Why is it that when it comes to the big British Gun Makers, Rigby are the only brand that offers "affordable" models?

[Alistair]

Reminds me of the path Rolex took compared to say patek phillipe.

Among watch aficionados Rolex is seen as a mid market brand.

However, among the public as a whole (99.9%) of people, they are seen as a top end luxury product.

In doing so, Rolex has turned into a behemoth. They dwarf the premium makers by 100 fold.

It is a tight rope to walk, but it can be done.

I'd argue Rolex are going more the luxury route in terms of business strategy.

They're not 'ultra premium' really, but they do a lot of marketing to people who aren't watch people, and will never buy a Rolex to convince the general public that they are.

Beyond that, they control production levels, limit availability, raise prices each year. They certainly don't offer an 'entry level' option, or at least, when they do it's under the Tudor brand.

I think that if they did do a model at say $1000-$2000, which anyone could buy and didn't have a waitlist, their brand equity would take a big hit.

We shall see if the entry level Rigby strategy does the same thing I guess.

 

[WAB]

No, I really don’t, but then I also really don’t care.

 

[Altitude sickness]

did you just buy that mauser from MNR ?

Yes I bought that Danzig sporter from MNR. Matt was great to deal with for the paltry commission he received from the seller.

 

[Daisy]

I'd argue Rolex are going more the luxury route in terms of business strategy.

They're not 'ultra premium' really, but they do a lot of marketing to people who aren't watch people, and will never buy a Rolex to convince the general public that they are.

Beyond that, they control production levels, limit availability, raise prices each year. They certainly don't offer an 'entry level' option, or at least, when they do it's under the Tudor brand.

I think that if they did do a model at say $1000-$2000, which anyone could buy and didn't have a waitlist, their brand equity would take a big hit.

We shall see if the entry level Rigby strategy does the same thing I guess.

In the watch world a submariner is exactly like a rigby highland stalker. They are actually priced almost identical. You can buy a watch for 500 just like you can buy a savage.

Limit production? They make over 1 million watches a year. They have created huge demand with strategic marketing and brand awareness. But again in watch world a Rolex isn’t considered in the upper luxury tier. To most people it is.

In the gun world a rigby highland stalker isn’t considered in the upper luxury tier. To most people it is.

 

[Daisy]

No, I really don’t, but then I also really don’t care.

Ha. Ok.

 

[Alistair]

In the watch world a submariner is exactly like a rigby highland stalker. They are actually priced almost identical. You can buy a watch for 500 just like you can buy a savage.

Limit production? They make over 1 million watches a year. They have created huge demand with strategic marketing and brand awareness. But again in watch world a Rolex isn’t considered in the upper luxury tier. To most people it is.

In the gun world a rigby highland stalker isn’t considered in the upper luxury tier. To most people it is.

Price point, yes. Positioning... maybe.

But strategy? No.

Limited production doesn't depend solely on units, it's the ratio of units the market demands / units available. Try buying any Rolex without wait listing...

As it happens, I did a marketing report on Rolex during my MBA.

It's kind of long, but if you're interested I'll post up the summary on price strategy here:

Price

A Rolex Submariner is an expensive piece to manufacture. Firstly, a mechanical watch of any type is a highly complicated piece of precision engineering comprising, in the case of the Rolex Submariner, of 256 parts (Wrist Porn, 2023). Secondly, the piece contains a number of inherently costly materials including proprietary steel alloys and ceramics, gold, lab grown sapphires and anti-magnetic hairsprings (Rolex 3, n.d.). Rolex is also committed to both vertical integration of much of their supply chain, independent certification of the accuracy of each of their movements, and to manufacturing the pieces in Switzerland, a country with some of the highest average wages on the planet (Mc Bride, 2024). As such, it is unsurprising that a Submariner is an expensive watch.

However, Rolex certainly does not use a mark-up pricing model, and the cost of manufacture is far from the key driver of pricing. Instead, Rolex prices based on an objective of quality leadership, using it as a key strategic lever to derive brand equity and maintain the prestige and popularity of their products. They utilize Economic Value to Consumer pricing to achieve this, as explored below.

Rolex watches are Veblen goods (Fig. 7), a specific type of luxury good that does not conform to the normal price / demand curve. In fact, for Veblen goods, increasing the price of an item increases the level of demand for it. This is because the appeal of these goods lies in exclusivity. High pricing ensures that many people want a Rolex, but only some can afford one, thereby making the good desirable and exclusive. High pricing also signals quality, another intrinsic characteristic of Rolexes’ brand image.

Figure 7 – The price/demand relationship for normal goods and Veblen goods (Robbins, 2022).


Rolex is hyper-aware of this relationship, and works very hard to manage their pricing and distribution models to enable it. They exert a great deal of control on pricing within their approved dealer network on compliance to MSRP for this reason, and for Rolex, this is perhaps the biggest single benefit of their exclusive distribution strategy.

Rolex ensures that the MSRP to consumers always goes up, irrespective of market conditions. In fact, Role prices typically increase in price at a rate that exceeds both inflation rates and individual income growth (Fig. 8).

Figure 8 - Pricing of the base model Rolex Submariner 1957-2014 both in inflation adjusted dollars and non-inflation adjusted dollars (Bredan, 2014).

This is a surprising strategy considering the turbulent nature of the luxury goods market and the swings in demand due to factors such as recessions. However, Rolex manages this in their forecasting and production numbers, strategically reducing production and distribution of pieces to their approved dealers during times of market softness to ensure that demand always outstrips supply (Altieri, n.d.).

One example of this is seen in 2022 and 2023, where second hand prices crashed by approximately 40% due to rising recession concerns and weakening demand (Friesen, 2024). Despite this trend, Rolex still posted MSRP price increases of approximately 4% across the range (Goulard, 2024). However, this was coupled with a significant reduction in revenue, which might suggest that whilst they generated more income on each piece, they shipped rather less of them, presumably because they anticipated that actual market demand was also likely to be reduced (Ch, 2023). As a result, waitlists were still in place for basically all Rolex models even in that weak market (Neita, 2024).

There is one other consideration behind Rolexes pricing model. Wherever possible, they try to ensure that the price of second hand models remains higher than MSRP (Fig. 9). This is achieved primarily through the gatekeeping around purchase; a customer has the option to pay MSRP at some unspecified time in the future when their order becomes available, or they can choose to pay above MSRP to have the piece now. Rolexes’ decision to always raise prices every year supports this activity, leading potential purchasers and current owners to believe that their piece is likely to appreciate in value over time.

Figure 9 – Submariner MSRP vs second hand prices by SKU (Powerfunk, 2024).


However, this does mean that Rolex actively chooses to keep MSRP below the level that a Economic Value to Consumer model might suggest is optimal. Customers are quite willing to pay significantly more for the pieces that Rolex charges, even when buying them second hand. Therefore, it stands to reason that Rolex could choose to increase the MSRP that they charge and consumers would still consider the new price ‘good value’. This intentional underpricing of Submariner watches is another strategic choice on Rolexes part to trade short-term profit in exchange for enhanced brand equity in the long term.

Overall, Rolexes pricing strategy has the benefit of driving a perception of ‘exclusivity’, ‘quality’ and ‘value’ for potential customers, whilst also supporting a secondary speculative market of watch ‘investors’ who buy Rolex models at MSRP to sell on for a profit. This second outcome is actually a virtuous cycle for Rolex; simultaneously generating them a second customer pool, whilst also supporting their goal of exclusivity by further increasing waitlists for ‘genuine’ buyers, which in turn ‘justifies’ the price increases on MSRP each year.

Rolex publicly opposes these ‘flippers’ and have made statements in the past about such individuals being excluded from future purchases, but there is significant evidence that Rolex is actually quite welcoming of this activity, especially in times of reduced ‘genuine’ demand where they often relax pressure on authorized dealers to screen for this type of activity (Corder, 2022). From the perspective of Rolex as a ‘for-profit enterprise’, the authors can’t help but feel that this situation is at the very least a happy accident for the brand, if not an outcome that Rolex desires and is actively working to enable.

This trend of high pricing being important to the Rolex brand is also demonstrated in their strategy for price discrimination and pricing tools such as discounts, clearance and bundling. Put simply, they don’t do any of those things.

Rolex is of course aware that selling their pieces at a discount would drive additional short term sales and likely increase short term profits, but they are also acutely aware that doing such things would damage consumer confidence in the brand, hurting their brand equity and making it more difficult for them to maintain margins in the future. They do not participate in price discrimination for the same reason, and also because they effectively only have one customer segment, product format and channel; the affluent purchaser, buying a single piece, in an approved dealer. In a luxury segment, this also allows them to achieve consistent pricing across geographies, with pricing including sales taxes being virtually identical across nations. Submariner models specifically only vary by $800 across Europe, North America, and Japan, with the main point of disparity being currency fluctuations in the Swiss Franc versus the local currency. Rolex takes steps to minimize these disparities where possible (Rivoira, 2023).

Rolex also intentionally chooses not to offer any ‘manufacturer sponsored or advertised’ financing mechanisms for their goods. This is done both to maintain the carefully curated dealership experience, and also to intentionally make it hard to purchase the product, further enhancing the perception of ‘exclusivity’ at the point of sale.

All together, these strategies allow Rolex to not only charge a high price for their models compared to ‘commodity’ brands, but also in comparison to ‘peer’ brands such as Omega. A Rolex Submariner retails for approximately twice the price of an equivalent specification Omega Seamaster, a disparity driven almost exclusively by the strength of their brand, the carefully managed artificial scarcity of the pieces, and the expectation for value retention that Rolex offers as a result (Andrioli, 2021).

 

[hwr239]

I also think good old economics. Westly Richards and Purdy unnatural goods meaning for their targeted clientele the high price actually increases demand up to their supply limit which is why if you even wanted to pay their prices they are 6 years out and they are fine with that. I agree Rigby has reinvented themselves and are now on the first tier and growing providing the high quality british rifle at a very reasonable cost. For example their entry level doubles now running about $40-$50k versus a WR starting at $125k.
Personally, I believe Rigby will enjoy growth while the other two will start to stagnate as customers weary of their long wait times and well deserved high price.
Bottom line clearly Rigby is on the right track and will grow market share once again with their leadership team

I spent quite a bit of time with Trigger and LD at the SCI show, and we discussed this very topic. They are aware that Rigby is expanding its market reach with lower-priced offerings like the Shikari double rifle and its new bolt-action models. However, this is not a market they are interested in targeting. Their focus remains on higher-end, best-quality firearms, and they have not been negatively affected by Rigby’s new marketing efforts. The new customers Rigby is attracting with these offerings are simply not the same clientele for their products.

Trigger and LD emphatically support Rigby’s direction, believing that a rising tide lifts all boats. They recognize that Rigby’s efforts benefit the British gun trade as a whole. I also had an in-depth conversation with the team at Holland & Holland, and they echoed the same sentiment.

With Holland & Holland now owned by Beretta and Westley Richards under the ownership of Sheikh Mohammed bin Khalifa Al Thani—a man with billions in annual revenue—neither company perceives Rigby’s strategy as a threat to their business models. They remain confident in their market position and see Rigby’s expansion as complementary rather than competitive.

Additionally, Westley Richards is operating at full capacity for the production of best-quality firearms and has no interest in expanding at the expense of craftsmanship. This is largely due to the challenge of finding skilled labor in the bespoke gun trade in the UK, as few young men are interested in apprenticing to become gunmakers.

Despite these challenges, Westley Richards is confident in its ability to maintain its current production levels without compromising quality. They believe they can recruit apprentices in sufficient numbers to sustain their production capabilities and uphold their standards of excellence in the long run.

 

[MD Driver]

Namely the Highland Stalker and Big Game rifles, both start in the $10,000-$12,000 USD range. No small sum of money by any means but leagues more affordable than the magazine rifle offerings I'm seeing from the other big names (Purdey, Holland & Holland, Westley Richards, Jeffery etc.)

From the pricing that I've seen, if you want to purchase a magazine rifle from one of these other makes, you're going to spend 5x more than the Rigby, if not more.

So why is this? are Rigby not viewed to be on the same level as those above? Are Rigby the only brand in this class that are trying to appeal to the hunters that aspire to own "London best" rifles with more entry level pricing? Do you feel like this pricing strategy cheapens their brand name at all?

Sorry about commenting on this old thread. This soon might be interesting again, with the DSC and SCI conventions coming up. One minor anecdote… I was in Purdey’s Long Room ordering an O/U shotgun. In the course of the discussion, their representative showed me one of their completed rifles and ready for sale. “Stunning piece of kit” as our British friends would say. The price surprised me…. it wasn’t near the cost of their shotguns. Still significant, but many dollars/pounds less than their shotgun models. Actually gave it some thought, but the safe at home has some Rigby residents, so it would have been just more sand being brought to a beach. So there are some business economics at play between the types of guns, apparently.

