Randy's Ramblings - Content, motivations, and recent threads

[Big Fin]

I’m home for two days, leaving again tomorrow on the next trip. Scanned HT a bit when time allowed. A few comments in the Ryan Lampers threads seem to be pointed at me. While working today my mind starting thinking about some of those questions and if I could offer any insight that is helpful.

I’ve decided to do this as my own thread, so when/if I have coverage on the road, I can drop in and check it when time allows. Reading this as I typed it in a Word doc, I realize it has turned out to be a long ramble and I’m not sure if I am connecting the dots very well.

I don’t have the time to go to those other threads and copy quotes of comments or questions that I think were directed at me. So, hopefully this ramble gives some insight to how companies approach content contracts, how the longest sustained content platforms (us being here 17 years) apply common business practices, and why I focus on my own motivations and not guessing the motivations of others.

First, the easier answers. In the other threads, some have asked why I haven’t said anything about the Lampers charges. There are a few reasons.

1. I’ve been out in the hills for most of the last four weeks, with little coverage or time to chime in.

2. Without exception, I have no tolerance for poaching. Yet, as unpopular as it may sound right now, I subscribe to the idea of “innocent until proven guilty.” Until the case resolves through the legal system, I’m not going to spend too much time commenting on specifics that I don’t have insight to. I’ll accept the outcome of the legal process.

If proven guilty or a plea bargain is made, Ryan’s profile in the hunting space should be considered in what the final outcome is. Those of us who have a high profile should expect a harsher final outcome than someone else. I hold all content producers to much higher standards, given who much of hunting's image is impacted by our messages and our actions. If a content producer can't accept that, they shouldn't be producing content.

3. If proven not guilty, which I agree seems unlikely with the subsequent actions taken by Ryan, then I accept that outcome as well.

It is interesting to read the comments on the open thread and the thread that got locked related to Lampers that are directed at “influencers,” whatever that term means. I’ve been in this gig long before the term influencer was adopted. I don’t trying to “influence” people to do anything, rather I’ve been trying to inspire them to advocate for wild places, wild things, and the resources essential to hunting. “Inspired” people are far more effective than “influenced” people.

Regardless of the terminology and my distinctions, some of the comments with the term “influencer” had my name in it, so I’ll go along with the implied idea that as a content producer I am under their umbrella of “influencer.”

The HT crowd is a pretty sharp group of people. Yet, reading comments where people express their understanding about content production, there are some gaps in information about how some of this works from a business standpoint. I’ll try to add some information might be helpful.

I can only explain how it works for our company. For me to say how it works for other content producers would be assumptions and guesses.

Unless you see our contracts, see our internal measurements, sit in on the meetings of our vision and our progress towards our mission/WHY, you’d have no reason to know how it works for us and how we approach it. I hope what I provide here about our business gives additional understanding, though I know our business might operate vastly different than one where the owners are dependent upon hunting content for their livelihood.

A lot of the comments try to attach motivation. I can’t guess motivations of anyone other than myself. I’ll get to that later in these posts for those who hang around.

Sorry this will be a long ramble and might not cover every question some might have. If this goes off the rails, the mods will be told to close it down, as I'm doing this in hopes that it gives people a bit more information of how content models work. Or, at least how ours works.

 

[Big Fin]

Contracts and deliverables – Is it clicks/likes/views?

A lot of comments imply the business we operate is all about clicks/likes/views under the premise that such equates to more money for the content producer. Might be the case for others who are smaller or operating purely with ad agencies (media buyers), and not directly with the companies.

That’s not our situation. We don’t have a single contract that has a requirement or demand or incentive for any threshold of clicks/likes/views/subs/etc. I’d never sign such an agreement.

We do have internal measurements to see how certain content is/isn’t received by the audience. Those clicks/likes/views metrics many attribute to “motivation” does not impact our business even a penny.

