package and when they get it 10% restock....the price of business and higher values.

JUST BE AWARE IS ALL I CAN SAY. ?
 
#80
RUAG sales were 1.9 billion I take it that Prime is not that size company, name of the game is capital reserves if you want to pee with the big dogs in the tall grass.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Ern
#82
It is a commodity. It is available, and it's worth the price.

Loading the transaction with legalities, prejudices, and best intentions is irrelevant. Whatever comes of the legal issues, nothing you or I can do in a free market will influence the outcome, or the 'fairness' of that outcome.

Stop it. You're sounding like a pack of squabbling SJW's.

Buy, don't buy; but do it based on sound economics, and not on 'feelings'.

Somebody's going to get some, maybe the last of, some great ammo. If you have a use for it, grow up, and don't be standing in your own way of acquiring it.

Greg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ravenworks, Jeeper48, Pilotscrappy and 3 others
#83
SIlabs said:
Problem number #1: If you don't pay your debt when owed you have defaulted on your obligations. You are subject to default provisions in the contract.
Problem number #2: If you restructured the Agreement and then default on paying your bills you have again defaulted on your obligations. You are subject to the default provisions in the contract.
Problem number #3: You contend that you reach an unsigned agreement that changes terms when there is a prior written agreement. The other party starts to enforce prior written contract...
Problem number #4: You agreed that the producer could sell the product for non-payment and default....

The rest is up to a court to sort out....

If you don't have the facts......argue the law....if you don't have the law....pound the table and put out a video...
Click to expand...

Agreed. There was zero legal reasoning behind that video. Regardless at how good and nice the people are at prime, when you release a video statement like that.......it’s a last ditch cry for help.
 
#92
The new Prime I shot yesterday is rockstar,

I don't want to hype it, but I at 800 yards with my 5.75" Truing bar, I stacked the rounds.

7097171


The numbers are better too, from MV to SDs,

I would stay away from the stores that bought the stuff from RUAG, might be a Trademark issue there. Not the end users problem, but a possible problem depending how the lawyers see it.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Srgt. Hulka, Spblademaker, CStroud and 7 others
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

99mpower
SOLD 118pcs of PRIMED Lapua 308 brass
Replies
2
Views
78
99mpower
99mpower
stello1001
Old prime ammo lot# location???
Replies
6
Views
253
D̷e̷v̷i̷l̷D̷o̷c̷A̷Z̷
D
M
Used Too Small a Bushing & Neck is Undersize
Replies
8
Views
212
sirhrmechanic
sirhrmechanic
CasperTheFriendlyGhost
Reloading Equipment Hand Loaded 6BR Rounds with Extras
Replies
4
Views
329
CasperTheFriendlyGhost
CasperTheFriendlyGhost
R
Need ammo recommendations for new 6.5 CM
Replies
5
Views
287
themightytimmah
T
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts