Smith Enterprises, Inc. Suing over a forum post.

#201
^^^Thanks for the post! I am also aware how govt contracts are usually awarded, however; it appears that at least one the members here on the hide has some special, inside knowledge. The superior product was not awarded the contract-I was hoping he could set the record straight! Which was better, how the tests were conducted etc. As I previously stated, I'm sure he didn't just pull that out of his "hat", but actually has real data to back it up. I have no problem writing my congressman and pointing out the superior product was not given the contract, if it could only help 1/1,000,000th in getting the SEALs the proven better, superior product. I'm sure you feel the same way, all Americans do.
 
Last edited:
#202
pawprint2 said:
^^^Thanks for the post! I am also aware how govt contracts are usually awarded, however; it appears that at least one the members here on the hide has some special, inside knowledge. The superior product was not awarded the contract-I was hoping he could set the record straight! Which was better, how the tests were conducted etc. As I previously stated, I'm sure he didn't just pull that out of his "hat", but actually has real data to back it up. I have no problem writing my congressman and pointing out the superior product was not given the contract, if it could only help 1/1,000,000th in getting the SEALs the proven better, superior product. I'm sure you feel the same way, all Americans do.
Click to expand...

Well if that is the case, then you know the other mfgrs had the right to contest the awarding of the contract. Quiet simply put, unless you have evidence of malfeasance, you are wasting your time. Claiming to have a superior product is not justification. If at the end of the day if company X and Y meet the criteria and company X wants more per unit and is unwilling to adjust his price then company Y with the price per unit that is most advantageous to the Govt' gets awarded the contract.

Now if you are claiming that Y's product is substandard(as does not meet the posted requirements) and or defective, that would be an instance of malfeasance and a reason for other mfgrs to contest and or for the Gov't to seek recourse. As would be any other form of impropriety that wrongfully awarded the contract to Y's company.

What it sounds like to me is you are assuming is that there was a side by side physical testing that was not on the level. If there was a side by side testing, it would have been early on in the procurement process to weed out those who did not meet the test criteria long before there was even a downselect and subsequent contract awarding. Again, if malfeasance was involved then the other mfgrs would surely have contested it.

Without going to fedbizops and looking to see how the solicitation was written, you are assuming that this wasn't simply an order that was placed and by law, due to its cost,etc, had to be listed on fedbizops. For all we know it could have been exactely what Crane wanted after doing their own testing. Personally, I think persuing this is a waste of time but if you are intent on writting your congressman then I strongly suggest you do your due dilligence and research the contract as well as learn about the FARs and contracting from other than an internet gun forum. Again, the burden of proof is on you/the other mfgrs if you wish to contest the contract and simply saying product X is superior is not going to get you very far.
 
Last edited:
#203
papa zero three, may I suggest you re-Read the string, for you have me confused with 0812guns, I do not claim to have any inside knowledge as to why a superior product was not given the award, not at all.
In fact 0812guns posted, "Winning? Are you serious? Look at their website. They clearly state that they are a small business, woman owned, veteran operated. Uncle Sam has funds already allocated for contracts to businesses like that. Well played on SEI's part. To think that the only reason they have government contracts is because of superior products is pretty naive."""
It is obvious he has knowledge regarding a superior products, as I have stated several times, I don't think he just pulled that out of his "hat". For it would be idiotic, and naïve to make a statement like that without knowing what you were talking about. It appears he is privy to the testing procedures and result from Crane; and can state without equivocation that the superior product was not chosen, but the award went to SEI, do to political requirements. I am just hoping he will post some of those inside results. Maybe he can't because it is "real top secret" and if he posted it, there would be Fed LE at his front door in just minutes........ Of course, I'd really like to know what is the superior product, as I may want to purchase a vortex flash hider in the future. I am not suggesting anything about anything, other than suggesting 0812 post his special inside knowledge regarding these tests. Again re-Read the string.
 
#204
Pawprint, I am not confusing you with 0812guns. I have been replying to your post(#197) where you stated you would write your congressman based on the issue 0812guns claims exists, which from what has been posted so far, sounds like pure supposition and or not understanding Gov't contracting and the FAR's.
 
#205
I'd like to add a thought, can anyone imagine a sponsor of a board, such as sniper's hide, complaining, threatening a law suit, or threatening to stop their sponsorship because some posters were trashing them or their claims etc.? I know on this board, Frank would tell them to take their tent and leave, there wouldn't be any "protection" of sponsors that make "crazy" claims! If some gun maker for example, claimed all his lever action super shooters held a 1/4MOA, and a few posters called him out on it, I just can't see Frank banning or deleting those posters, as that would diminish all the other sponsors claims (cheapen their sponsorship). I'm like most of you guys, hate to see this lawsuit, but, I'm better SEI's business won't go into the toilet as so many have predicted. I'm an still amazed at the number of guys, that were just days away from purchasing a SEI rifle on this board, but are now turning to SEI's competitors! I didn't realize the M14 trade was so brisk! I know Wideners has LRB rifles for sale, and has had them in stock for a while, who knew the demand for these rifles would be as high as it seems on this board? I've always thought the bolt gun was king on the hide, followed by the AR gas guns.
 
#206
Papa Zero Three said:
Pawprint, I am not confusing you with 0812guns. I have been replying to your post(#197) where you stated you would write your congressman based on the issue 0812guns claims exists, which from what has been posted so far, sounds like pure supposition and or not understanding Gov't contracting and the FAR's.
Click to expand...

I will write my congressman, if 0812 will ever post the inside knowledge he has, and how Crane is not buying the superior product. I have no intention of writing my congressman with a letter starting out with, "some guy made a claim, but didn't back it up at all, but I'm sure it is correct" that would be stupid, idiotic and naïve! This is why I've asked 0812 to post the facts that he must have, as I'm sure he didn't just pull this out of his "hat", for that would be stupid, idiotic, naïve, and just plain trashy. I don't claim to have any inside test data, I wasn't at Crane doing the tests, I don't even know a guy, that has a friend that saw the test at Crane. But we (here on the hide) do have a guy with this special-inside-data, all I want is some of the specifics-writing my congressman is just one, the other, is, I may want to purchase a vortex flash hider, and I'd like to buy the superior product.
You are correct, I will write my congressman on the issue 0812guns claims exists, if he will post the facts, manufacturers involved, costs, test procedures, etc. And if it would do any good or not, who knows, as 0812guns has the inside track on what was the superior product (as tested by Crane), maybe something can be done to make sure the SEALs get the better "superior" unit.
 
Last edited:
#207
pawprint2 said:
You sir are 100% correct, I stand corrected, I should have said, "still being awarded" govt contracts. Regarding your observation that," Uncle Sam has funds already allocated for contracts to businesses like that", I'm sorry to hear Navy Crane and the SEALs are buying what must be a sub quality product, or certainly not a "superior product", because of the ownerships, etc. This would be a good place to discuss the other offerings made to Crane, who made them, and why they weren't Awarded the contract. If you could post some photos and test results of the other businesses that mfg. a superior flash hider (one that met the Crane's stated requirement), I'll be among the first to call my Congressman!! I apologize for being naïve on the subject, but with your help, I'll be able to have some hard facts-as in what else has been tested, who mfg'd the other products etc.. Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

I believe this is a full copy of post 197. If you re-READ my reply, you can see I was offering to write my congressman-after 0812guns supplied the needed info.
 
#208
pawprint2 said:
I believe this is a full copy of post 197. If you re-READ my reply, you can see I was offering to write my congressman-after 0812guns supplied the needed info.
Click to expand...

I'm tracking. And I addressed some of your concerns, specifically,:

"This would be a good place to discuss the other offerings made to Crane, who made them, and why they weren't Awarded the contract."

As I stated, you'd have to look up the solicitation on fedbizops to see how it was listed and to see if any other mfgrs even replied to the solicitation. The only way other mfgrs would be able to find out why they were not selected would be to go back and look at the winners listed price to see if it was awarded on price alone. Other than that there are no reasons given to mfgrs who are not awarded the contract, there are no "results" or findings. The only other way would be to file a FOI act to get all the paperwork submitted by those mfgrs which typically are only items showing they meet the requirements to compete in the solicitation of the contract.

