Greatly simplified, but here's what really happened -
The only folks who benefited from Remington being sold to the venture capital folks were the venture capital folks.
They bought a company for a lot of money that had very little debt. They then forced the low-debt company to borrow a lot of money to fund expansions/acquisitions/etc. More money than the original transaction.
Then, the VC people ran it into the ground, as they had their money back plus a bunch. Reminton was unable to recover from the crippling debt and lost expertise of the previous senior management fired by the VC folks.
So what you're saying is , it was more money to be made by destroying the company than actually running the company
Maybe not more money, but certainly a faster payout.
Sorta. The VC people went into the Remington investment with the sole purpose of making money by quickly killing the company. They also made money afterwards by showing off to their liberal friends that they killed a gun maker, and in return they got more access to deals like Remington.
They also did the same thing with other outdoor and "gun" related businesses. Its a trendy money making model that the liberal wealthy have gotten into called "activist investing". The goal is to invest in a traditional American company (the kind of company without Unions that republicans like) and set the company up for failure. Then the "investors" start shorting the company while the board directors set the company up for fast failure.
