A thought I had on increasing .22 LR availability

[JAB]

In another thread on this subforum, TGO member netmindr mentioned seeing fifty round boxes of .22LR at his local Walmart.  Part of his post that really got me thinking read:

 

..although 1 guy did ask if he had any of the bulk boxes but passed on the 50 rounders. Guess they're harder to turn a profit on.

 

You know, maybe that would be part of a potential solution - or at least an improvement - to the current situation.  From what I have seen, Walmart doesn't limit purchases based on number of rounds - they limit based on number of boxes.  I have seen other retailers do the same.  So, based on a three box per person limit and using the 550 round bulk packs as an example, the same 1650 rounds that one guy (possibly a reseller, possibly not) could get in a visit would allow eleven people to buy three fifty-round boxes each.  Even if bulk packs were limited to 1 per person while 50 round boxes were limited to three per person then packaging the ammo in fifty round boxes instead of bulk packs would allow three people to purchase 150 rounds each (with some left over from the bulk pack to package with the 'left-overs' from other packs to make even more fifty round boxes.)  To be clear, I am not talking about retailers breaking down bulk packs.  I am talking about ammo manufacturers packaging the ammo in fifty round boxes instead of bulk packs in the first place.

 

Sure the scalpers could just get their friends/family/bums off the street to come in with them and buy fifty round boxes but I have to wonder if the increased effort and likely decreased profit margin would be worth it, to them.  It just might put them out of the ammo scalping business.  Even if the price on the fifty rounders increased slightly - which could further hurt the scalpers - they would still be inexpensive enough that a guy could buy one or two a week to keep shooting until the nonsense ends.

 

Yeah, I like being able to go into a store and buy 550 rounds for around $20 as much as the next person.  However, realistically it has been over a year since a person could count on being able to do so.  Further, if it made a difference between ten or eleven people being able to keep shooting at a reasonable expense versus one person getting ammo (and maybe reselling it), I would support the idea of manufacturers doing away with bulk pack .22LR until things settle down.  To my mind, it would be a win for people who want to shoot .22LR on a weekly basis or even people who want to build a small reserve.  I would also think it would be a win for retailers as they would still likely be able to sell all the .22LR they could get while making a larger number of customers happy in the process.

 

I would also see it as a win for ammo manufacturers when it comes to long term sales.  At current ammo prices, even those of us who are very much 'in' to target shooting, plinking and the like are not doing it nearly as much and some have indicated that they have gotten out of it almost entirely.  I also have to wonder if potential new shooting enthusiasts (i.e. the ammo companies' potential, future customers) might not be deterred by the current prices of ammo and end up exploring another hobby rather than ever becoming involved in shooting as a hobby.

 

So, what do you guys think?

Edited May 14, 2014 by JAB

[Jonnin]

yes and no. 

Yes, ideally more people would get a little ammo.  But if all that were available were 50 round boxes, the scalpers would buy those up instead.   The problem would shift and reappear in a new format. 

 

Wal-mart might spread a little thinner.  Some places sell it by round count though -- you can have 500 or the biggest box we have, in whatever boxes that comes from is the current academy rule.   Wal-mart's rule is just not very good: you can buy 3 boxes, so the first 3-5 people get 1600+ rounds, and the rest get 0, instead of serving 15 or so people one box each.   Couple that with the resellers....  

 

Anyway, I doubt it would help much.   Prices would be higher too: more packing per round expense, more printing, more tax stamps, .....   gas prices for the customers as well, as more trips per round, as well as time = money factor. 

Edited May 14, 2014 by Jonnin

[TrickyNicky]

I've bought more ammo in 50 round boxes in the last year than I have in bulk packs. I've had an almost steady of 22lr that way...

I look forward to buying nothing but bulk packs again, but in the meantime I've adapted. YMMV.

[netmindr]

I had that thought when I posted that too, JAB. However, I don't think the manufacturers have a dog in that fight. As long as they're selling all they can produce, that's what they care about. However, I can see the retailers changing the way they order it and ordering more of the 50 count boxes. But then again, as long as they sell all they have in stock it doesn't really matter to them how it's packaged unless there is a better margin in one than the other.

 

Other than the consumer, the only other winner I can see would be the state as they get 11x the taxes for 50 round boxes vs the bulk boxes since the tax is $.10 per box regardless of the quantity. But they don't have any business telling manufacturers or retailers how to package or sell their products.

 

I was definitely glad to see such it available and so little interest by the resellers to grab it up. But, all in all, sure it would be much better for the shooter, but I don't think there's enough motivation up the chain for it to happen.  :yuck:

[Mike.357]

yeah I doubt that manufacturers care who gets the ammo as long as they get the profit.

 

All I know is every round of .22 I shoot cannot be replaced.

[vontar]

At this point I have serious doubts on it returning to what we call normal, being able to just walk in and buy a brick.  I don't see it returning any time soon.