Bottom line: 0812guns statement and your reply to post supporting info are non starters as if you understand the acquisition process(FAR's) and contracting it would be apparent that what has been presented so far is not cause to question the awarding of that contract but rather a case of not knowing what you don't know. And again, I refer back to my caveat statement about malfeasance/impropriety being involved.
 
#209
pawprint2 said:
...I'm like most of you guys, hate to see this lawsuit, but, I'm better SEI's business won't go into the toilet as so many have predicted. I'm an still amazed at the number of guys, that were just days away from purchasing a SEI rifle on this board, but are now turning to SEI's competitors! I didn't realize the M14 trade was so brisk!...
Click to expand...
The custom M14 trade is limited. The companies making and selling receivers only, more so. But, back to the custom market, which SEI, would be considered part of. Not many people with the disposable income to afford a custom, expensive M14 are going to be willing to let SEI "win" their business when SEI has openly demonstrated such disregard and disrespect for customers. Are their other custom builders and manufacturers of any firearm platform that have a website dedicated to their poor treatment of customers? Smith Enterprise, Sucks.
 
#210
Papa Zero Three said:
I'm tracking. And I addressed some of your concerns, specifically,:

"This would be a good place to discuss the other offerings made to Crane, who made them, and why they weren't Awarded the contract."

As I stated, you'd have to look up the solicitation on fedbizops to see how it was listed and to see if any other mfgrs even replied to the solicitation. The only way other mfgrs would be able to find out why they were not selected would be to go back and look at the winners listed price to see if it was awarded on price alone. Other than that there are no reasons given to mfgrs who are not awarded the contract, there are no "results" or findings. The only other way would be to file a FOI act to get all the paperwork submitted by those mfgrs which typically are only items showing they meet the requirements to compete in the solicitation of the contract.

Bottom line: 0812guns statement and your reply to post supporting info are non starters as if you understand the acquisition process(FAR's) and contracting it would be apparent that what has been presented so far is not cause to question the awarding of that contract but rather a case of not knowing what you don't know. And again, I refer back to my caveat statement about malfeasance/impropriety being involved.
Click to expand...
WOW! Please refer t the ENTIRE quote, cherry picking is for cherry pickers! As anyone can read I stated, "This would be a good place to discuss the other offerings made to Crane, who made them, and why they weren't Awarded the contract. If you could post some photos and test results of the other businesses that mfg. a superior flash hider (one that met the Crane's stated requirement), I'll be among the first to call my Congressman!!
As you may see when you re-READ my post, I am making zero, claims of bad doings by Crane or the SEALs! I am only asking, one more time, for the info regarding how 0812guns knows that the superior product wasn't the one purchased (SEI'S). I am still waiting for his post. It doesn't matter how the govt. made the pick, I don't care if it were three fat ladies in a bar in downtown Chicago! You seem to miss the point, then miss it again and again. If 0812guns knows that the superior product was not awarded the contract, he must have some solid reasons! Not those just pulled out of his "hat"!!! Again, how the contracting process works, is of no importance to the info asked for from 0812-but rather what product was superior in the Crane tests. He must work for Crane, or have some other source of inside information! He was willing to share the "fact" that the superior product wasn't awarded the contract-I'd just like him to share the rest of his top secret info.
 
#211
mescalito said:
The custom M14 trade is limited. The companies making and selling receivers only, more so. But, back to the custom market, which SEI, would be considered part of. Not many people with the disposable income to afford a custom, expensive M14 are going to be willing to let SEI "win" their business when SEI has openly demonstrated such disregard and disrespect for customers. Are their other custom builders and manufacturers of any firearm platform that have a website dedicated to their poor treatment of customers? Smith Enterprise, Sucks.
Click to expand...
Thanks for you enlightening post! I guess the market will tell. Are you predicting that Smith will be filing for bankruptcy in the next year? Or that they won't be able to sell all the rifles they make? How long, based on your insight, will they company be able to hold on before their weapons become "collectors items"?
 
#212
pawprint2 said:
Thanks for you enlightening post! I guess the market will tell. Are you predicting that Smith will be filing for bankruptcy in the next year? Or that they won't be able to sell all the rifles they make? How long, based on your insight, will they company be able to hold on before their weapons become "collectors items"?
Click to expand...


