Experience & Value Versus Cost

[BRICKBURN]

The only reason this is a topic is because booking agents and Outfitters make promises they can't keep. Like you did yesterday and then deleted it. Instead of of defending the " guarantee" in your offer you just deleted it. ............. .

Any particular target for your comment ????

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Posting rules:

• Don't post in threads just to "bump" them to the top of the list of threads.
• Don't hijack threads/topics. This includes (but not limited to) purposely changing the subject, posting in someone's sales thread to offer your opinion when you have no intention of buying.

"Spam" is a pretty big catch all for posting things that overly promotional in nature. ............. but it can also be less blatant things like posting something just ...... asking questions about something you already know the answer to

Attempts to artificially manipulate are seen as spam .......

"Shilling" - don't "help a friend out" by..

If the outfitter isn't selling hunts he might want to re-evaluate his business model and maybe his marketing plan. It's not because someone on this site made an unsupportive comment about his offer.

Charlie,

Over at the "other place" which has virtually no moderation whatsoever, the online behavior all too often devolves down to a point that it would shock even the worst children on an unsupervised playground. But the one thing I can say is that regardless of any rules that may or may not exist there, the behavioral norm of its members is you don't dump on legitimate offers. I can't say for sure why that is, but my feel is it's considered a common courtesy. Furthermore, that website is bought and paid for by the owner, there is no sponsorship. Anyone who wants to bring a hunt offer to that forum can, it is a free service.

Contrasting that with AH, in order for an outfitter to bring an offer to AH, the outfitter must be a sponsor.

A posted hunt offer in my opinion is not by default open to being criticized within the thread. No question was asked, no opinion was sought. It is an offer, take it or leave it, or contact the outfitter if you wish to negotiate on it. As I have mentioned in this thread and numerous times over the year, the one thing I'm proud of AH for is the way our little community treats each other. I think this should extend to the sponsors of the website. And I think we should be at least meeting the standards of other websites like this if not exceeding them as we normally do. This to include not dumping on legitimate offers.

However regardless of what you or I think regarding this subject, it is in fact a rule that you don't. Please see that part of Wayne's post I quoted above. What you or I think in regards to posting in an offer thread is in the end irrelevant with this rule in place.

So for my own clarification on your post, do you think this rule is good or bad?

I think it's a good one for a few reasons. The first one being that I think it's just a courtesy to the poster AND specifically to AH a sign of gratitude to the sponsor. Second reason is if we don't have this rule, or fail to police ourselves to refrain from doing so, it opens up a can of worms and can snowball into something that would in the end be detrimental to AH in my opinion.

This doesn't mean you or anyone else is being silenced from expressing an opinion on what you consider to be a "value" hunt. As far as I can tell, you're always free to start your own thread on this subject.

 

[twilly24]

The whole start to this tread was the author of the post. Said he was at a show and hunters where choosing a small game farm buffalo hunt over his wild Africa Buffalo. And then those Hunters were coming home disappointed. My point is people come home disappointed from a hunt because they did not get something they were promised or guaranteed. In my opinion someone told that Hunter a small game farm buffalo hunt was the same experience as a wild African buffalo hunt. Obviously this is not the case. And in my opinion that's why the hunter came home disappointed and complaining about his hunt. Now move on to the next day the author of this post put up buffalo hunt and in Wild Africa with a guarantee posted in it. I replied back to the thread and ask how the guaranteed work. This was a $17,000 buffalo bow hunt. So I wanted to know how the guarantee worked. After my reply the offer was deleted. So I replied on this thread and it is my opinion Hunters come home from hunts disappointed because some booking agents and outfitting agencies do not deliver on pre hunt promises and guarantees.

 

[JamesJ]

@twilly24 I'm assuming that is directed towards me? The offer was pulled as the bow hunting permit in Zim was in question. To the best of my knowledge, bow hunting is legal on private land in Zim, but there were some questions raised. I decided to pull it, get confirmation and make a decision from there. The "guarantee" was never questioned an no one that I saw posted or asked me about it. If i post a hunt that has the words guarantee in it, then it is, if the outfitter wont honor it then I will.

 

[twilly24]

Thanks James, was not trying to start a fight. Sorry if it came out wrong. Thanks for your reply. Buffalo is next on my list after my first safari this summer. Thanks again.

 

[Hank2211]

An interesting topic, and

The only reason this is a topic is because booking agents and Outfitters make promises they can't keep. Like you did yesterday and then deleted it. Instead of of defending the " guarantee" in your offer you just deleted it. Again if all outfitters were on the up and up this would not be a topic. Not saying you are one of the bad guys. But most guys are probably choosing a fence hunt because of it being cheaper and a guarantee.

