Is outdoor hunting tv dead?

[llewellinsetter]

The idea of guys switching to Amazon, owned by Jeff Bezos, the second richest person on Earth, the same Jeff Bezos that owns the Washington Post, the most anti-hunting and anti-2nd Amendment entity in America, is absolutely absurd to me. Directly supporting those that would choose to take away the very rights that allow you to do what you do is blatant self destruction. on this siteSo many issues of guys talking about access rights, firearm rights, etc. and then you go and financially support those that are willfully against you. Amazing. Before you make decisions based on $$ please make sure you know where that $$ is going.

 

[Big Fin]

The idea of guys switching to Amazon, owned by Jeff Bezos, the second richest person on Earth, the same Jeff Bezos that owns the Washington Post, the most anti-hunting and anti-2nd Amendment entity in America, is absolutely absurd to me. Directly supporting those that would choose to take away the very rights that allow you to do what you do is blatant self destruction. on this siteSo many issues of guys talking about access rights, firearm rights, etc. and then you go and financially support those that are willfully against you. Amazing. Before you make decisions based on $$ please make sure you know where that $$ is going.

Hmm, I didn't know Jeff Bezos was "the owner" of Amazon. This stock ticker symbol, AMZN, must be a fraudulent listing on the NASDAQ - https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/amzn. Evidently those holding Amazon stock have bought into a Ponzi scheme, now that it is revealed that Jeff Bazos is the true owner of Amazon, not all those shareholders and mutual funds.

Might I suggest you research who is the owner of Outdoor Sportsman Group, the 100% owner, and analyze how much help he and his enterprises are to the public land hunter. Maybe research the rap sheets of some of the folks his OSG group allows to air content on their network. Even check out the number of game violations some of their "paid personalities" have to their credit.

Thanks for your comments.

P.S. - Amazon pays me, so I'm not financially supporting Jeff Bazos and the Washington Post.

 

[llewellinsetter]

In spite of Amazon being a publicly traded company, Bezos owns 17% of it, a stake that accounts for 95% of his estimated fortune, and he is still CEO. They may pay YOU but they, and Jeff Bezos, are supported by people that pay for their services, which in turn pays to further his agenda and that of the Washington Post. Yes, it's a tricky map to navigate where the all funds ultimately go, as are most enterprises these days, but to say people buying Amazon Video are not supporting him and his other ventures is not being completely honest. To each their own I guess.

 

[PrairieHunter]

The sad reality is hunting TV was never much to start with in the picture of sports on TV if you look at what those networks get paid from Cable/Sat providers.



Getting paid 3 cents or 5 cents per cable sub is peanuts compared to other sports channels or just other channels in general. Might be more than QVC and BYU TV but that's about it. All the hunting networks put together don't even demand the same rate as worthless channels like Fox Sports 2. Heck the PAC 12 network is worth much more per sub than any of the hunting TV networks. So in the big picture hunting TV networks were never really popular enough to capitalize like other sports networks have been able to. Even the tennis network demands higher carriage rates than the sportsman networks which indicates how small the interest is/was in those networks.

These new platforms are great, I watch most of my hunting shows on you tube. Lots of shows out there and some guys who do a pretty good job just filming their own hunts.

I have been paying attention and from my perspective hunting/fishing shows are now more popular than ever on traditional TV. Alaska the last frontier, Life below Zero,
Alaska troopers, The last Alaskans, Naked and Afraid, Tuna Wars, and the numerous game warden programs are much more popular than any of the hunting or fishing programs on any of the outdoor/pursuit/sportsman, etc... networks because they are now on much more popular networks like Discovery, TCL, Animal Planet, etc... Millions of people tune in to these programs to see how real people hunt for food, prepare food, or just simple drama of law enforcement dealing with hunters and other folks. There reality is that there is much more interest in showing how to shoot an animal, process the meat, and make a meal than there is on shooting big bucks/bulls/sheep/etc... which most of the country could care less about. In the end I suspect guys like Glenn Villanueve are as good or better hunters than just about anyone on a hunting/outdoor network even though they have little fancy hunting gear or constantly plug sponsors which is pretty much why most of these traditional hunting shows were created. I wan't to see hunting, not a guy telling me to buy brand X guns/optics/bow/etc because the sponsors paid him to tell me that. Most hunters are like teenage girls and go out and buy stuff they see the folks they look up to using, that's just what the sponsors want you to do.

People are starting to think about where their food comes from and I am seeing more and more folks who come from non hunting backgrounds show an interest in hunting, I think in many cases they see animals as a source of food and really have no interest in antlers. I think this will be a good thing for hunting as it will gain popularity in new segments of the population as well as renew interest in small game and doe hunting which are abundant across the country.

 

[PrairieHunter]

In spite of Amazon being a publicly traded company, Bezos owns 17% of it, a stake that accounts for 95% of his estimated fortune, and he is still CEO. They may pay YOU but they, and Jeff Bezos, are supported by people that pay for their services, which in turn pays to further his agenda and that of the Washington Post. Yes, it's a tricky map to navigate where the all funds ultimately go, as are most enterprises these days, but to say people buying Amazon Video are not supporting him and his other ventures is not being completely honest. To each their own I guess.

Interesting perspective. I guess ultimately Amazon purchases content to generate sales/income.

 

[llewellinsetter]

Interesting perspective. I guess ultimately Amazon purchases content to generate sales/income.

The perspective is that if possible I choose to do business with entities that align with my thinking and certainly try and not financially support those that would prefer to eliminate my values and rights.

 

[bobbydean]

I hesitate to talk on access of hunt videos. My last opinion I was gently nudged off the site, but I was able to log back on. I had my doubts.

If a business is trying to make a profit, that business should take the best avenue to be a success.

Personal objections aside, take the best avenue. A brilliant man is making a fortune for his idea. I may not like his politics, but can you find a better avenue for success.

Please do not bump me again. Worried the hell out of me!

 

[cedahm]

In spite of Amazon being a publicly traded company, Bezos owns 17% of it, a stake that accounts for 95% of his estimated fortune, and he is still CEO. They may pay YOU but they, and Jeff Bezos, are supported by people that pay for their services, which in turn pays to further his agenda and that of the Washington Post. Yes, it's a tricky map to navigate where the all funds ultimately go, as are most enterprises these days, but to say people buying Amazon Video are not supporting him and his other ventures is not being completely honest. To each their own I guess.

It's your perogative to spend money where and how you wish, that is one of our rights. But, as you allude to, these arguments about every-day consumerism having an implicit role in furthering political views/agendas always seem very flimsy to me.

If you follow every dollar in and out of any business, eventually you'll find a participant in a transaction that has different views than you do. Choosing to be a consumer of goods or services doesn't mean that you unequivocally support and agree with every view of every other participant in every other transaction made by said business.

My most recent Amazon purchase (and yes, I am a shareholder) was a headlamp.

It was 33% off normal retail, so I bought it from them. It was $35 after taxes. Of that (my accounting principles could be off, but this is directionally correct)-

- 0.5% ($0.75) went to TRCP via the 'smile' program.
- 6.4% ($2.26) went to state sales tax
- ~60% ($14) went to AMZN COGS for buying the item from Black Diamond, AMZN fulfillment handling, and freight to me
- ~20% ($7) went to SG&A for marketing, website, etc.
- Lets just ease up on this and say the rest ($3) was Net Income

Hypothetically, let's say 5 physical people were involved in my transaction (3 folks in the Amazon fulfillment center, at least a couple on the carrier side). They of course received some portion of my money as well. Should I add their views and opinions to the list of things I am now in tacit agreement with because I paid them? (I’ll ignore the countless manufacturers of paper, corrugate, etc that went into shipping me this headlamp).

If you keep tracing, Black Diamond probably got 40% of the dough. So I would need to look at every partner BD has that was involved in producing the headlamp, shipping it, meeting with the AMZN procurement team, etc. Also, since the manufacturer of the headlamp doesn’t make all those components from scratch, add in at least 4 other contract manufacturers (batteries, LED bulbs, plastic housings, miscellaneous circuitry).

Now, my $35 headlamp has had the hands of 7 organizations and probably 2-3X that number of physical people. I would say It’s pretty likely that I don’t agree with all of the viewpoints represented in that sample. It may even be likely that some of them are polar opposite of me on any number of issues.

I did get a sweet headlamp for 33% of what it typically retails for and I won’t think at all about the above when I turn it on in the elk woods. There is precisely 0% chance that I could make it myself or that it could be produced solely by people who's views I am in complete alignment with.

(P.S> Awesome looking dog in your avatar)

 

[llewellinsetter]

I did get a sweet headlamp for 33% of what it typically retails for and I won’t think at all about the above when I turn it on in the elk woods. There is precisely 0% chance that I could make it myself or that it could be produced solely by people who's views I am in complete alignment with.

(P.S> Awesome looking dog in your avatar)

I'd gladly pay 33% more to support a brick and mortar that supports the lifestyle I choose to live and while in the hunting woods I will happily think of how they support my views while I support their business. Sadly principled living has taken a drastic backseat to the almighty dollar.

