I donāt think anyone is disputing that Scott has put a lot of time, energy, and passion into his business. Thatās just not really relevant to the criticism being made here.
The issue is how preliminary information is communicated. If a manufacturer tells a dealer theyāre trying to get something rostered, thatās useful information. But ātheyāre trying,ā āwe expect approval soon,ā and āthis product is confirmed, will release soon, preorders are opening now" are three different claims with very different levels of certainty; especially when such a product announcement is not Scott's to make (like the CC9).
Thatās why the Glock thread keeps being brought up. A claim like āGlock is trying to get something rosteredā turned out to have substance behind it. The FOIA request actually showed that. But that still isnāt the same claim as California compliant Gen 6 is being released this year. It's also kind of weird that R66 creates these threads with big claims and then disappears. When a prediction doesnāt materialize, Iād rather hear āhereās what changedā than immediately move on to the next prediction. Thatās not personal and it doesnāt require anyone to dislike Scott. Itās just basic accountability, especially when people may base purchasing decisions off this information.
Ironically, the other FFL posting in this thread demonstrated exactly what Iām talking about: he shared what dealers were being told, explained that something changed Wednesday, preserved the uncertainty, and didnāt identify the manufacturer because he didnāt want to jeopardize his supplier relationship.