TexasCHLforum.com

fishman wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:Business a little slow, eh TAM?

Now thats funny!!!

Yep. Nothing funny about it. Glad to amuse you.

apostate wrote:Competition generally does lower prices. That's one of the blessings of free market capitalism.

Oldgringo wrote:Like Walmart?

I am completely in favor of free market capitalism, which is why I ridicule the Occupy crowd. I am a business person. They are not. I have some inkling of what it takes to (in order): 1) start a business; 2) grow the business; 3) stay in business; and finally 4) accomplish an exit strategy at the time of the owner's choosing. The quest for the person who has accomplished (1) is to accomplish (2). The quest for the person who has accomplished (1) and (2) is to accomplish (3). The quest for the person who has accomplished (1), (2), and (3) is to accomplish (4).

Here's what I am NOT going to do: 1) operate my business at a loss if I can at all avoid it; and 2) apologize for profit. There is no such thing as "obscene" profit. What does exist, and what does matter, is what I choose to do with my profits, as directed by the tenets of my faith, and much good can come from that. The more I can profit, the more generous I can be. THIS (whether you do it through your church, or simply through some kind of secular giving) is only possible if I profit from my business. There is much need in the world, and I don't think there are very many people on this forum who think that government is the best means of answering those needs. "Any government big enough to give you everything you need is also big enough to take everything you have." Even so, if people want to hang onto every penny they earn and not be charitable with it, that's their business, and none of mine or the OP's business.

Profit is good. Profit is praised in the Bible. Wisdom encourages profit. When people who provide commercial services are able to profit from those services, then they become able to render those services to a larger number of people, more efficiently. And where they have to compete with others offering the same goods or services, they either have to match or beat the competition's pricing, OR....................








...........wait for it............






.......they have to beat the competition's service.

I have never bought a gun from Walmart. I never will buy a gun from Walmart, because price is not my personal bottom line. Yes, price is important to me, but it is not the only factor I weigh in making buying decisions when it comes to items priced like guns are priced—fairly major purchases. OTH, I have no problem buying toilet paper and underwear from Walmart.

When I first moved to Texas, the local Walmart here in Grapevine still sold long guns. My first long gun purchase was from Sporting Arms in Lewisville—a small but well run "kitchen-table" gun dealer. My first pistol purchase in Texas wasn't from Cabelas or Bass Pro, it was from Euless Guns and Ammo. These two purchases were made from these two dealers for two specific reasons: 1) knowledgeable sales people who would take the time to help me arrive at the best buying decision based on what was best for my needs and not the store's needs; and 2) a better selection of products than a Walmart can provide. The local Walmart offered 2 or 3 each of sort of generic bolt rifles and shotguns. They did NOT offer anything left handed. They did NOT offer anything in .308. They did NOT offer anything with a heavy barrel, 1:10 twist, aluminum pillar bedded in an HS Precision stock. The point is, Walmart can't fulfill everybody's needs. Smart gun sellers who want to sell in the same market as Walmart simply need to offer what Walmart does not. If they try to beat Walmart at Walmart's game, they'll lose.

But all of this is moot. The CHL market is small. I'm willing to bet that the percentage of families in Grapevine who shop at least once in a while at Walmart is probably near 100%. I am equally willing to bet that the percentage of families who shop at "CHL Providers" is not more than 2% (if statistics are to be believed). CHL training is a small, niche market. There aren't really any models for "mass production" and "volume discounts." Show me the person who will teach a 10 hour class for $50, and I will show you a person who either A) has zero overhead; and B) doesn't need the money; OR C) is headed for business failure.

(A) and (B) does not describe most of the people who teach CHL classes. But (C) definitely describes people who have no business sense. In my Basic Handgun classes currently, and in my CHL classes when I become eligible to teach them, I want to try and operate at a profit because A) I will have overhead to pay for; B) I need the money; and C) I can then continue operating. I am not going to apologize for that. If the OP wants to give away his own services, that's fine. But unless he is independently wealthy, he's going to shortly lose interest in teaching because the economic penalty will take the pleasure out of it. If he expects others to operate at a loss, then he's no better than the Occupy crowd.

I would like to think that he is a better person than they are, and that he understands free market capitalism better than they do.