One thing for sure is SEI did not do themselves any favors with the lawsuit or some of the email printed on what they think of its customers.
M1A builders is a small community and I am sure everyone knows everyone so in the chance SEI leaves the marketplace LRB, Fulton and Springfield can cover it pretty well and none of them has shown disdain for its customers.
 
#213
cal50 said:
One thing for sure is SEI did not do themselves any favors with the lawsuit or some of the email printed on what they think of its customers.
M1A builders is a small community and I am sure everyone knows everyone so in the chance SEI leaves the marketplace LRB, Fulton and Springfield can cover it pretty well and none of them has shown disdain for its customers.
Click to expand...

The fact that they did not do themselves any favors goes without saying, I'm just curious, based on all the bluster, how long some of the experts in the M14 "community" think it will be before this sends SEI into bankruptcy? Or how long it will be before they are not selling all they guns they make? BTW, I've been trying to get a straight answer from 0812guns regarding the recent contract awarded to SEI, do you have any knowledge regarding what Crane actually determined was a superior flash hider-but went with SEI, do to political restraints? It was easy to get the first part of the experts post, but it sure isn't easy to get the particulars. Maybe it is real top secret or something....
 
Last edited:
#214
pawprint2 said:
The fact that they did not do themselves any favors goes without saying, I'm just curious, based on all the bluster, how long some of the experts in the M14 "community" think it will be before this sends SEI into bankruptcy? Or how long it will be before they are not selling all they guns they make? BTW, I've been trying to get a straight answer from 0812guns regarding the recent contract awarded to SEI, do you have any knowledge regarding what Crane actually determined was a superior flash hider-but went with SEI, do to political restraints? It was easy to get the first part of the experts post, but it sure isn't easy to get the particulars. Maybe it is real top secret or something....
Click to expand...


I do not know of anyone that deems themselves an "expert" on predicting market trends, demands, state laws that allow purchase, etc. so pressing someone for a prediction is argumentative at best.
It serves no purpose expect for a pissing contest.

I had zero opinions of SEI until the lawsuit came to light and some of the things I have been reading are pretty unflattering. If someone wants a forged receiver ( M1A) LRB makes a much nicer looking receiver anyway. As much as I dislike the way SEI has handeled themselves I hate to see any gun manufacturer alienate its customers and possible exit the market place. Competition and selection are good things but I would personally never buy a SEI product just becasue of their actions. I have four (4) Springfield M1A's never felt the need for a forged receiver anyway. The SEI heel stamp does look like ass though......

As to awarding contracts sometimes the "best" product does get purchased, other times its total cost, supply time window, buddy , buddy, etc.
After its awarded for whatever reason its over and done.
 
#215
pawprint2 said:
WOW! Please refer t the ENTIRE quote, cherry picking is for cherry pickers! As anyone can read I stated, "This would be a good place to discuss the other offerings made to Crane, who made them, and why they weren't Awarded the contract. If you could post some photos and test results of the other businesses that mfg. a superior flash hider (one that met the Crane's stated requirement), I'll be among the first to call my Congressman!!
As you may see when you re-READ my post, I am making zero, claims of bad doings by Crane or the SEALs! I am only asking, one more time, for the info regarding how 0812guns knows that the superior product wasn't the one purchased (SEI'S). I am still waiting for his post. It doesn't matter how the govt. made the pick, I don't care if it were three fat ladies in a bar in downtown Chicago! You seem to miss the point, then miss it again and again. If 0812guns knows that the superior product was not awarded the contract, he must have some solid reasons! Not those just pulled out of his "hat"!!! Again, how the contracting process works, is of no importance to the info asked for from 0812-but rather what product was superior in the Crane tests. He must work for Crane, or have some other source of inside information! He was willing to share the "fact" that the superior product wasn't awarded the contract-I'd just like him to share the rest of his top secret info.
Click to expand...


