Sig lands Army contract to make rifle ammo

[Erik88]

I came across this article earlier and thought it was odd. I know Sig makes some ammo, but they don't immediately jump out to most people as a big ammo manufacturer. Maybe they were the lowest bidder but this just doesn't pass the sniff test. 

I'm sure many remember the trials for the new Army sidearm. It was obvious that whoever wrote the the RFP guidelines had Sig in mind. A lot of people felt like Sig was basically given that contract. Now this.

Someone at Sig has friends in high places...

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/army-picks-sig-sauer-for-m2010-sniper-rifle-ammunition-2020-1

 

 

[Johnny Rotten]

Also landed this too

https://www.guns.com/news/2020/01/16/ussocom-takes-delivery-of-new-sig-sauer-mg-338-machine-gun

 

[deerslayer]

Sounds like a good time to buy SIG stock.

[Grayfox54]

I never knew Sig had an ammo plant in Arkansas. I just figured they had their name put on another maker's stuff. Learn something new every day. 

And WOW! A light machine gun in  .338 Norma Magnum! Now that's some serious fire power. 

I like Sig. They make some excellent weapons. Good for them. 

[pop pop]

Sig Ammo, with the V Crown bullets,  looks promising when you look at their stats. I may try some. They are loading their ammo on the hotter side compared to most ammo of today.  Most ammo companies have down loader their ammo, velocity wise, as of late. Hard to find ammo for the 357 Mag that reaches the 1450 FPS range.   This velocity once was the norm, but not today. Sig has been advertising theirs's will reach this range of speed. 

 

Edited to add; I just researched some gel testing on this ammo. Results were not good. It is hot ammo but over penetrated, and the hollow point did not open when fired through 4 layers of denim. I take back what I said! I can do that, can't I? 

Edited January 17, 2020 by pop pop

[Hozzie]

Someone at SIG did their job.  If an RFP comes out from the government and it isn't tilted towards you and you are in the business, you didn't do your job.  Contracts are won and lost way before an RFP ever comes out.

[Erik88]

10 minutes ago, Hozzie said:

Someone at SIG did their job.  If an RFP comes out from the government and it isn't tilted towards you and you are in the business, you didn't do your job.  Contracts are won and lost way before an RFP ever comes out.

By greasing someones palm? 

[Hozzie]

No, by doing your job, building relationships.  Contracts are about relationships.  We all know that probably does happen in some cases, but not as much as many would like to think.  Relationships are built over dinners, etc. but that is part of business.  Even dinner is hard to do anymore.  Losers like to think is was purely a money issue, but it never is.  It's more about who decision makers have a better relationship with.  More business is lost by not knowing who the real decisions makers are.  It's not always the person on top.

[Erik88]

33 minutes ago, Hozzie said:

No, by doing your job, building relationships.  Contracts are about relationships.  We all know that probably does happen in some cases, but not as much as many would like to think.  Relationships are built over dinners, etc. but that is part of business.  Even dinner is hard to do anymore.  Losers like to think is was purely a money issue, but it never is.  It's more about who decision makers have a better relationship with.  More business is lost by not knowing who the real decisions makers are.  It's not always the person on top.

Considering tax dollars are at play here, I have a problem knowing a deal was won because someone at Sig took the right person out to dinner. But to be fair, we don't know if anything like that happened here.  I found the handgun RFP to be extremely biased towards Sig since the Army's criteria seemed to be written solely for their gun.  

I get what you're saying for the private sector though. I see the sales guys in my industry do the same thing and it works. 

 

 

Edited January 17, 2020 by Erik88

[Hozzie]

8 minutes ago, Erik88 said:

Considering tax dollars at play here, I have a problem knowing a deal was won because someone at Sig took the right person out to dinner. But to be fair, we don't know if anything like that happened here.  I found the handgun RFP to be extremely biased towards Sig since the Army's criteria seemed to be written solely for their gun.  

I get what you're saying for the private sector though. I see the sales guys in my industry do the same thing and it works. 

 

 

That's the problem.  You think its because they took the right person out to dinner.  The real reason is because they most likely have spent years working with many people involved, listened and understood the real needs, and put together a plan to show the customer (doesn't matter if it is private or public) that they will provide the product and service level desired.

This isn't some magic process.  It can happen that someone wins a deal after an RFP comes out, but it is much harder.  The issue is not with the process as far as I am concerned.  The bigger issue in my view is with the actual regulations that give preference to some companies over another just because they are minority owned.  In many cases, they use extortion to win business, not ability or track record.  

There will never be a perfect process, but losers always have excuses and winners always have reasons.

[E4 No More]

2 minutes ago, Erik88 said:

Considering tax dollars at play here, I have a problem knowing a deal was won because someone at Sig took the right person out to dinner. But to be fair, we don't know if anything like that happened here.  I found the handgun RFP to be extremely biased towards Sig since the Army's criteria seemed to be written solely for their gun.  

I get what you're saying for the private sector though. I see the sales guys in my industry do the same thing and it works. 

 

 

The government has laws in place to prevent a corrupt bidding process, and a dinner wouldn't cut it anyway. The laws pretty much limits you to a doughnut and a cup of coffee. That varies from state to state.

Being in technical sales and dealing with a lot of local government accounts during my years, it is mostly bias towards a solution and then writing that bias into an RFP so that only a specific vendor or manufacturer can fulfill the requirements of the RFP. Cisco and their loyal users, for instance, does this a lot. They use a proprietary protocol, such as Cisco's EIGRP, (a routing protocol), and write that into the RFP as a requirement regardless of whether or not the agency is even going to use it so that only Cisco can fulfill the RFP requirement and "win" the business. To appear "fair" they'll even write in "or the equivalent" which is never the case for a proprietary feature. Cisco wins the business and the Cisco Certified whatever user keeps his Cisco certifications relevant to the organization for which he/she works.

[DaveTN]

38 minutes ago, Erik88 said:

I found the handgun RFP to be extremely biased towards Sig since the Army's criteria seemed to be written solely for their gun. 

Many times, that’s exactly what is done. I don’t know if they still do, but it used to be that our government had to buy American made products if they met the requirement, as obviously it should be. People get what they want by having specific details that only the product they want will meet. My experience is in the machine tool industry; I doubt the arms industry is any different.

What we see the military buying now a days has very little to do with obtaining a quality, usable product our troops want. It’s the same thing with Police Departments when the purchase is left up to the department instead of what the Officers want.