As long as the state mandates a 10 hour class, people are going to try and make a go of this as a business. Compare it to the number of instructors in Texas who offer advanced tactical training. Their numbers aren't even close to the number of people who offer CHL classes (not counting for overlap in who offers what). Why is that? Because the demand is lower. If the state were to mandate advanced tactical training for CHL holders, the number of people offering that training would blossom. If we had Constitutional Carry in Texas, with CHL licenses for those who wanted them for interstate reciprocity purposes, you would see a much smaller number of CHL instructors because the demand for their services would more approximate the demand for advanced tactical training. This is a perfect example of the state creating a market where one did not previoiusly exist, and for a product for which there is not much of a natural demand, simply as a revenue generator for the state.

But as long as the business opportunity exists, I agree wholeheartedly with others who warn against devaluing your own product. As a website designer, I see this all the time and it is the bane of my existence. When I was in the printing industry, I saw it there. Printers devalued their own product in order to get work. And when their pricing got to the point where it would no longer sustain the payments on million dollar printing presses, they went under. The printing industry today is a mere shadow of what it was just 10 years ago. The website design industry has suffered the same kind of pressures in this economy. And now those of us who are still in business are having to deal with customers who have been conditioned to not see enough value in the product to be willing to pay a reasonable fee for it, thanks to those who used cut-throat pricing to get a share of a diminishing market. In the end, all they cut was their own throats......and made it harder for the rest of us who are still in business to continue making a living.

Profit is good. It should be encouraged. Those that try to charge too little and deliver too much are going to fail just as much as those who charge too much and deliver too little. There is a place in the marketplace for $50 CHL classes, but you'll always get Yugos instead of Cadillacs for that price.

Honesly, it continues to surprise me that there are people who just don't get this. In my experience, those that don't get it lack a fundamental understanding of human nature. They are the same people who want somebody to run up $250,000 or more in student loans; invest 4 years in college plus 4 years in med school plus several more years of internship/residency; and then give away their medical services. They want something for nothing. I'm ranting. I know. But I'm surprised that this topic even came up.

You want people to spend less money on the right to carry a gun? Abolish all restrictions on the RKBA. End of problem. But don't put the onus on honest people who choose to take lemons and make lemonaid.

It kind of depends on what you think your time is worth. I'm a self employed businessman in a tough economy, and too much altruism will simply ensure that I go out of business. When I teach a Basic Pistol class, I provide the ammo for my pistols. Since my students usually own only one pistol in one caliber......if they even own one at all.....ammo can be a considerable expense for me. The NRA student packets cost me $11.00 per student. I bring a cooler with water bottles for the students. I buy other training materials like dummy rounds, etc., etc., etc. And then there is the cost of providing a classroom. And then there is the minimum 4 hours of my time out of my day–at a time that is convenient for them but not necessarily for me–and that is if I am teaching a non-NRA compliant class. The NRA compliant classes are twice as long. My web programming rate is five times higher than what I charge for a basic pistol class. I'm really not making any money at it when you add it all up. Oh, and I forgot the cost to me of obtaining the NRA Certified Basic Pistol Instructor certificate.

It is my mission to teach people about firearms and firearms safety, but I cannot afford to lose money doing it. My goal is to procure my CHL instructor license in 2012 and begin doing that as well. And by the way, let's add into the mix all of the costs inherent in obtaining the CHL instructor's license, not the least of which is a week spent in a hotel in Austin. But I can't do any of it if I am bankrupt. A certain amount of altruism is noble, but it is completely useless if you are too broke to offer the service–so try not to be so naive about it, or your mission will go belly up. That's fine for you, if that's what you want. I would like very much to be able to continue teaching for a long time. For that to happen, I have to, at worst, not lose any money, and hopefully profit enough so that I can expand the business.....or at east justify it to my wife.

If you ask a lot of the instructors on this site, you'll find that for most of them, their CHL instruction business is not their primary source of income. They have jobs. So even charging between $100-$150 per student, they really aren't making any money at it. In my humble opinion, it's kind of unrealistic to expect them to operate their training business at a loss, just to satisfy your standards of altruism.

That's just my 2¢. Your mileage may vary.