In both 0812 and your posts both are non sequiturs in response to the aforementioned contract award statement. I'm trying to say this without sounding like a dick but the premise 0812 made about the small business set aside and then your asking for further information are both erroneous. 0812's assumption/misunderstanding of what a small business set aside is, is wrong and your assumption that he (or anyone else) could provide "facts" to support it is also wrong, as in he cannot provide anything to support his claim. For sake of argument, if he could, then it would fall in to the malfeasance category realm which would in turn mean the other mfgrs involved could legally pursue the matter. To further run with this, there is nothing saying the aforementioned contract award wasn't a sole source solicitation notice(we'd have to go look it up on fedbizops),which means no one other than SEI could fulfill the users technical specification requirement based on what was in the statement of work submitted by the end user and by law they have to announce it on fedbizops that they are awarding them the contract, its a public notice.


No where in my replies to you did I say you were implying any wrong doing by Crane, I have no clue where you pulled that idea from.

I'm not missing the point, it is you. I am addressing the contract award and how it works. If 0812 thinks a superior product was not chosen, that is his opinion, which may in fact be true. Just because a mfgr has what may be a superior product doesn't mean they will win the contract. As long as all of the mfgr submissions meet the technical specifications outlined in the statement of work they will be considered. Chances are and more often than not the superior item may cost more to make and the mfgr has a higher per unit price than the next mfgr's item that also meets the requirement threshold. The contracting office will choose the item that is most cost effective for the Govt as long as it meets the Technical specification requirements, period. Superior product or not, thats how it works. Knowing this IS important if you want a legitimate answer, which I have been trying to explain here. What 0812 thinks of what happened or a "why" can only be viewed as supposition/opinion. If it was otherwise, it would then fall into a case of malfeasance.

If you don't understand the entire process correctly, anyone could tell you anything as to why X mfgr didn't get a contract and you would be none the wiser to say otherwise or see through whatever conspiracy theory/lack of knowledge story they are trying to sell you.
 
#217
pawprint2 said:
Thanks for you enlightening post! I guess the market will tell. Are you predicting that Smith will be filing for bankruptcy in the next year? Or that they won't be able to sell all the rifles they make? How long, based on your insight, will they company be able to hold on before their weapons become "collectors items"?
Click to expand...

My crystal ball is cloudy over that issue. They only have themselves to blame that you would even think to ask that. I hope they don't go BK, I would guess the M14 community does not want that either. But, we do know that SEI has expressed that they don't necessarily care what the customer thinks if it conflicts with what SEI thinks.
 
Last edited:
#218
Is there any consensus whether a forged and machined M14/M1A receiver is superior to a receiver machined from a billet (bar stock)? I'm just trying to learn which manufacturing method is believed to produce the best receiver.

I may be mistaken, but I had always presumed that both the receivers that are forged or the receivers made from a billets are superior to the receivers coming from investment castings.
 
#219
I believe forged receivers are superior because they form the grain of the metal into the form of the receiver rather than cutting the metal with less regard for the grain. I believe both are superior to investment casting.
 
#222
From what I have seen on threads across the Internet is this has gone from everyone sharing their bad experiences with SEI to debates over who has the biggest man parts and now to personal insults not just here but across the Internet. After looking and reading these posts I can't help but feel the gun community and forums alike have been given a black eye because of our lack of respect to one another. In a time that we responsible gun owners are under attack by those who feel we shouldn't have rights on what we can and can't own isn't a time to pick fights with one another it time to unite. We have found that not only are we under attack from other private and government individuals but from gun manufacturers such as SEI and others who done give a damn about the private civilian sales but cater to their military contracts. It's not time for personal assaults on each other so lets keep it professional and on topic.
 
#226
I used to forge quite a few knives, and always believed that the forging compressed and tightened up the grain structure in the steel, there by making it superior to bench ground steel that hasn't been forged. However, knife making is far different than making receivers for firearms. Much of the advantage of forging knives is gained through the way the heat treating is done after forging.

I don't know how firearms parts makers do their heat treating after forging. To get the best results, I had to re-aneal and normalize the steel after forging to remove the stresses the forging caused. Then I could harden, and temper the knife.

But as I said, I'm not familiar with the methods of heat treating used in making firearms receivers. I would think that the forged piece would require different heat treating than a piece that is machined from a billet/bar stock.

Without some kind of testing on characteristics such as tensile strength, resistance to breakage, wear resistance, errosion, corrosion resistance between parts that were forged and those that were machined from billets/bar stock, a person would only be guessing at how the parts would compare. I was hoping someone had done some testing to show how firearms receivers compare. Without that information, I would probably lean toward a forged and machined part first, then would choose a piece machined from a billet/bar stock, and lastly a cast part.
 
