A Glock 42?

[Tamara]

But, they are obviously not targeting this segment, but instead focusing on most of the CCW audience, which doesn't differentiate between 9 and .380.

Most of the CCW audience doesn't distinguish between a Kel-Tec and a gun, but they do distinguish between $319 and $375, and they distinguish between those with a vengeance.

I may not have ever kicked in a door or jumped out of a helicopter with a knife in my teeth, but when it comes to the retail gun-buying habits of Jasper and Cletus? That's a subject I feel fairly qualified to pontificate on.

[GJM]

Most of the CCW audience doesn't distinguish between a Kel-Tec and a gun, but they do distinguish between $319 and $375, and they distinguish between those with a vengeance.

And, what is to prevent Glock, given their likely cost to build this pistol, from selling a lot them at a higher price, and then reducing the price in the future if they feel that is desirable to reach different segments of the market?

[Tamara]

Look, I've made my fearless prediction, and you've made yours. I might be wrong, and this'll be a home run for Glock, but I just don't think so, based on my observations.

We'll see what the market says, won't we?

[Palmguy]

And, if Glock was targeting the "SHOT" show audience, I would agree with you. But, they are obviously not targeting this segment, but instead focusing on most of the CCW audience, which doesn't differentiate between 9 and .380. As to Glock's reputation taking a hit, I suspect that is with the same "one percent" of buyers that also want a 9mm.

If you wanted to maximize sales, and had a 9 and .380, which would you introduce first? Not too different than Apple's strategy, where you release one model now, and better stuff next year. Critics pan the current iPhone and Apple sells out of them. Tam, I bet after the 9 is introduced in a year or so, Glock cumulatively sells more .380's, despite being panned by the "cool boys."

I've had the same thought...I hope you're right.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4

[ToddG]

Most of the CCW audience doesn't distinguish between a Kel-Tec and a gun, but they do distinguish between $319 and $375, and they distinguish between those with a vengeance.

They also distinguish between immediately noticeable respected brand names and "other." Smith sold Sigmas by the boatload not to PF members but to, you know, the other 99.99% of gun buyers.

Tell you what, Tam. I'll bet you $1 that a single stack .380 Glock, in its first full year of production & sales, outsells any other single brand/model .380 pistol on the market.

[jkurtz7]

And, what is to prevent Glock, given their likely cost to build this pistol, from selling a lot them at a higher price, and then reducing the price in the future if they feel that is desirable to reach different segments of the market?

Tam has a good point. Why would bubba buy the G42 over a Ruger LCP? The Ruger is smaller, and will obviously cost less. According to a poll on a CCW based forum, the Ruger LCP is already the most popular carry gun for the masses.

Is Glock trying to compete with the Ruger LC380? No one really cares about that Ruger offering, because it's too big for the caliber according to many.

[Tamara]

Tell you what, Tam. I'll bet you $1 that a single stack .380 Glock, in its first full year of production & sales, outsells any other single brand/model .380 pistol on the market.

I'll take that. Without googling around, I'm guessing P3AT numbers will be tough to beat.

[ToddG]

I'll take that. Without googling around, I'm guessing P3AT numbers will be tough to beat.

[JodyH]

It'll be a flop unless they have a pink version.
You can quote me on that.

[Tamara]

It'll be a flop unless they have a pink version.
You can quote me on that.

/thread