<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: More on the M4 Rights</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.gunpundit.com/3130.php/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.gunpundit.com/3130.php</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 18:11:38 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Hawk</title>
		<link>http://www.gunpundit.com/3130.php/comment-page-1#comment-4993</link>
		<dc:creator>Hawk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2009 16:25:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gunpundit.com/?p=3130#comment-4993</guid>
		<description>Either way the USG and Soldier win.  When the Army competed the M16 and FN won, the price dropped to half what we were paying for an M4.

Colt&#039;s fatal flaw has been a failure to innovate, instead resting on the laurels of their production contract and relying on litigation to preserve their competitive advantage rather than developing newer, competitive products.

The XM8 scared them back to the drawing board, but now I suspect it is too little, too late.  If a new carbine gets competed, Colt will not win.  If the M4 gets competed, Colt will not win.  Dead company walking.

Ironically, I told Colt this in the middle of the XM8 wars in 2004-2005: unless they changed dramatically, immediately, both investing in new engineering and getting price competitive with their competitors, they were out of business.  Best case, it woul dbe in 2009 when they gave up the M4 TDP, worst case in 2005 if XM8 became reality.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Either way the USG and Soldier win.  When the Army competed the M16 and FN won, the price dropped to half what we were paying for an M4.</p>
<p>Colt&#8217;s fatal flaw has been a failure to innovate, instead resting on the laurels of their production contract and relying on litigation to preserve their competitive advantage rather than developing newer, competitive products.</p>
<p>The XM8 scared them back to the drawing board, but now I suspect it is too little, too late.  If a new carbine gets competed, Colt will not win.  If the M4 gets competed, Colt will not win.  Dead company walking.</p>
<p>Ironically, I told Colt this in the middle of the XM8 wars in 2004-2005: unless they changed dramatically, immediately, both investing in new engineering and getting price competitive with their competitors, they were out of business.  Best case, it woul dbe in 2009 when they gave up the M4 TDP, worst case in 2005 if XM8 became reality.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SayUncle &#187; More on the Army M4</title>
		<link>http://www.gunpundit.com/3130.php/comment-page-1#comment-4973</link>
		<dc:creator>SayUncle &#187; More on the Army M4</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2009 13:11:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gunpundit.com/?p=3130#comment-4973</guid>
		<description>[...] Murdoc has the skinny [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Murdoc has the skinny [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
