I would expect that Orvis might pursue a 4-pronged strategy: (1) keep the SA and Ross brands and distribution channels alive, but support R&D and marketing more vigorously than 3M was doing; (2) continue to do contract manufacturing for other brands in the industry as opportunities allow; (3) expand in-house manufacturing of Orvis-branded products; and (4) exploit efficiencies in higher-volume purchasing and shared vendor relationships. Ross and SA were not critical business lines for 3M overall, and Ross in particular appeared to be suffering, so Orvis ownership ought to be able to operate those businesses more successfully. The vertical integration opportunities for Orvis's own products are icing on the cake. But now they have to make it all work. Hopefully they have learned from their false starts with BFR and Redington, and the third time will be the charm.
---------- Post added at 09:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:48 AM ----------
Originally Posted by sweetandsalt
Now, they need not concern themselves with these issues any longer...but will SA continue to make lines for Orvis's erstwhile competitors?
Why not? Someone is going to make them, it might as well be SA. It's not as though SA could keep a competitor out of the market by refusing a manufacturing order. If they could, they would have refused those orders even before Orvis took over, because they already had their own brand to promote.