I'm not sure what exactly you were referring to, so I will leave the comment about the guarantee that was deleted alone.

With respect to the reasons why people choose a "fence" hunt though, I have to ask. If there is a guarantee of success (which is what I assume you mean by "guarantee"), then is it really hunting? If I want a guarantee, am I really a hunter, or something else? Please don't get me wrong - on many hunts, I like to know the outfitter's success rate - when I was choosing an outfitter for mountain nyala, I asked about success rates, because it says something about the areas they have. But I didn't ask for a guarantee. Same with bongo. That's one reason why those hunts are as long as they are, and cost what they do.

On the other hand, I belong to a pheasant club. We raise birds and release them. I don't say I'm going pheasant hunting, when I know they're there, rather, I say I'm going pheasant shooting. Maybe a subtle difference, but it matters to me.

Note that I do both. So both are valid experiences, but they are different. So I don't criticize one or the other, but I do think if you're offering one or the other, you should be clear about what you're offering. If someone wants the hunting experience, I suggest the risk of failure is inherent in that. If they want the shooting experience, then by all means ask for a guarantee. I have done cull shoots, and it is very clear, at least to me, that this isn't hunting. I don't have to hunt for anything. The animals are there, presented to me, in a smallish fenced area. It's guaranteed. It can be lots of fun, but it isn't hunting. At least not how I learned it.

I can assure you that one experience costs less than the other. And for very good reasons. It's not better or worse, its just different, and everyone needs to know what they want, and what they are buying.

 

[BRICKBURN]

The only reason this is a topic is because booking agents and Outfitters make promises they can't keep. Like you did yesterday and then deleted it. Instead of of defending the " guarantee" in your offer you just deleted it. ...... .

I know you don't know who has the power to delete around here if you think James deleted his offer. There are only a couple of folks with that special tool and I am one of them.

I removed the offer from public view.
This is only done if there is a legitimate reason to do so.
James has just publicly explained the basis of his request, just now.

Hope that is sorted.

 

[twilly24]

James, if my reply is off topic please feel free to delete. I feel it is a valid point to the original topic. But this isn't my tread. Thanks again.

 

[JamesJ]

@twilly24 thank you for that. I sell free range and ranch hunts for just about everything. The main reason for the post was more of a why. Many guys are choosing the instant gratification route and booking a hunt they can afford right now often passing up on the hunt they really want. The price difference between some of the hunts is generally not all that much.

Its really not just a question of high fence vs low fence. There are some great outfitters all over south Africa that offer a great hunt behind a fence, there are some low fence real wild Africa guys that are terrible.

 

[Red Leg]

The only reason this is a topic is because booking agents and Outfitters make promises they can't keep. Like you did yesterday and then deleted it. Instead of of defending the " guarantee" in your offer you just deleted it. Again if all outfitters were on the up and up this would not be a topic. Not saying you are one of the bad guys. But most guys are probably choosing a fence hunt because of it being cheaper and a guarantee.

My experience is that most outfitters are indeed on the "up and up" and that the bad apples are distinct minority. I have no idea to whom you refer above.

It is a bit of a stretch but not a huge one to compare quail and pheasant hunting on a preserve/game farm and chasing coveys in the Red River valley to one's choices in Africa. I am certainly guaranteed killing quail on the plantation which releases hundreds or thousands each year but if you have ever hunted wild coveys, you will never confuse the birds or the challenge. I am not saying one is better than the other - I do both - but from a "hunting" perspective, there is little comparison. You can come down here to Texas tomorrow, stay in an outstanding lodge, look over a couple of hundred whitetails behind a high fence and shoot one in a certain inch category for a pre-agreed price. It is a guaranteed way to get a 180 on your wall. However, it is difficult to confuse that experience with a free range hunt in the same state which "might" get you a shooting opportunity at the same class of buck. If getting the specific deer is more important, then by all means hunt the high fence. If shivering in a stand over-looking a sendero for a chance at such a buck is more important, then hunt an open ranch.

I think Africa can be viewed much the same way. That makes neither offering right or wrong / good or bad. And I think most outfitters are fairly accurate in describing their opportunity set. There is a nuance to that generalization in that many African ranches are large enough that the populations of many species live in a "wild" environment.