 

I remember being one of the early ones to be concerned and everyone said, after Christmas production will return to normal and the shelves will stock up, well that was like a year and a half ago.

[KKing]

I've given up the hope of it returning to "normal", can't even say I really care anymore. My reasoning is this: 1) I'm still able to buy 500 round bricks for $50 or so and could do so probably twice a week availability wise if I desired. It's out there 2) Even at 10-12 cents per round it's at least half cheaper than my 9mm weapons, and at least 1/3 cheaper than my .223 I'm not going to pay more than what I've listed for it because there's simply no need, I've found plenty in that range. I still get to shoot. Shooting is my biggest hobby, and my favorite. If I can shoot my 22lr weapons at 1/2 and 1/3 the prices of my others, I will continue to do so. I'm not going to let the stress of gouges, resellers, and so forth outweigh the relief I get from shooting. Do prices of rimfire suck compared to what they were? Absolutely. Ammo manufacturers don't care if you get your ammo or if joe smo buys and resells it. In the end, they're getting their money either way. The only way they would start to care is if distributors had to return their stock to the manufacturers because they couldn't sell it. That will NEVER happen. I hate to speak in absolutes, but I can promise you it won't. I know that the 22lr situation is rough, and I'm not going to make any new fiends from this post, but I'm tired of trying to find "solutions" and so on. If you see a scalper selling his wares for double the price somewhere, report him or do whatever you see is necessary. But for me I'll continue to buy when I can, at the best prices I can find on these here interwebz, and continue to plink, train, and enjoy my hobby. As always, YMMV

[miller_man]

I like it. I think it has some merit, and could possibly allieviate some of the problem.

 

Would it instantly solve the problem? No. Is there any real chance of the ammo co's doing it? Not really.

[JAB]

But, all in all, sure it would be much better for the shooter, but I don't think there's enough motivation up the chain for it to happen.  :yuck:

 

Unfortunately, you are probably right.  It is too bad because all it would take would be one - just one - of the ammo companies having a little foresight as to the good it could do their company down the line while losing nothing, now.  What do I mean by that?

 

Well, packaged bulk or in fifty round boxes, in the current climate they are going to sell every, single round of .22LR they make so that is the 'losing nothing' part.  So, if I were the CEO of an ammo company then what gain would I see to going to fifty rounders? 

 

Well, (thinking as I might if I were such a CEO) if people are walking in to their local Walmart, sporting goods store or whatever and (because my theoretical company is packaging its ammo in fifty round boxes) my product is the only option available to them then they are going to buy and shoot my product.  This means that until the ammo situation starts to settle down, again (which I do think it will but maybe not for a couple of years even at this point) a whole lot of folks - maybe even the majority of people who are buying the ammo to actually shoot - will be using my product.  They won't be using it because I have slashed my price.  Heck, I can probably charge a little more per round than with bulk pack and still keep the price attractive for a fifty round box.  Nope, they will be using it because it is all they can get. 

 

When and if things get back to normal, neither my company nor the competition will likely be able to edge out the others based on price but I will have an advantage in that people will be used to using my ammo.  They will walk up to the ammo counter/cabinet/shelf and see three or four different types of ammo sitting there.  They will see that they are all priced pretty much in line with the others and probably won't have any reason to believe that one type is remarkable compared to the others.  In the case of newer shooters, they might not even know anything or much of anything about the others.  But there, on the shelf with my company labeling, will be their old friend - the only .22 ammo they have been able to find for the past two, three, four years or longer.  Again, with new shooters, maybe the only .22 ammo of which they have ever shot very much.  So here comes my advantage - familiarity.  If you are about to drop the same amount of cash either way, why not stick with the ammo you have been shooting?  You know it works, you have already sighted your guns for it (as it was the only ammo you could find, anyhow) and you know its capabilities so why change? 

 

Further, there is the possibility of a somewhat Pavlovian element - people start associating the feelings of pleasure and instant gratification they get from actually finding some .22LR on the shelf with my company's product, labeling, brand and so on.  Not exactly brain washing customers to buy my product but perhaps taking the opportunity to insert a little coincidental conditioning.  Behavior modification as a sales tool.

 

See, that is the kind of thinking about the customer I am talking about.  Not so much that I believe a company cares who gets the ammo but more along the lines of a company wanting to expand and solidify its customer base while building, if not customer loyalty, then at least customer familiarity and habituating customers to buying that company's ammo.  To me, that is a pretty unique opportunity with a type of ammo - .22LR - that has been around for years and sells in such high volumes.  All by doing something that requires no real effort or expenditure on the part of the company.

Edited May 15, 2014 by JAB

[urdubob]

We killed pigs this week end  I hated to use the 5 .22 rounds.....should have used a sledge hammer :ugh: