UZI Talk Forums
+ Reply to Thread
Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst 1 7 8 LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 142

Thread: A Sad Update For The Tenko 10-16

  1. #121
    UZI Talk Supporter
    root's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    3,038
    Quote Originally Posted by IndustrialRescue View Post
    Are we STILL beating this to death?

    \/ \/ \/ BATFE


    ^^^ TENKO

  2. #122
    UZI Talk Life Member
    rybread's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    U.S. F'N A
    Posts
    2,783
    Quote Originally Posted by IndustrialRescue View Post
    Are we STILL beating this to death?
    Surely by the end of the week? Maybe two.

    No one likes the waiver idea - how about an “Undetermined Products Co LLC” licenses the design and manufacturers these things to sell under a waiver- to get some out in the wild while generating cash flow? “Undetermined Co” could do this for all the products waiting on the ATF. Just spitballing here, it’s a free country- if anyone dislikes that, flights to China should resume at some point.
    Live BRAVE, Live FREE!

  3. #123
    Mr. Miata
    UZI Talk Life Member
    Jmacken37's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    SE MI
    Posts
    4,565
    Quote Originally Posted by Concorde View Post
    The costs of becoming an FFL 07 for 3 years of license is way less than your single month payment expense. And the concept of “risking your personal firearm collection” if your FFL is home-based is based on what?... you just have to store your personal firearms separately from FFL inventory, or at least label/tag them as personal if stored together... the ATF makes that part easy.
    All of my guns are for sale. No need to label or separate. :-)
    AWWWW NUTS!

    REAL MEN DRIVE MIATAS

  4. #124
    UZI Talk Supporter
    Gaujo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    2,759
    I say let's get down to brass tacks. The basis of law is what a common man would think. A common man would think that if they approved a plastic version, they'd have to approve a metal version of the exact same thing. If it were myself in the pot, I'd sell it with a copy of the plastic version letter. I believe that would cover you as having made reasonable decisions were this to go to court. But again, that's just my
    Last edited by Gaujo; 04-22-2020 at 03:15 PM.

  5. #125
    Moderator
    UZI Talk Life Member
    Concorde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    North Alabama
    Posts
    2,672
    Quote Originally Posted by Jmacken37 View Post
    All of my guns are for sale. No need to label or separate. :-)
    If you have an FFL, that means that you'd have to transfer all of your previously owned firearms to the FFL business and put them into the Acquisition/Disposition Book and then they'd also be part of your computation for the business's Personal Property Taxes each year. Not the most cost effective-way to deal with it. We've found it best (at least in my situation) to keep them separated. :-)
    Now hosting: www.MAC-11.info

  6. #126
    UZI Talk Life Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Southern New Hampshire
    Posts
    2,034
    Quote Originally Posted by Gaujo View Post
    I say let's get down to brass tacks. The basis of law is what a common man would think. A common man would think that if they approved a plastic version, they'd have to approve a metal version of the exact same thing. If it were myself in the pot, I'd sell it with a copy of the plastic version letter. I believe that would cover you as having made reasonable decisions were this to go to court. But again, that's just my
    But there is the rub, going to court. I am staying afloat right now. Even if I had to wait another five or six months would be another $10,000 or $12,000. What would the retainer be for a lawyer to defend me in Federal court? My guess would be two or three times that on top of our fixed costs. It is not necessarily about who is right or wrong, but who has deep enough pockets to see it to the end. That is not a position I would want to be in.

    Scott
    Manager A&S Conversions L.L.C.

  7. #127
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    NE Georgia
    Posts
    32

    Tenko

    I've not followed too closely the development of your adapter. I've watched the videos and I'm on the waiting list. I understand that the plastic trial version would not stand up to prolonged use but is there another formula plastic that would? What about a plastic version with reinforcement al la Glock?

  8. #128
    UZI Talk Life Member
    skoda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    371
    Scott,

    What does your lawyer say about your personal responsibility to any BATFE suit against A&S Conversion LLC for selling MG's? What does your lawyer say about the need for a determination in metal verses polymer? You have a lawyer for this right!!!!! Expensive as it may be they would be cheaper than paying rent on a building that you aren't using for a year or more.

  9. #129
    UZI Talk Life Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Southern New Hampshire
    Posts
    2,034
    Quote Originally Posted by alex4922 View Post
    I've not followed too closely the development of your adapter. I've watched the videos and I'm on the waiting list. I understand that the plastic trial version would not stand up to prolonged use but is there another formula plastic that would? What about a plastic version with reinforcement al la Glock?
    The short answer is, if we submit a new design then we go to the back of the line and restart the whole determination process from the beginning.

    Quote Originally Posted by skoda View Post
    Scott,

    What does your lawyer say about your personal responsibility to any BATFE suit against A&S Conversion LLC for selling MG's? What does your lawyer say about the need for a determination in metal verses polymer? You have a lawyer for this right!!!!! Expensive as it may be they would be cheaper than paying rent on a building that you aren't using for a year or more.
    As far as my personal responsibility if A&S Conversions was to sell Post Sample machineguns, he felt that both my wife and I could be charged. His specialty is business law in our home state. I could pursue a NFA specific lawyer's advice. The RKIs that I have asked all seem to think that my wife and I, the responsible persons of our FFL, could be charged. It doesn't mean that we would. That would be up to the Federal prosecutor.

    I didn't ask about the materials change as that was not his specialty. To find a NFA specific lawyer about the materials change when resubmition fo materials change was stated. As far as the rental, getting a manufacturing FFL has always been part of the plan. Several RKIs suggested getting the FFL as the FATD has been more responsive to FFL holders than private individuals. Again, if we got a determination of the aluminum adapter being an accessory tomorrow, there would not be a problem. But when will we receive such a determination, I don't know. About the time we paid to get out of the lease and returned the FFL, would be about the time we would get the determination of the aluminum version is an accessory.

    There is an endless list of things we could do. What we plan to do is tread water until we have the determination that would allow us to sell the units we have already made. To those that think we should come to market now, we don't think that would be the right thing to do until we have the determination that the aluminum version that we have can be sold as an accessory. To those that support that path, thank you. For those that don't, put up your own money to bring your product to market any way you see fit. I have way too much money in this to try and change boats in midstream. YMMV.

    Scott
    Manager A&S Conversions L.L.C.

  10. #130
    UZI Talk Supporter
    sniperdoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    4,733
    Would getting your FFL now even help the Tenko problem, given that your Tenko submission would substantially predate your FFL?
    I have no clue what a dozen or so hours of an NFA Attorney's fee would cost, but it might be worth checking out. I would assume that they will give you a $/hr over the phone, like other Attorneys.

  11. #131
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    555
    What we plan to do is tread water until we have the determination that would allow us to sell the units we have already made.
    IF you get a determination. The ATF has no obligation to provide one. I hope they do, but your assumption that they absolutely will provide one confuses me.

    Also, the determination does not allow you to sell your inventory. You can legally sell your inventory today. The determination is something you want, not something you legally need.

    I wish you the best. Hopefully you get a determination asap.

  12. #132
    UZI Talk Life Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Southern New Hampshire
    Posts
    2,034
    Quote Originally Posted by Fishman View Post
    IF you get a determination. The ATF has no obligation to provide one. I hope they do, but your assumption that they absolutely will provide one confuses me.

    Also, the determination does not allow you to sell your inventory. You can legally sell your inventory today. The determination is something you want, not something you legally need.

    I wish you the best. Hopefully you get a determination asap.
    You are correct. If there is no determination, then we would not be selling Post Sample machineguns. But there would also be no cash flow. We would need to hold onto the money until we actually did get a determination. We already floated the idea of a release form. A total of four units could be sold as that was the number of buyers willing to sign away their recourse if there was a determination issue. I don't even know if such a release would be legal. For the sale of four units, I never sought out a NFA lawyer to find out.