A bigger problem seems to me to be hunter expectations and how those expectations color what they are hearing or reading. Someone going to Africa for the first time is often caught up in the Africa of Hemingway and Ruark rather than the Redneck experiences of the "Bone Collector" and his ilk. I still am. (And I am also an 11th generation Southerner, so I know Redneck) Quite a few outfitters cater to that expectation by creating little tent camps on their properties approximating an East African hunting experience (though the en suite bathroom might have Percival scratching his head.) That kind of created environment is not interesting to me, but might very well be to someone else. On the other hand, something very much closer to a real wilderness experience can be purchased in Zim , Moz or Tanz. But none of them are going to be East Africa in 1936 or 1956.

Also, Twilly makes the point that many hunters want a "guarantee" of a certain trophy list. In the Caprivi, I watched Jammy Traut trying his best to meet the expectations of a couple and their children who had come to Africa to fill out a trophy room list. Guaranteed shooting lists are indeed a challenge in a free range environment like the Caprivi Strip. Horror of horrors, it took five days of the eleven allocated to get the buff. When I left, they were complaining mightily that they were "off schedule." From my perspective, I had just spent a week in paradise. Jammy Traut is one of the most respected outfitters in Namibia, and his concessions are second to none. But the other clients' expectations and his offerings were not the best of matches. No one lied - no one failed to be on the "up and up". But a bit more pre-hunt dialogue and research would likely have led to a better match of outfitter and expectations.

The more we are honest with ourselves, both with regard to expectations and budget, the more likely we are to accurately read or hear offerings and find the compromise which best meets those expectations.

 

[Red Leg]

Hank and I seem to be reading from the same Bible.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

My experience is that most outfitters are indeed on the "up and up" and that the bad apples are distinct minority. I have no idea to whom you refer above.

It is a bit of a stretch but not a huge one to compare quail and pheasant hunting on a preserve/game farm and chasing coveys in the Red River valley to one's choices in Africa. I am certainly guaranteed killing quail on the plantation which releases hundreds or thousands each year but if you have ever hunted wild coveys, you will never confuse the birds or the challenge. I am not saying one is better than the other - I do both - but from a "hunting" perspective, there is little comparison. You can come down here to Texas tomorrow, stay in an outstanding lodge, look over a couple of hundred whitetails behind a high fence and shoot one in a certain inch category for a pre-agreed price. It is a guaranteed way to get a 180 on your wall. However, it is difficult to confuse that experience with a free range hunt in the same state which "might" get you a shooting opportunity at the same class of buck. If getting the specific deer is more important, then by all means hunt the high fence. If shivering in a stand over-looking a sendero for a chance at such a buck is more important, then hunt an open ranch.

I think Africa can be viewed much the same way. That makes neither offering right or wrong / good or bad. And I think most outfitters are fairly accurate in describing their opportunity set. There is a nuance to that generalization in that many African ranches are large enough that the populations of many species live in a "wild" environment.

A bigger problem seems to me to be hunter expectations and how those expectations color what they are hearing or reading. Someone going to Africa for the first time is often caught up in the Africa of Hemingway and Ruark rather than the Redneck experiences of the "Bone Collector" and his ilk. I still am. (And I am also an 11th generation Southerner, so I know Redneck) Quite a few outfitters cater to that expectation by creating little tent camps on their properties approximating an East African hunting experience (though the en suite bathroom might have Percival scratching his head.) That kind of created environment is not interesting to me, but might very well be to someone else. On the other hand, something very much closer to a real wilderness experience can be purchased in Zim , Moz or Tanz. But none of them are going to be East Africa in 1936 or 1956.

Also, Twilly makes the point that many hunters want a "guarantee" of a certain trophy list. In the Caprivi, I watched Jammy Traut trying his best to meet the expectations of a couple and their children who had come to Africa to fill out a trophy room list. Guaranteed shooting lists are indeed a challenge in a free range environment like the Caprivi Strip. Horror of horrors, it took five days of the eleven allocated to get the buff. When I left, they were complaining mightily that they were "off schedule." From my perspective, I had just spent a week in paradise. Jammy Traut is one of the most respected outfitters in Namibia, and his concessions are second to none. But the other clients' expectations and his offerings were not the best of matches. No one lied - no one failed to be on the "up and up". But a bit more pre-hunt dialogue and research would likely have led to a better match of outfitter and expectations.

The more we are honest with ourselves, both with regard to expectations and budget, the more likely we are to accurately read or hear offerings and find the compromise which best meets those expectations.

Well said Red, first beer is on me next year in Vegas!