I know my contracts are different, as every company tells me that. Contracts lay out the “deliverables” or services to be provided by the contractor. Ours are as much “consulting agreements” as they are the other deliverables of media placement, branding, and the company’s support for a conservation-based platform. Here’s an example of language that is one of the primary deliverables in our largest contracts that I’m told are unique to us; consulting. It has nothing to do with clicks/views/likes.

Consulting:

• Randy Newberg will be available for consulting with Sponsor on topics related to hunting, conservation, public land advocacy, and product development.

That gets to why most companies invest some of their marketing/branding money with us. They feel it is a good investment in the portion of their budgets that are allocated to support hunting, access, conservation, etc. They view us as an effective voice for those things that are important to their customers. Those things we work towards are hard to measure, but they trust we are a good use of that investment, without concern for clicks/likes/views/subs/etc.

These companies also understand the importance of being engaged in, and aware of, emerging issues that impact hunting and conservation. They rely on us for that. Many of my meetings and phone calls with these companies are around those issues. They don’t have someone internally with 30+ years experience and relationships, so I can help with some of that.

Grab some caffeine for the next section, it's long, but I think helpful to the discussion.

 

[Big Fin]

Our content model and company marketing investments

Another thing that seems to be assumed about content production is that many think companies work with us to “get you to buy their product.” Kind of, but not really. Sorry if this is more B-school theory than you want to read.

For those of you with marketing degrees, you fully get what I’m about to layout in this marketing dissertation. Much of it is about brand building via brand association, and yes, helping them develop potential customers who will consider their products/services when make a purchase decision.

For understanding of how companies develop marketing plans, Google the term “marketing funnel.” It will explain the most basic principles of how marketing, branding, and sales all work together in a coherent plan. There are four basic parts of the marketing funnel; 1) awareness, 2) consideration, 3) conversion, 4) retention.

The deeper you go down the funnel, the greater the value to the company. Some parts of the funnel can be accomplished with the use of contractors and some parts are purely the company’s responsibility.

First I’ll explain the marketing funnel for our business, then for companies we work with, and connect it to our WHY - “create impactful media that inspires hunters to advocate for wild places, wild things, and the resources essential to hunting.”

We have our own marketing funnel for our business. It is a lot different than the marketing funnel of the companies we work with. Our “conversion”, the equivalent of their sale of a product or service, is when someone is inspired to take actions that advocate for wild places, wild things, and the resources essential to hunting. That’s hard for us to measure. We have ways that we try to measure it and I think we’ve got a pretty good idea of what accomplishes that.

A relationship starts with me explaining to companies our content model, built with the intention of accomplishing our WHY. I explain that I have no product to sell, that I provide no service to solve a problem (like tax preparation), and I’m asking my audience to do something that is difficult, uncomfortable, and inconvenient. I am asking them to advocate for hunting and the resources essential to hunting, in exchange for nothing tangible.

Yeah, I’m asking our audience to give up their most important commodity, time, and invest that time towards something they may get no benefit from. That’s a hard sell. The only way it can happen is with trust. If you as viewers/listeners don’t trust me and what we are working towards, I’m wasting my time.

I give that presentation to the companies interested in our work. I explain that our “marketing funnel” works the same way as those companies, but it’s more difficult and has a lower conversion rate, as my “value proposition” is upside down compared to the normal business. I’m asking people to pay with their time and in exchange, possibly get a nothing more than a headache out of the deal.

The more sophisticated folks get what I’m pitching. We try to find ways that their marketing investment could work within our goals and how our content is designed to fulfill our WHY. We’re not changing our content or our WHY, yet if they see a place where their models can work within our models, maybe a relationship is worth investigating further.

Sometimes it doesn’t work, as they are looking for clicks/likes/views. I tell them “thanks, but no thanks.” It’s just not my approach and they’d be better off spending their money elsewhere. We turn down way more requests than we accept. We also limit the number of companies we will work with, as we only want so many relationships with a crew of our size.

Now how the marketing funnel works for these companies, why they spend money on what they do, and how their marketing funnel integrates with what we do. I’ll list it by each of the four funnel stages mentioned earlier.

The most basic and less valued part of the marketing funnel is “awareness.” Often referred to as “Top of funnel,” as it is the wide part of the funnel where you try to capture as many eyeballs as possible. The more people made aware, the more who might move down to the next part of the funnel; consideration.

In today’s world, awareness is cheap to acquire. Think short-form content such social media posts, magazine ads, TV commercials. Those are usually part of the “media purchase” of a marketing budget. Most of the content producers operate in this part of the marketing funnel, many paid in the form of free product. This is not where we operate.

The next phase in the funnel is “consideration.” How does a company get a potential customer to “consider” their products or services? Consideration, for us, is longer-form content. In the case of hunting, it can be video that shows the products used in real life situations. It can be because the brand is associated with an activity/platform for which the potential customer has affinity; in our case public lands, conservation, and access.

When companies contract with media outlets for “consideration” it requires authenticity and trust to get a customer’s attention long enough to consider the product or service. Consideration is harder to achieve and thus more valued by companies. This is mostly where we operate. Our longer-form content of videos and podcasts show products being used in real life situations, yet the content is focused heavily on hunters out on public lands, me being engaged in policy and legislation, and our team involved in the affinity activities of volunteerism and advocacy.

If our efforts cause you to consider that company or their product, based on their support of our WHY or if you see it used in a way that you might consider it as one of the many options in your next purchase, then we’ve done our job.

Conversion, or a sale, is the next step, once a potential customer has given consideration to the options available. Conversion is the company’s responsibility. Their ability to provide value, the intersection of price and performance, is what will convert the potential customer. Yeah, they might use a promo code, such as RANDY, for tracking to see if the “consideration” prospects we delivered might “convert.” Promos also lowers the price, making the value intersection even better for the potential customer.

A good company, with a good product, at a good price, should be able to convert a percentage of these potential customers that have filtered down from the “consideration” level of the funnel.

Retention, the last step, is another purely company function. Follow up, customer service, product upgrades, etc. are what work in this part of the funnel. Not something media platforms have much of a role in.

Hopefully that explains how these companies approach it, what goes into their budget allocations, and what platforms and content types they look to. For us, they’re seeking some “awareness,” though mostly “consideration.”

So, does our advocacy and engagement create enough affinity to justify the investment these companies make in our content? That’s hard to measure. They see me in many places speaking and giving voice to the things I tell them are important to our audience. Are we moving the needle on the topics I’ve told them are most important to our audience?

The smart ones have an intuitive understanding of hunting and conservation and they can read the signs well enough to make the assessments. The ones just focused on quantitative measurements, the “lazy way” as I call it, such as clicks/likes/views, usually can’t see much value in us. They equate one like on IG to be the equivalent to one podcast download that results in a two-hour engagement with that listener. That works from a quantitative analysis, but is a complete whiff for the more important qualitative analysis.

Does our message give a good impression of how well their products will perform? They see us using their products in some difficult and challenging hunts that they hope gets the audience to consider their products when the time comes. Add that to the affinity values the come from being associated with our conservation message and they judge if we are worth their investment.

 

[Big Fin]

Trust – Our only currency.

Like my CPA life, any value we can create comes down to trust. Does the potential customer trust us? If not, we’re of no value to a company who sponsors us. Trust cannot be bought. Trust can only be earned, over time and experience. Trust comes from knowledge, authenticity, and honesty. Our only currency with our audience is trust. The crew is likely tired of me talking about trust as our currency.

I’ll give an example of a recent decision made toward building/retaining trust. Sitka decided not to renew 30+/- of their 35 media platforms, when contracts came due March 31. We were part of the 30 that were not renewed. Yet, they’ve asked me to continue serving as an advisor to their Conservation Council.

As expected, I have been approached by other clothing companies who have found out that we are no longer obligated to Sitka for product or media placement. I’ve explained to them that for now, I’m not interested. And that gets back to the concepts of trust we focus on.

That is a significant gap to make up, as far as my budget goes. Some ask why I would do that. For many reasons.

Sitka makes a great product. It has served me well. They have always supported conservation in a big way. I’ll experiment with some other items from other companies. Until I find something better I’ll likely continue to use Sitka for most things. If Sitka stops their conservation support, that would change my decision.

No matter how well I might tell the story of Sitka leaving us, folks will assume it was us leaving for more money. I get why people would think I was “chasing the money,” given such is the norm in this business.

So, accepting a contract with another clothing company, lowers the trust people have in us, which lowers our value to every partner we have. It looks like we are just another one of the “money chasers.” When the basis for us to inspire our audience is trust, the financial hit of losing Sitka is less than the cost of losing trust from our audience.

We’ve never left a sponsor in our seventeen years. Some of their ad agencies have decided to move on from us, which is for reasons I understood. It’s just business and no hard feelings. And we turn down a lot of them who think that money is going to sway us. Nope, the money from a huge boot conglomerate is going to cost us credibility with the audience.

If I can continue to make a difference by helping Sitka invest their large Conservation Council funds into public land and access, that helps fulfill our WHY. Likely more so than getting paid by a different clothing company.

 

[Big Fin]

Contract language and what rights sponsors have for termination.

Some have asked what contract language is in place to terminate folks with the problem Ryan Lampers has in front of him. I am not sure what their contracts look like, but here is the language in my larger contracts:

Termination.​

Termination Rights.

Termination for Just Cause. Company may terminate this Agreement for just cause immediately upon providing written notice to Contractor. For purposes of this Section (d), “just cause” occurs if Contractor:

a) commits (or is accused of committing) a felony or misdemeanor involving fraud, embezzlement, theft, dishonesty, or any other crime of moral turpitude;

b) illegally uses, purchases, or possesses any controlled substance or
narcotic;

c) engages in any form of conduct involving moral turpitude during the performance of Services that, in Company’s reasonable judgment, may reflect adversely on the reputation of Company;

d) commits any act or becomes involved in any situation or occurrence that, in Company’s reasonable judgment, brings Contractor into public disrepute, scandal, or ridicule; or shocks or offends the public or Company’s customers generally;

e) materially breaches any representation, warranty, or covenant in this Agreement; provided that Company first provides Contractor ten (10) days’ advance notice of the breach and Contractor fails to cure such breach within the ten- (10-) day period; or

f) is named as a debtor in a petition for bankruptcy, makes an assignment for the benefit of creditors, seeks any other similar relief under any bankruptcy law or related statute, or otherwise ceases to do business in the ordinary course.

Termination without Cause. Company may terminate this Agreement without just cause by providing at least thirty (30) days’ advance notice thereof to Contractor.

Some might wonder why I would sign a contract that gives this company such easy rights to terminate. Well, first of all, I don’t intent to do any of the things that would give grounds for termination. Second, if I did one of those things, the company should have rights to terminate. Third, if I was in their shoes, I would demand such and if a contractor refused to give me those rights I’d wonder what skeletons the contractor had in his closet.

A company likely has termination rights like in my contracts. It doesn’t mean that they would do it immediately without some sort of due diligence.

I can’t tell you what rights sponsors have in the contracts with others. Usually, if you are merely a social media person, the contracts are short 2-3 pages with easy termination. In our case, the contracts are 10-14 pages, as they involve a lot of different platforms, media placement, appearances, consulting, and use of the media assets we capture in the field. Yet, even more complicated contracts give a ton of termination rights to the company.

I suspect many folks sign these contracts without reading the fine details. Their just excited to get paid in cash or gear. Tax accountants read the fine details on everything and consider the possible outcomes.

 

[Big Fin]

Motivations – Something I never assume for anyone other than myself.

If you’ve hung in here this long, you get to read the last part I promised I’d touch on - the questions and assumptions many make about motivations. This connects my personal situation to the assumed motivations many claim – money, with clicks/likes/views being the motivation that drives more money.

Most statements imply that the motivation for those who produce content is driven by money. That might be the case. I can’t judge, as I don’t know their motivations or their situation. If money is the primary motivation, I feel sorry for them, as they have taken something that was/is a passion and made it their livelihood, interjecting all of the stress and pressures the come with a livelihood.

It is hard for me to stand in their shoes, as our business has almost zero impact on my personal finances. This year, after 17 years of unpaid work, I started taking a salary. My salary for 2025 will be $9,000. Yeah, far less than minimum wage. That salary is less than 5% of my household income from other sources.

If that salary went away, it would not make a dent in the disposable income we have to operate with. And at that salary, it will take about 50 years for us to get what we’ve invested in this business. That salary is hardly enough “motivation” for me to do something in a way I don’t want, for reasons I don’t find helpful to an activity that I value as deeply as I value hunting.

I understand that is not the situation others are in. I have no debt, so it is hard for me to understand the stress that I might feel if I had a mortgage or vehicle loans or (insert obligation here) that was dependent upon who much profit I could wring out of this gig.

Barring some stupid moves on my part, I’ve been able to set myself up for a comfortable post-CPA life. I’m not trying to build a retirement nest egg with this operation, so I can look at every large business decision through our WHY, rather than through our checking account balance.

I tell the crew that if ever I feel we are not making progress towards our WHY, or this operation becomes more headache than what I see in progress, I’m out of here. I’d spend my final years of hunting without cameras or microphones, I’d close our social media (other than HT), and I’d stop doing podcasts. I’d continue to show up and speak up for public lands and conservation the same as I was doing before we started these platforms in 2008, though I’m sure I wouldn’t have the voice that comes with these platforms.

Point being, I don’t need any of this from a standpoint of money or attention. I do this because I feel I have been given the greatest life anyone could ask for, and that amazing life is because a lot of people stood up and spoke up to provide what I’ve been able to enjoy.

I’ve had this amazing life because I live in the greatest country in the world, where a snotty-nosed kid living in a trailer house with his recently divorced mother and two younger siblings could build a life like I’ve enjoyed. Every day I am grateful for all those blessings. And I feel an obligation to do what I can with this amazing opportunity I’ve been given so that future snotty-nosed kids who love the outdoors, who find peace and sanity in wild places/things might get the opportunities I’ve had. For me, that’s as complicated as I can make it.

Maybe I am a bit weird, but growing up without money has caused me to place little priority on money beyond what I need to be comfortable. Around age 30 I started listening to my older CPA clients who were successful as measured by the life they had lived and not necessarily the wealth they had accumulated.

The common thread among all of them was that their happiness came from what they viewed as true freedom. To them, and as I’ve come to see through my own eyes, true freedom is owning your own time and your own life. Doing what you feel is worth your time, not what you boss or your company feels is the best use of your time.

Thanks to their example and counsel, I set a plan to be debt free by age 50. We got that done a few years ahead of schedule. I’ve lived in the same house for over 21 years and if I move, it will be to downsize and put some more money in the bank to allow for even more “freedom” to do the daily things that are important to me.

That financial situation, thanks to commitment and support from Mrs. Fin, have made it so I am in a completely different position than most of the folks who produce content, whether at the top of the funnel or deeper down the funnel.

I get up every day to do something I truly love. That is my motivation. I find pleasure in engaging in these policy issues, access, conservation and funding, and hopefully giving some voice to something important to me. Very few have been blessed to have the situation I have, the supporting spouse who is also “all in” on these topics, and the 30+ years of experience that makes this easier for me than when I had very little experience.

They say if you truly love something, you’d do it for free. I did this for free for 17 years. I’d keep doing it for free so long as I feel we are making progress and giving voice to the things I’m passionate about.

I am thankful that I’m not trying to do this as a livelihood. It would make this a job, even though there are some days it feels like a job. I cannot put myself in the shoes of those who do this for their livelihood. I suspect it adds a level of stress and pressure that I cannot understand.

I don’t know if those pressures and stresses are the motivation for some to do questionable or illegal things that damage the image of hunting. If so, I hope they find new paths for their livelihood. They will be happier, less stressed, and they will have more freedom.

Sorry for the ramble. I respect the intelligence of the HT audience and I hope I was able to fill in some gaps of information that you would not otherwise have access to. I’ll be hitting the road again this weekend, so if there are questions I won’t be able to answer them until I get home.

THE END.

 

[Letthemgrow]

Thank you. That was broadly encompassing and educational.

 

[mxracer317]

@Big Fin you owe the HT crowd nothing, and yet we get to see a true look at the behind the scenes. Thank you for all the work you do in behalf of conservation—that’s the true testament of inspiration. Go have some fun this weekend, sir!

 

[Johnny Bravo]

Holy crap, what a load of stuff…just go kill stuff… lol

 

[kansasdad]

I appreciate you sharing your perspectives. Having a mission statement and sticking to it has provided the plumb line with which to judge options as viable or non starters. And the NEED to produce income with your advocacy “business” is much less because of your CPA/real estate investments so wisely made over the years.

I’ve said it before but it bears saying it again. Your platform/s have had their desired effect in my life. I have become an active participant/advocate for public lands directly due to OYOA/FreshTracks/HuntTalk.

Thank you to you, Mrs Fin, Matthew, past and current staff members for your efforts for wild (and sometimes not so wild) places.

 

[Schutzhund]

You are a Captain of honesty and integrity. I'd like to believe thats what pulled most of us to your forum. You lead by example and from the heart. No bs.

Thank you.

 

[Dan O]

Thanks for the insight you've shared. Your business model reflects the stand up kind of guy you are. All hunters are lucky to have you representing us with your dedication to public lands. We owe you a big THANK YOU!!!

 

[Catskill.Joe]

This is a masterclass. Thanks for writing all of it down. Happy and proud to support it.

 

[CPAjeff]

Invaluable insight into the WHY, a model for all to follow. I appreciate all that HT has to offer - thanks to all those who make it possible.

 

[mn taxidermist]

Thank you Randy for all your work on hunting and public land issues. Your hometown is so proud to call you one of us. We appreciate everything you've done for us and the rest of the outdoor world.

 

[mn taxidermist]

I also wanted to remind you grouse season opens today. You really need to come chase them here again someday.

 

[Forkyfinder]

@Big Fin Thank you. Did want to clarify something. I was someone who said something to the effect of "Some of these influencers must be under tremendous pressure to produce content to make a living" - I didnt specifically mention that i know FT isnt suffering from those pressures, but it now feels like i should have.

"How" and "what" you are focused on, conservation, preservation of public lands, and access is "why" i am a consumer of your content and purchaser of your merchandise. The content above - its simply not made by anyone else, at least until lately when saving public lands became trendy. Thank you.

 

[hank4elk]

Your a good man Randy. I do know that.

 

[elkhuntinfool78]

I’m home for two days, leaving again tomorrow on the next trip. Scanned HT a bit when time allowed. A few comments in the Ryan Lampers threads seem to be pointed at me. While working today my mind starting thinking about some of those questions and if I could offer any insight that is helpful.

I’ve decided to do this as my own thread, so when/if I have coverage on the road, I can drop in and check it when time allows. Reading this as I typed it in a Word doc, I realize it has turned out to be a long ramble and I’m not sure if I am connecting the dots very well.

I don’t have the time to go to those other threads and copy quotes of comments or questions that I think were directed at me. So, hopefully this ramble gives some insight to how companies approach content contracts, how the longest sustained content platforms (us being here 17 years) apply common business practices, and why I focus on my own motivations and not guessing the motivations of others.

First, the easier answers. In the other threads, some have asked why I haven’t said anything about the Lampers charges. There are a few reasons.

1. I’ve been out in the hills for most of the last four weeks, with little coverage or time to chime in.

2. Without exception, I have no tolerance for poaching. Yet, as unpopular as it may sound right now, I subscribe to the idea of “innocent until proven guilty.” Until the case resolves through the legal system, I’m not going to spend too much time commenting on specifics that I don’t have insight to. I’ll accept the outcome of the legal process.

If proven guilty or a plea bargain is made, Ryan’s profile in the hunting space should be considered in what the final outcome is. Those of us who have a high profile should expect a harsher final outcome than someone else. I hold all content producers to much higher standards, given who much of hunting's image is impacted by our messages and our actions. If a content producer can't accept that, they shouldn't be producing content.

3. If proven not guilty, which I agree seems unlikely with the subsequent actions taken by Ryan, then I accept that outcome as well.

It is interesting to read the comments on the open thread and the thread that got locked related to Lampers that are directed at “influencers,” whatever that term means. I’ve been in this gig long before the term influencer was adopted. I don’t trying to “influence” people to do anything, rather I’ve been trying to inspire them to advocate for wild places, wild things, and the resources essential to hunting. “Inspired” people are far more effective than “influenced” people.

Regardless of the terminology and my distinctions, some of the comments with the term “influencer” had my name in it, so I’ll go along with the implied idea that as a content producer I am under their umbrella of “influencer.”

The HT crowd is a pretty sharp group of people. Yet, reading comments where people express their understanding about content production, there are some gaps in information about how some of this works from a business standpoint. I’ll try to add some information might be helpful.

I can only explain how it works for our company. For me to say how it works for other content producers would be assumptions and guesses.

Unless you see our contracts, see our internal measurements, sit in on the meetings of our vision and our progress towards our mission/WHY, you’d have no reason to know how it works for us and how we approach it. I hope what I provide here about our business gives additional understanding, though I know our business might operate vastly different than one where the owners are dependent upon hunting content for their livelihood.

A lot of the comments try to attach motivation. I can’t guess motivations of anyone other than myself. I’ll get to that later in these posts for those who hang around.

Sorry this will be a long ramble and might not cover every question some might have. If this goes off the rails, the mods will be told to close it down, as I'm doing this in hopes that it gives people a bit more information of how content models work. Or, at least how ours works.

Hi Big Fin,

First off I'd like to say thanks for taking the time to start this thread and offer some insight as to how you operate. FWIW you are one of the few folks in the public eye that I have respect for.

I'm not sure if I am one of the folks that you felt was "calling you out" or not but I had asked if you or any other well known influencers ( for lack of a better term) had commented in regards to the Lampers case and mentioned that I wished they would.

I get that you abide by the "innocent until proven guilty" and I don't have a problem with that.

May I ask if you have ever made any public comments in regards to other "convicted" hunting influencers?

If Lampers is found guilty in any regard will you make a public statement addressing the issue?

Incidents like this Lampers ( if guilty, which in my mind is pretty likely seeing how he has handled himself thus far, scrubbing social media, selling his house, etc) and other " convicted cases" definitely stir up a fire in me. Not that they are the only ones breaking the law , poachers are everywhere unfortunately.

However when someone in the public eye does something like this it feels worse. I grew up idolizing my father as a hunter/outdoorsman (different era) but how many young hunters that idolize individuals like this will succumb to poaching something because after all the guy they've watched and subscribed to for years even does it?

As for your contract with your sponsors I don't necessarily feel like it is that different from other influencers. I don’t think that most well known influencers get paid for each like, sub, etc. That said I think it is pretty clear that if a lot of the most well known individuals didn't produce quality content and come across as an "expert " hunter taking trophy animals they would not have the large base of followers and subs. And realistically if they didn't have the large amount of followers they wouldn't be getting any large sponsorship deals. So with that said I would have to say yes it is a highly monetary affair for a lot of these guys.

I will say that the way you handle relationships with your sponsors is rare and the fact that you won't take a sponsorship from a company you don't believe in is refreshing. I also believe you are an extreme minority in that regard.

Do I wish the honest and well known influencers would "come down" on the ones who are breaking the law, absolutely. After all in today's world the influencers are the ones with the loudest voice.

 

[rmyoung1]

I enjoyed your explanations and pulling back the curtain on your motivation and the passion that fuels it. Thanks for the transparency and staying true to your mission.