#227
A properly engineered and produced cast part will generally be fine. But there's always finer and finest to consider. How strong do you want it to be, how long do you want it to last, and how much do you want it to cost?
 
#228
Unless someone knows of a straight up comparison of receivers testing things like how accurately they meet actual specs, durability, erosion and corrosion resistance, shear strength, heat treat quality and similar characteristics, I am left with my unscientific personal biases. Those biases leave me with the following order of preference:

forged, then machined
machined from billet/bar stock
cast then machined

I would think that manufacturers would have little to gain, and there would be the possibility of a great deal to loose. If a manufacturer comes out at the bottom of the heap, it could hurt sales.

Price is also a reasonable consideration. If the worst receiver lasts through 4-5 barrels that each fire 6000-10,000 rounds, and the best receiver only lasts for one more barrel, it could only justify a price difference of one sixth more cost. If a high end receiver costs double the cheap one, it would need performance to justify that extra expense.
 
#229
Easy with the common sense there hoss!


Unknown said:
Unless someone knows of a straight up comparison of receivers testing things like how accurately they meet actual specs, durability, erosion and corrosion resistance, shear strength, heat treat quality and similar characteristics, I am left with my unscientific personal biases. Those biases leave me with the following order of preference:

forged, then machined
machined from billet/bar stock
cast then machined

I would think that manufacturers would have little to gain, and there would be the possibility of a great deal to loose. If a manufacturer comes out at the bottom of the heap, it could hurt sales.

Price is also a reasonable consideration. If the worst receiver lasts through 4-5 barrels that each fire 6000-10,000 rounds, and the best receiver only lasts for one more barrel, it could only justify a price difference of one sixth more cost. If a high end receiver costs double the cheap one, it would need performance to justify that extra expense.
Click to expand...
 
#230
Unknown said:
Unless someone knows of a straight up comparison of receivers testing things like how accurately they meet actual specs, durability, erosion and corrosion resistance, shear strength, heat treat quality and similar characteristics, I am left with my unscientific personal biases. Those biases leave me with the following order of preference:

forged, then machined
machined from billet/bar stock
cast then machined

I would think that manufacturers would have little to gain, and there would be the possibility of a great deal to loose. If a manufacturer comes out at the bottom of the heap, it could hurt sales.

Price is also a reasonable consideration. If the worst receiver lasts through 4-5 barrels that each fire 6000-10,000 rounds, and the best receiver only lasts for one more barrel, it could only justify a price difference of one sixth more cost. If a high end receiver costs double the cheap one, it would need performance to justify that extra expense.
Click to expand...

Forged vs cast is a moot point in today's manufacturing and tech equipment available. Ruger has been investment casting for years and makes excellent firearms. MIM (metal injection) is also debated against the identical forged parts with some claiming MIM = junk. That sounds harsh considering jet turbine blades are processed the same way.

Forged parts are nice strong parts that sometime fail as well. Forged is more of a sales pitch or bragging rights item IMHO and function no differently than the cast item.
 
#231
I am certainly willing to consider that modern manufacturing techniques such as MIM casting, and the alloys available for that make fabulous parts. An excellent example of how modern manufacturing can do very good work compared to ancient techniques would be the steels and heat treat methods available to modern sword makers. To be certain, the ancient Samurai swords are great, however, with modern steels, laminating techniques, and heat treating, modern sword makers can use steels and techniques like x-ray and magnetic particle inspection checks to insure that there are no inclusions, voids, or problems with the modern blades they make.

So, I am open to the idea that modern manufacturing is able to produce an excellent product. However, without some head to head testing, we are all left with our own personal biases, and prejudices when selecting a product. It would be great to see some actual research, but I doubt it will happen because of what manufacturers could possibly loose if their product comes out on the bottom end.

If a manufacturer is barely able to keep up with current demand for their product, I wouldn't blame them for declining an invitation to participate in a head to head comparison. I wouldn't risk going from barely able to keep up with demand down to everyone in the market place knowing for a fact that my product came out dead last in the comparison. However, if they are already at the bottom of the heap, they might just come out ahead of their already dead last place by participating in a comparison. In that case, it might be worth the risk. Of course, if the comparison returned with something like "We knew they were dead last going into the comparison, but holy cow, we didn't know they were THIS bad," it wouldn't work out well for them.
 