 

[twilly24]

I will try to make this my last post. I Wrongly linked two topics from James. My point was Hunters usually come home disappointed because they didn't get something they thought they paid for ie a promise or a guarantee. James point was comparing price of a low fence to a high fence
Now to the second post. James had an offer for bow hunting Buffalo with a guarantee. I made a question about the guarantee because I would like to hunt buffalo on my next Safari. I never asked him for the guarantee. I was simply asking about the guarantee because he posted the guarantee in his offer. After my question on his hunt offer the hunt offer was removed. I mistakenly and stupidly thought it was because of my question and the guarantee. That's my fault and on me. I now know it was deleted because of questions about bow hunting Buffalo in that country. I would never demand a guarantee on a hunt. To me that's not a true hunt. That's why I originally ask James about the guarantee. And to be fair to James I believe the guarantee was a guarantee for shot opportunity not a guaranteed kill but that's why I asked. Thanks.

 

[BRICKBURN]

Timing is everything!

 

[rookhawk]

@Red Leg You brought up another dimension to this in your prior post about outfitters good vs outfitters "bad apples" I think was your terminology? For purposes of my response, Outfitter and Booking Agent will be synonymous although in many cases they are not.



Here's my beef with outfitters, many of which I've really enjoyed knowing on this forum.



First, there are absolutely the bad apples. These are the 1/20 or 1/50 fly-by-nighters that give everyone a bad name. Yeah, they suck, but they are sorta rare.



Second, we have the booking agent brokerages like Cabelas Worldwide Adventures which has now spun off. They are a broker and they provided NO service to me after numerous letters. Basically, hunt was illegal and misrepresented. Guide was a maniac. Success statistics were demonstrably false. Etc. So these big outfits don't really explain the value they bring to the table and customers hate them because they assume some sort of advocacy that will never be made available. The big brokers peddle awareness, that is it: Did you know this hunt over here costs X and we'll book it for you? That's all they do.



Third, there is the sideliner. Boy do I especially hate these guys. The sideliners are old men that are total BS artists that set up tables at little local gun shows. They will tell you anything you want to hear. Scratch the surface and the story is the same: Fixed income retiree with no job, no money. They love to hunt. Some RSA guy will give them a free hunt for every 5 bookings they land for them. Thus, they are totally eager to BS you because thats how they get to hunt. Also, they aren't the bag man so they aren't going to return monies to you because they are peddling in favors for themselves. Get a job! Get a life! Stop bottom feeding off of people! Don't describe yourselves as outfitters because you provide NONE of the benefits of a legitimate outfitter like escrow, dispute resolution, advisory services, travel arrangement, etc.



Last, the illusion of need, the illusion of benefit. Many people are under illusions that they need an outfitter to prevent them from being robbed. (when the outfitter is more often than the operator, the robber) Then, when there is a general issue that needs help it becomes clear the outfitter has no carrot to dangle, no sway, no authority, no pull to remediate the problem. Often the guy is dealing with a $60,000 hunt that went south but his commission was $6,000. The customer thinks the outfitter is going to make good on the debacle when there is no blood in the stone.



Don't get me wrong, there is a place for everything and good, quality, honest outfitters have a place. A friend of mine is a doctor and he fits the stereotype of every doctor I know...absolute surgical genius...yet you can't figure out how they get their pants on in the morning. (think Marcus Brody from Indiana Jones) These temperaments NEED an outfitter because the client needs organization and coordination at any price. Does a type A with experience, a known plan and a lot of attention to detail need an outfitter as badly? Probably not. But still sometimes.



My point is, in a very longwinded way, that there is cause for concern as we like to participate in a hobby that attracts a lot of fraud and dishonest services by its nature. From the onset of the thread @James Jeffrey - HuntingAgent.com was mentioning outfitter fees and who is “cheaper”. Services vary significantly from person to person and the level of protection is quite different too. Who the outfitter is working for is also different. If outfitters want respect in this world where they are not afforded much benefit of the doubt, blow the lid off how everything works. Show every credit and kickback. Explain how much you make for what you do, how much the PH makes. Explain how the concession gives the PH a credit back. Explain who gets cuts of trophy fees. Explain who’s side each party is on and how they are compensated. Explain how the taxidermists in Africa give goods and tips to PHs for bringing them clients. Explain how transport companies give something back to those that select them.



Transparency is how you’ll get utmost respect. Transparency is how someone will finally see the value of the different hunts that Brickburn and James listed early on in this thread. If everything is transparent then there is no hard feelings and no one feels taken. When you don’t make much, don’t keep it a secret, otherwise most people will assume you’re taking a 50% cut and expect you to have that amount of influence/clout/money to return when in fact you do not. Otherwise, we're going to have more sob stories as new customers simply cannot determine what is real, fair, or honest until it is too late.

 

[sierraone]

An interesting topic, and


I'm not sure what exactly you were referring to, so I will leave the comment about the guarantee that was deleted alone.