 

[Rare Breed]

I've been catching up on their Podcast and it really seems like Marc Newton has reinvented the brand for the 21st century.

Really pushing the brand to be just attainable enough for those that have always dreamed of owning these types of rifles.

Being a Marketing man myself it is about regenerating a classical magnificent brand led by a visionary, Mark, and knowing his target audience perfectly which you have described very well!

 

[Tucketed]

Rolex is $10B revenue vs Rigby under $10M

 

[PCC600]

Don’t confuse the Rigby Highland Stalker or Big Game with London Best guns. While they are fine rifles, and I am very happy with my Highland Stalker, I do recognize that it is not London Best. Rigby makes London Best guns, and they are truly works of art.

The other makers do not offer weapons in the class of the HS or BG. As others have mentioned, I suspect that this is a decision made to protect their brand. Personally I think this is a mistake, but I also recognize that I am not a target customer.

You are spot on . The Rigby Big Game and even Shikari rifles are great ( I own 2xBGs and waiting on my Shikari ) but they are nothing like the best grade rifles made by others in UK . They are intended to be what were once referred to as “working rifles” . Worth noting too that Rigby “London Best “ Mausers and their sidelock double rifles are every bit as expensive as the offerings from WR , H&H .

 

[Rare Breed]

Correct and well said!

 

[PCC600]

I think it's mainly a strategic brand management decision, driven by the different ownership of the companies.

Rigby is owned by Luke and Ortmeir Group, who are a holding company who deal in firearms. They own Mauser, Rigby, Hammerli, Sig Sauer and a couple others. Rigby is their premium offering in the way that Jaguar is Tata's.

Purdey, by contrast, is owned by the Richemont Group, a holding company for luxury goods and brands. They own Vacheron Constantin, Cartier, and Montblanc, amongst others.

Holland and Holland, until 2021, was owned by Chanel. Although now it's Beretta's.

Westley Richards is a bit more opaque, although the chief financier is Sheikh Sultan Bin Jassim Al Thani of Qatar, so I presume it's mostly a passion / vanity project.

Anyhow, in Luxury brands, brand equity supersedes all other considerations. It's the most valuable part of the product. You keep it exclusive at all costs, because any downmarket stretch damages the IP. If you look at say Purdey as a luxury brand (Richemont clearly does, that's all they deal in), the fact that it's expensive makes it exclusive, which justifies the price, which justifies the exclusivity. A virtuous circle. The fact that doing so doesn't allow you to sell many units is a good thing, because it allows you to charge any price you want, and the more you charge, the more people desire the good. Growth in revenue and profit comes primarily from increasingly high price points, not drastically increasing sales volumes.

If you're primarily interested in making firearms however, a bit of downmarket stretch is no bad thing. More units keeps the lights on. If you can take the Mauser action from one business unit, improve it a bit, give it a nice fit and finish, do some custom work, then sell it under a more impressive name for a significantly higher margin, that's a good plan. I expect Rigby is the most reliably profitable of the big british names as a result, and probably the one posting the most rapid growth.

In the long term, I think Rigby will need to be extremely careful that doing so doesn't dilute their brand equity to a point where their brand is seen as lesser than say Purdey. In 20 odd years I think they might find themselves at a point where they're primarily a 'premium' mid-market brand who see a lot of sales in their bread and butter 'a bit more than a nice Mauser' 7-20k range, and rather less interest in their high end custom work as a result.

But for now, I expect it's proving to be a very profitable business decision.

Good points . A funny thing is that in their hey day before WW2 Rigby rifles were far more expensive than H&H by circa 30% and 100% more than WR ( who focussed on Working Rifles ). My basis for this is from old Manton (of India ) catalogues from late 1920s . All listed their prices except Purdey who were POA .

