When you go into business, there’s really no way to know if you’ll become one two things: 1) the next big thing (ideal), or, 2) the latest big bust (not optimal).

That’s why the first three years of any business have long been considered the most definite indications of business viability.

If a business is demonstrating steady, but unspectacular, growth over three years, its chances for survival are actually pretty good.

If it demonstrated spectacular early growth and has dwindled since, the chances are slim to none - barring some outside abilities to continue as it tries to turn the corner.

Businesses reliant on outside financing usually find that decision isn’t theirs to make. Barring measurable progress, investors will likely cut their losses and move on.

So that brings up a question….what is - or should be - the goal of any business?

It’s one I’ve heard debated for nearly a half-century, in startups and major corporations.

Management answers have ranged from “be a good citizen and provide jobs to our community” to “move technology and quality of life forward via innovative, disruptive technologies.”

Both those answers, and all of the others that sound so awesome are categorically wrong.

The goal of a business, regardless of size, is to make money for its owners.

Absent profit, good citizenship, employment or technological innovation means nothing.

The path of progress is littered with the bones of good citizens, disruptive technologies, and all the myriad other buzzwords that have fallen in- and out- of vogue.

The single thing that separates the winner from the wanna-be is profit.

“Making money,” the old expression goes, “covers a multitude of shortcomings.”

This week we see two more examples of a lack of profits revealing business shortcomings.

F+W Media, was a powerhouse in the publishing world. Only a couple of years ago, it was acquiring other less successful companies.

Now, the collective bundle’s being broken up in the hopes that someone will be interested in all-or a part - of them.

Hudson Manufacturing was announced - with considerable fanfare (and a great party) - at SHOT Show a couple of years ago. Their slick marketing materials promised that: “Elegant simplicity and cutting-edge design unite in a stunning example of modern weaponry.”

But the compelling opening, uber-cool logo, and “buzz” with the “cool kids” couldn’t save a company whose single product seemed rife with problems.

Engineering issues foreshadowed a 100% fatal shortcoming: the company didn’t have enough money to pay suppliers.

After Hudson was a no-show at SHOT 2019 - the cineast responded to media inquiries by saying lacking the money to return guns to customers made it inappropriate to attend a trade show,

And that, as the old expression goes, was all she wrote for Hudson.

Now, Hudson’s headed for Chapter 7 liquidation, and their much-touted guns are headed toward the footnotes of gun development history.

The failure of a longtime success and the failure of a short-term phenomenon have more in common than you might think.

F+W’s properties never lacked for enthusiasts. Their titles were tightly niched and popular with everyone from predator hunters and knife collectors to patchwork quilters. And they offered solid, helpful content.

But as subscription numbers and advertising revenues dwindled as publishing costs continued to rise, F+W tried to become something they weren’t. Creating a hybrid company that combined print content with online turned out to be more than they could manage - or adapt to fit from a corporate standpoint.

Online content improved, but old publishing practices persisted, including hiring of expensive experts to force-fit F+W into a new business model that included selling products and fulfilling sales orders. Limited online success only added to overhead, and the dwindling print revenues just couldn’t sustain, and the board and management realized they were out of viable options.

And CEO Greg Osberg’s bankruptcy filing narrative gives a textbook example of how even seemingly solid business moves can go bad:

“And, because the Company had ventured into fields in which it lacked expertise, it soon realized that the technology used on the Company’s websites was unnecessary or flawed, resulting in customer service issues that significantly damaged the Company’s reputation and relationship with its customers.”

Will the Hudson H9 become another footnote in the history of firearms. Screen capture from Hudson Mfg website.

Hudson’s story remains considerably more murky. Their preliminary Chapter 7 filing and its nearly 20 pages of creditors, don’t really answer the questions Hudson owners and industry insiders are still asking.

Ultimately, only one answer, barring some sort of malfeasance, answers all the questions: : building a new mousetrap -even if it might be the proverbial better one- doesn’t guarantee success.

A company has to make money - or it dies. End of story.

Today’s news section brings word of another business shutdown, but this isn’t a cautionary tale of woe, it’s an example of one company capitalizing on another’s decision to close up shop.

Pietta Firearms, known primarily in the U.S. as makers of historical replica firearms, has acquired importer EMF.

According to Pietta's news release, EMF was feeling the “pressure of the increasing gun regulations and felt “ and decided it would be best to simply close their doors.

Seeing an opportunity, the Pietta brothers invested in EMF. As Allesandro Pietta explained in the release, “The Partnership with EMF and establishing a great sales force will allow us to open a significant amount of new dealers. Having our own importing business and service center will allow us to provide better pricing and a higher level of customer service.”

Out of adversity, opportunity.

One final note regarding Alpen Optics, for two decades a manufacturer of affordable and popular optics - that unexpectedly shut its doors in March of last year.

Since owners Time and Vickie Gardner said family health issues, a difficult business climate, competition and factory production challenges convinced them to shut down, we’ve gotten occasional questions regarding Alpen. We hadn’t been able to offer anything in the way of assistance.

So we went digging, and today, we’re able to offer Alpen Optics owners contact for questions and/or repair issues. In fact, we’ve discovered that a majority of Alpen’s products (except riflescopes right now) are still available. And the warrantees are the same as on the “old” Alpen products.

Explore Scientific (www.explorescientific) tells us they’re the people to contact with Alpen questions. We suggest using the email service@explorescientific.com to send them your questions.

They say their customer service team is “limited” so they encourage Alpen owners to go through their customer portal link, create an account and then get updates. That portal’s address is: https://explorescientific.supportsync.com/.

If you are one of those who prefers the telephonic method, realize in advance there may be some difficulties because of their “limited” service team, and call 1-866-252-3811.

As always, we’ll keep you posted.

—Jim Shepherd