With respect to the reasons why people choose a "fence" hunt though, I have to ask. If there is a guarantee of success (which is what I assume you mean by "guarantee"), then is it really hunting? If I want a guarantee, am I really a hunter, or something else? Please don't get me wrong - on many hunts, I like to know the outfitter's success rate - when I was choosing an outfitter for mountain nyala, I asked about success rates, because it says something about the areas they have. But I didn't ask for a guarantee. Same with bongo. That's one reason why those hunts are as long as they are, and cost what they do.

On the other hand, I belong to a pheasant club. We raise birds and release them. I don't say I'm going pheasant hunting, when I know they're there, rather, I say I'm going pheasant shooting. Maybe a subtle difference, but it matters to me.

Note that I do both. So both are valid experiences, but they are different. So I don't criticize one or the other, but I do think if you're offering one or the other, you should be clear about what you're offering. If someone wants the hunting experience, I suggest the risk of failure is inherent in that. If they want the shooting experience, then by all means ask for a guarantee. I have done cull shoots, and it is very clear, at least to me, that this isn't hunting. I don't have to hunt for anything. The animals are there, presented to me, in a smallish fenced area. It's guaranteed. It can be lots of fun, but it isn't hunting. At least not how I learned it.

I can assure you that one experience costs less than the other. And for very good reasons. It's not better or worse, its just different, and everyone needs to know what they want, and what they are buying.

Hunting vs shooting??? I agree 110%. It is truly surprising how many people, hunters and non-hunters have no idea that there is distinct difference. Hunting always involves the chance that you will not find what you are hunting for!

 

[thi9elsp]

@PHOENIX PHIL I'll throw my two cents on on the rule you reference above. Many on this site have complained about the lack of vetting by DSC and SCI for hunts that are offered during their conventions and chapter activities. So, what vetting does AH do for the members on the outfitters that are sponsors of this site and the offers they make? I look forward to an answer. John

 

[twilly24]

I pissed enough people off with my posts today. So I didn't say anything tell now but if you think there's only a few bad apples In this bussiness your crazy. If there was only a handfull of bad apples in Africa or north America this site wouldn't exist. Just because someone is a member of SCI or DSC doesn't mean they are on the up and up. Does it help yes. But it's no guarantee. Ask anyone that's willing to admitted they got taken for 10s of thousands of dollars. You still have to ask the tough questions. This isn't meant for anyone on this site. My opinion. And it's funny how 2 other people went in the same direction as me in this post just in the time it took me to write this. Have a great day.

 

[BRICKBURN]

......... For purposes of my response, Outfitter and Booking Agent will be synonymous although in many cases they are not.

Outfitter and Agent should not be used interchangeably, it is very confusing. They have two totally different parts to play in the hunting industry.

In the majority of African countries you are required by LAW to have an Outfitter (as a client) You are not required to have an agent. That is a value added service and a personal choice.

First, there are absolutely the bad apples. .........

Without a doubt they are out there.

Second, we have the brokerages like Cabelas Worldwide Adventures .......

I like that differentiation. Brokerage. Fits the bill.

Last, the illusion of need, the illusion of benefit. Many people are under illusions that they need an Agent to prevent them from being robbed. .........

Having a licensed Outfitter does provide the first step in avoiding being robbed. A license is a license, nothing more.

Don't get me wrong, there is a place for everything and good, quality, honest AGENTS have a place. ........... Services vary significantly from person to person and the level of protection is quite different too. ...........

Exactly.

Transparency is how you’ll get utmost respect. Transparency is how someone will finally see the value of the different hunts that Brickburn and James listed early on in this thread. ...........

The more information the merrier.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

@PHOENIX PHIL I'll throw my two cents on on the rule you reference above. Many on this site have complained about the lack of vetting by DSC and SCI for hunts that are offered during their conventions and chapter activities. So, what vetting does AH do for the members on the outfitters that are sponsors of this site and the offers they make? I look forward to an answer. John

I'm not sure exactly what you're getting at. But I'll first say, the rule I believe applies as mentioned to LEGITIMATE offers. Remove the legitimacy, all bets are off and so is the rule.

As to what effort Jerome puts into vetting prospective sponsors of AH, I haven't any idea. You would to have to ask him.

That said, let's just say for some reason Juan Pace tried to become a sponsor, Jerome had never heard of him and lets him in. I think it would be seconds after Juan's first post that you'd see the stinky stuff hitting the fan alerting Jerome to the situation.

If by chance you've missed the Juan Pace threads, please do a search and I think you'll see what I mean.