    So if we sold all of the units today and we get a determination three months from now that the Tenko adapter is a firearm/machinegun, then we could be facing hundreds of thousands of dollars in civil litigation and whatever the BATF&E decides to throw at us for criminal charges. Criminal charges mean defense in Federal court. Which gets us right back to tens of thousands of dollars more in expenses with no profits to pay for it. Could we sell units without a determination that the Tenko adapter is not a firearm or machinegun? Yes, but doing so could bankrupt us. If it doesn't make dollars then it doesn't make sense. At 60 I'm not interested in facing bankruptcy.

    There are lots of things we "could" do. Taking on more risk than we already have is not something we will do.

    Scott
    Manager A&S Conversions L.L.C.

  13. #133
    Registered User Deerhurst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    82
    Just went through this thread. Christ! Makes me dislike the ATF even more than I already did! They seem to be living up to the useless beaurocrats name a coworker has given them. This is also making me dread sending in the F4 I am currently waiting for responsible persons forms for. Who knows how many decades that'll take to come back!

    I wish you the best. At this time I am 100% in for buying one of your adapters and I havnt even mailed the F4 for my Mac yet! I sincerely hope they get their act together and give you a thumbs up ASAP!

  14. #134
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    463
    Random, but is Lage facing these same issues? I’d presume this is all across the board. Lage hasn’t had anything determined on since pre-Tenko I believe.

  15. #135
    UZI Talk Life Member
    rybread's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    U.S. F'N A
    Posts
    2,783
    Next week for sure.
    Live BRAVE, Live FREE!

  16. #136
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by cjsoccer3 View Post
    Random, but is Lage facing these same issues? I’d presume this is all across the board. Lage hasn’t had anything determined on since pre-Tenko I believe.
    http://www.uzitalk.com/forums/showth...022-Max11A1-15

  17. #137
    UZI Talk Life Member
    mattnh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    NH
    Posts
    591
    Just read something interesting in the latest issue of
    Small Arms Review pg 96.
    Column by Jeff Folloder NFATCA Exec Director
    Says that DOJ has restricted providing <any>
    Industry guidance. ATF acknowledged needing
    To update the NFA Handbook, but said they
    couldn’t. Said there might be a future column
    Covering the topic...


    Matt

  18. #138
    UZI Talk Life Member
    rybread's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    U.S. F'N A
    Posts
    2,783
    Two weeks!
    Live BRAVE, Live FREE!

  19. #139
    UZI Talk Life Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Southern New Hampshire
    Posts
    2,034
    Thank you for the update Matt. Of course until there is an actual notification that there will be no more Industrial guidance, I don't think that will change anything for A&S Conversions L.L.C.

    Scott

  20. #140
    UZI Talk Life Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Southern New Hampshire
    Posts
    2,034
    After reading the column in SAR, there was one line stating that "Unfortunately, with current Department of Justice restrictions on providing industry guidance (a topic which will require an entire column on its own), there is no real possibility of an update [of the NFA Handbook],on the near term horizon. " It seems obvious to me that since the Slidefire debacle, the DOJ has decided that if no industrial guidance is given then the Government can't be sued for erroneous guidance. I have heard all kinds of rumors. The FATD is overwhelmed with brace submissions, the FATD had most of their Examiners transferred to other departments and new examiners are being trained, or the legal Department of the ATF is overwhelmed. What is the truth, I don't know.

    Obviously, very little has come out from the FATD. I certainly wish I had submitted the aluminum version earlier. But I didn't. What if the FATD goes back to calling everything a machinegun? I have seen the pictures of the RPD upper in a vice held together with zip ties and whatever else they used to make a receiver. I am in this too deep to walk away. By the same token, I would rather not spend the other half of my net worth fighting with the ATF. We are able to maintain our current level of expenses.

    The system is broken. This thread is about the Tenko. As the manager of A&S Conversions L.L.C., I have no intention to take on the Government if we can help it. If you think otherwise, please make your own thread to complain about it. Thank you Matt for the information. It still is just rumor and conjecture. I still have not seen anything official from the FATD, ATF, or DOJ. Hopefully there will be something concrete so. I either need a positive determination to sell the Tenko or official word from the FATD that there will no longer be determinations issued.

    Scott
    Manager A&S Conversions L.L.C.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts


Please consider becoming an UZI Talk Supporter.