Thanks for the compliment on the dog. He's 14 and near the end but I have shot a ton of birds behind him.

 

[beginnerhunter]

I'm moving away from Amazon for reasons unrelated to hunting. It's taken me 35 years but I've finally come to appreciate the power large monopolies wield over us. I mean, I'm paying Amazon $120 a year to encourage me to buy more stuff from Amazon! All the while they slowly reach their tentacles into new industries and take over more markets. Walmart did it to retail and pharmacy. Amazon will have media, entertainment, retail, healthcare, pharmacy, and who knows what else. We need some Teddy Roosevelt style monopoly busting for these tech companies.

But I can't criticize FT for using Amazon to get their message out. The message is important and should use all avenues.

 

[Carnage2011]

The idea of guys switching to Amazon, owned by Jeff Bezos, the second richest person on Earth, the same Jeff Bezos that owns the Washington Post, the most anti-hunting and anti-2nd Amendment entity in America, is absolutely absurd to me. Directly supporting those that would choose to take away the very rights that allow you to do what you do is blatant self destruction. on this siteSo many issues of guys talking about access rights, firearm rights, etc. and then you go and financially support those that are willfully against you. Amazing. Before you make decisions based on $$ please make sure you know where that $$ is going.

Since you seem to be interested in facts, Jeff Bezos is actually the richest person in the world. Also, I don't want to speak for Randy, but I'd bet he did plenty of research prior to switching over to Amazon. There are so many hands in the retail world that I'd about guarantee that you will never find a product that doesn't roll through the hands of someone that has different views than you.

 

[llewellinsetter]

Since you seem to be interested in facts, Jeff Bezos is actually the richest person in the world......There are so many hands in the retail world that I'd about guarantee that you will never find a product that doesn't roll through the hands of someone that has different views than you.

1) Actually he's not quite there yet...AND, 95% of his earnings come from Amazon. So supporting Amazon supports him and his conglomerate.

2) I mean no disrespect to Randy, as I said it's tricky to navigate, but if instead of always chasing the $$ we started chasing our principles we could move towards a better balanced world. One where a few individuals don't dictate everything we do.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

the Washington Post, the most anti-hunting and anti-2nd Amendment entity in America

That's just a bit hyperbolic don't you think, I'm not going to argue that they lean liberal but 'the most'.
Also your conclusion that Fresh Tracks --> Amazon--> Jeff Bezos--> Washington Post --> Anti Gun seems a bit far fetched and presents a pretty myopic view of economics, it seems similar to the the other side of the aisles conclusion that REI-->Camelback-->Vista Outdoors--> Savage Arms--> Ar-15.

Amazon is one of the most popular streaming media services and the public land/ethical hunting message that Fresh Tracks embodies will hopefully help change some minds about hunting or at least sway people on the fence. Seems like even if Jeff Bezos got 10 million directly from Fresh Tracks being on Amazon and gave that directly to the post, which is ridiculously hyperbolic, the Post wouldn't be able to do as much to hurt hunting as Fresh Tracks and Randy's other content does to help it. The kind of principled living you are extolling seems penny wise but pound foolish.

 

[llewellinsetter]

The kind of principled living you are extolling seems penny wise but pound foolish.

...more and more everyday I see a new example of why this country is falling apart at the seams.

 

[SandyCreek]

...more and more everyday I see a new example of why this country is falling apart at the seams.

because we buy something from amazon...? hopefully you vet everyone you buy something from: food, water, gas, electricity, vehicles, soap, appliances, etc etc, i bet all of the things you own only are produced by strong 2A folks who share 100% of your views and values

 

[MinnesotaHunter]

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/feb/22/nra-opponents-take-aim-amazon/

He was attacked personally, yet NRAtv is still on Amazon....is it possible this multi-billionaire doesn't mandate adherence to a strict political dogma in his empire?

 

[dirtclod Az.]

I'm with you Setter.

 

[llewellinsetter]

I'm with you Setter.

For me, my world revolves around my integrity and my principles, regardless of how foolish others may think they are. Cheers.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

For me, my world revolves around my integrity and my principles, regardless of how foolish others may think they are. Cheers.

I wasn’t saying your principles are foolish, just that in my mind it seems better to have a tiny amount money maybe to go with someone you disagree with in order to spread a message you agree with to hundreds of thousands.

Now if a local small business was allowing anti trapping signature gathers to set up a both in their business I would definitely boycott and encourage others to do so... hypothetically

 

[HSi-ESi]

Capitalism is awesome, is there an insuiation that the market needs to be controlled politically?