Adamjp,
Perhaps you could list those "equally effective products."
The .260 Remington can do all that the 6.5 Creedmoor can do. The was no real marketing behind it, and the first rifles were barreled with slow twist rates. Switch the two
marketing strategies and we'd all Be singing the praises of the .260. The two rounds are very close.
I'd say the Creedmoor's success is more due to R&D strategy than "marketing" strategy. It was shooters, engineers and ballisticians that came up with it. Not MBAs or marketing experts.
The marketing budgets of all the shooting-sports companies combined isn't big enough to do "marketing" of anything on an effectual level. One company doing it, as you suggest, is completely ludicrous. It can't happen. There is absolutely no "marketing-driven" reason for the success of the 6.5 Creedmoor.
Truth be known, since Hornady is a much smaller company than Remington was when it introduced the .260, I'd lay very comfortable odds that the .260 Rem had far more "marketing hype" and budget than the 6.5 Creedmoor did. We all know how that worked out.