#233
Having to defend yourself in the court of public opinion by resorting to a court of law reflects poorly on any company unless the intent was malicious and unfounded. Most of us would rather not be involved with our judicial system which often seems dysfunctional.
SEI has shot themselves in the foot trying to clear a jam and gets no sympathy from me.
 
#236
++UPDATE++

Here is SEI's rebuttal to my dismissal motion.

As I previously described here, SEI sued me in Arizona federal court for alleged product disparagement due to comments I made on this forum while waiting for SEI to deliver several receivers that I had on order. I retained an attorney, we filed a motion to dismiss SEI’s complaint against me, and SEI's rebuttal is linked below with all exhibits. I wish I could discuss the documents with you, but I cannot.

I will be updating other forums I visit – if you want to do the same, you’re definitely free to do so (all of these documents are publicly available). I will keep everyone updated on further court filings Wednesday of this week.

Again, I’m sorry for the distraction caused by this situation, but feel strongly this should be openly discussed. Thanks again for the support and encouragement while I deal with this complaint everyone. All the best.

SEI's Rebuttal to my Dismissal Motion:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0XyOXhO5LcXSGd4RkFzaVdCb1U/edit?usp=sharing



Exhibit 1:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0XyOXhO5LcXYzk3bmxZc3BHREk/edit?usp=sharing

Exhibit A:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0XyOXhO5LcXRGtpdGpqVEdqZk0/edit?usp=sharing

Exhibit B:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0XyOXhO5LcXdlM5a3g0cFFYNEk/edit?usp=sharing

Exhibit C:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0XyOXhO5LcXQlJ5V3Z1UExfYU0/edit?usp=sharing

Exhibit E:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0XyOXhO5LcXVGVENHpiUWQ4Ukk/edit?usp=sharing

Exhibit F:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0XyOXhO5LcXMDduZHlDM0RQS28/edit?usp=sharing

Exhibit G:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0XyOXhO5LcXS3pNNXp6NkRYTTQ/edit?usp=sharing
 
#237
Exhibits F and G seem to show that Smith is petty, and that the defendant does not meet the definition of a manufacturer, or dealer. In Exhibit G, beginning with "the definition of "manufacturer" in 18 U.S.C.921(a)(10) and 27 CFR 478.11" states that "applies. Thus, a person who manufactures a firearm will require a manufacturer's license if he/she devotes time, attention, and labor to such manufacture as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the sale or distribution of the firearms manufactured."

All the reason I will ever need to avoid them when I build an M25.
 
#239
Aside from showing he sold some of his personal collection, isn't their line of thinking, if you change the rims on your car you're competing with Ford, Chevy, etc. If you later sell it. It appears anyone with some tools, and free space who calls their man cave a shop is a builder now. Every gun owners garage is potential shop to compete with.
 
#240
As far as the contracting and FAR dribble go.... it really means nothing. The Gov contracts with just about any company with a pulse and a DUNS number. Having a contract does not mean much as far as quality/price value goes. Furthermore, based on the volume and estimated price, that contracting action would fall under SAP (simplified aquisiition procedures, F.A.R. Chapter 13) which means the process is streamlined and most likley was sole sourced. Now that everyone and their fucking mother is a Small Business/8A/HubZone or whatever fucking name they come up with, sole sourcing contracts is EASY up to about the 6.5 MILLION dollar threshold. Ive done "small business" contracts (with competition) in the $250,000,000/5 year range. For Many SAP, it didnt even have to be a 1102 Warranted Contracting officer, could have been some knucklehead like me who took a few contracting classes and got a $25/50K Warrant. If you think that there is anything "FAIR" when it comes to non-prime/Multi-million dollar contracting actions, you need to give me some of what your smoking.

Even if some other company could prove SEI did something shady or the contracting office did something shady, it wouldn't be worth the lawyer/contracting time/fees to try to put up a protest on something so fucking insignificant as 400 flash hiders. There is a 99% chance that there was not even a fedbizops solicitation/RFP put out before hand, and the first time anyone other than SEI/Crane knew of the contract, was after it was awarded.
 