 

[Beck]

I’ll volunteer here to push back.
Hope I’m not the only one on AH thinking along these lines…
First, the notion that it is incumbent upon a buyer to travel to insure that an item is as described is ridiculous.
In any other instance, when purchasing any other high priced good, one relies upon the description in committing to the purchase.
I buy an appliance and it comes damaged, I demand a replacement or an adjustment in the price and that is the expectation on both sides of the deal.
This is an international forum and deals are done regularly between parties that obviate the possibility of in person inspection. This is the case in the art world, the jewelry world, any place that real money is being exchanged for valuable goods.
As I said before, the onus in being a responsible seller is to accurately describe the item you are offering.
In this instance, that did not happen and now has been aired out on an an open forum for better or for worse.
There is a lesson for everyone here.

?

 

[DaddyFlip]

@Alistair I like to compare the watch market to the high end audio market - of the 1980's and 90's. There was a time when the American consumer believed that the pinnacle of audio reproduction was Sony and Bose; you could do no better if you owned Sony ES components and a Bose surround sound system. Little did the American consumer know that the REAL pinnacle of audio reproduction lie with a handful of American, British, and Asian manufacturers. You could say that Rolex is the same as Sony and Bose. The mainstream high horology brands of PP, AP, VC, Breguet, etc. might be compared to Krell, Mark Levinson, Audio Research, Classe', Meridian, Audio Note, etc. Rolex doesn't claim to be high horology; they don't have to. Rolex is that mainstream staple that speaks status; it doesn't have to be more than that.

On the rifle front, the Big 3 can lay claim to exactly two cartridges that have survived to the present day; Rigby with the 416 and H&H with the 375. The others are obscure (275 Rigby, 300 H&H) or extinct (everything WR came out with). For me, from a desirability perspective, I prefer what Westley Richards is promoting above the other two.

 

[WAB]

Sorry about commenting on this old thread. This soon might be interesting again, with the DSC and SCI conventions coming up. One minor anecdote… I was in Purdey’s Long Room ordering an O/U shotgun. In the course of the discussion, their representative showed me one of their completed rifles and ready for sale. “Stunning piece of kit” as our British friends would say. The price surprised me…. it wasn’t near the cost of their shotguns. Still significant, but many dollars/pounds less than their shotgun models. Actually gave it some thought, but the safe at home has some Rigby residents, so it would have been just more sand being brought to a beach. So there are some business economics at play between the types of guns, apparently.

Assuming it was a bolt rifle, that is not surprising. The base of a Westley Richards bolt gun is roughly half the price of their Sidelock shotgun.

 

[KJE81]

You are spot on . The Rigby Big Game and even Shikari rifles are great ( I own 2xBGs and waiting on my Shikari ) but they are nothing like the best grade rifles made by others in UK . They are intended to be what were once referred to as “working rifles” . Worth noting too that Rigby “London Best “ Mausers and their sidelock double rifles are every bit as expensive as the offerings from WR , H&H .

When will you recieve your Shikari? I am really looking forward to seeing one ordered by a customer, it seems like it will be a great rifle but no one seems to have recieved theirs yet.

 

[PCC600]

When will you recieve your Shikari? I am really looking forward to seeing one ordered by a customer, it seems like it will be a great rifle but no one seems to have recieved theirs yet.

I ordered mine when Marc Newton & Jerome were in Brisbane in July 2023 . A 3 year wait at the time . I expect mine in October . It is the base model in 500NE . I specifically requested minimal engraving because I wanted something similar to the old Rigby box locks. The rifle will be regulated with Norma ammo. I did request a spare front sight and 2 extra strikers . Not an expensive addition . I already have a superb oak / leather rifle case which it will fit in . Already have the accessories for the case . I intend mounting a 3 point diamond on the spare front sight for shooting in poor light . It is a really practical and inexpensive modification . While it sounds wildly extravagant the diamond coast me $100. Here is one fitted on another English 500NE of mine.

 

[Odinsraven]

I do question Rigby's direction ...in the long term as fewer and fewer people hunt.More guns chasing fewer hunters.

Indeed when you see the pittance really nice virtually unfired Parker Hale rifles make in today's market...Sad indeed.

However if proposals for Australia become more widespread... Four gun limit ...one could ease the purse strings for a Rigby...

Interesting thread and times we find ourselves in.

 

[Altitude sickness]

PCC600, 1st, I like the thought and look of the more plain “old school” box lock.

Also, how much value has your Shikari gained in 3 years. That is how much more would it be to order one in the fall of 2026 vs 2023 ?