Last edited:
#241
Any updates? Just saw a thread on another site (barfcom) stating that SEI is alive and well. Wanted to ask "What are your feelings on multi-year wait times and getting sued by companies you support?", but they won't let me register there.

I realize that the legal system also moves on a geologic time scale sometimes,I was just curious.
 
#243
Graham said:
You nailed it: Personal jurisdiction.

The defendant's only contact with Arizona, the venue state, appears to have been the purchase of a receiver from a third party. Hmmm.........
Click to expand...

I'm no attorney, but I don't see how that would satisfy the minimum contacts part of the law. Again, I'm no attorney. I'm just a shooter trying to remember the stuff I was taught in "business Law". I believe the precedent was set in the international shoe v. State of Washington.
 
#244
Man, a rash of libel lawsuits in the precision shooting industry, the ambulance chasers must have hit upon a winning marketing formula.
 
Last edited:
#247
Graham said:
Better read that complaint again.

Or, maybe read a bit of this Thread first, then post.
Click to expand...

As usual, full of snark and devoid of specifics. Exactly what do you have an issue with? Libel is one of the charges listed, and there have been a few other defamation lawsuits in the gun industry lately, that any reasonable person should be able to see are completely baseless. So I come to the conclusion that the ambulance chasing lawyers have hit upon a new marketing gambit to draw in more suckers.

Commence " Grahaming it up my ass."
 
#248
mallrat said:
As usual, full of snark and devoid of specifics. Exactly what do you have an issue with? Libel is one of the charges listed, and there have been a few other defamation lawsuits in the gun industry lately, that any reasonable person should be able to see are completely baseless. So I come to the conclusion that the ambulance chasing lawyers have hit upon a new marketing gambit to draw in more suckers.

Commence " Grahaming it up my ass."
Click to expand...
Please don't take offense should I ignore the request of a submissive to be penetrated.

Repeating yourself while calling names doesn't make your position any stronger.

As I posted earlier, It's a Lanham act complaint. That's a very specific type of action. Just because you don't know what that is doesn't mean that what I say is suddenly 'devoid of specifics'.

What other 'defamation lawsuits in the gun industry lately' do you now claim you were talking about?
 
#249
That I "now" claim? Did you read post #244 before you attacked it? Let's see, there's the lawsuit against Frank and the 'Hide, and a couple others that we're not allowed to talk about here due to Frank's justified fear of legal action against the website or its members. So maybe not a "rash" of lawsuits, but an indicator of a disturbing trend, at least to this guerto la chingala's eyes.
 
Last edited:
#250
Smith Enterprises, Inc. Suing over a forum post.

mallrat said:
That I "now" claim? Did you read post #244 before you attacked it?
Click to expand...
Here below is post #244 in its entirety. Note that it mentions only the SEI lawsuit:
mallrat said:
Any updates? Just saw a thread on another site (barfcom) stating that SEI is alive and well. Wanted to ask "What are your feelings on multi-year wait times and getting sued by companies you support?", but they won't let me register there.

I realize that the legal system also moves on a geologic time scale sometimes,I was just curious.
Click to expand...
Now... what two lawsuits, according to you, does Frank prohibit us posting about or that we are not permitted to mention on this site due to Frank's 'justified fear of legal action'?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Aries64
Accessories VERY FEW TAC OPS DRAG BAGS REMAINING!
Replies
11
Views
1K
Aries64
Aries64
Aries64
Group Buys VERY LIMITED NUMBER OF OLIVE DRAB, COYOTE BROWN, & MULTICAM TAC OPS DRAG BAGS AVAILABLE
Replies
27
Views
2K
Aries64
Aries64
Brushout
SOLD WTS: Defiance Deviant 6mm Creedmoor Manners Compact ***SOLD***
Replies
0
Views
154
Brushout
Brushout
pangris
Battle Arms Development barrels and customer service – Caveat Emptor
Replies
15
Views
814
JS8588
J
Frank Green
Not Bartlein Barrels
Replies
92
Views
10K
Malum Prohibitum
Malum Prohibitum
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts