So over the Contrived and Repetitive Nature of Stages today

[Tx_Aggie]

Not necessarily. You probably won’t be a full-time reviewer and quit your day job, though.

But I understand the economic pressure. I don’t mind some minor advertisements. Take someone like Garand Thumb or 9hole Reviews. They both hit you once at the beginning; 9hole then does an intermission suggestion to support their Patreon. They both might praise the person/company who loaned the gun (but 9hole almost always owns the firearms).

GT might make an ammo sponsor joke when they waste ammo. GT might have an ad in the middle.

That’s about it.

The first video I commented on is constantly not only smacking you over the head with promos, but also semi-fawning over their sponsors.

Lots of people don’t realize just how much shilling is happening right in front of your eyes. They’ve been exposed to so much of it in their life that is just washes over.

But make no mistake…marketing/advertising works. The person who says, “Doesn’t work on me,” is a total mark.

If something is free, there's a good chance that you as the person consuming it are actually the product. That's true of pretty much anything on YouTube, or any social media.

Considering that one of the main complaints in this thread has been that PRS doesn't do enough to promote itself to new shooters, a fun, fast paced and upbeat video from a successful youtube channel about the one event each year aimed specifically at getting new shooters involved in the PRS seems to fit the bill nicely.

Would you prefer they made a video about their experience without talking about any of the gear they used, or just without mentioning the name of the items & who manufactured them? Or maybe just only talk about the items they purchased and leave out any mention of stuff that was provided to them? Would you hold Frank to that same standard - no positive comments about any gear that was provided to him for review by someone? If it came out that the PRS comped their entries for the match should they then also refrain from discussing the event in a positive light, or at all?

The GAP Grind is a "Pro/Am" match where an experienced shooter works with a new shooter as a team to help them learn what PRS matches are all about, and to coach them throughout the event by providing assistance during and between stages, including calling corrections on the clock. Having an experienced shooter there to help you is literally the entire point of the event, and a requirement for participation.

For these guys to discuss their experience without mentioning the dudes who helped them would make no sense. If anything, I think they should've taken more time to specifically talk on camera with the guys who played "Pro" to their "Amateur," as the YouTuber's participation in the match would not have happened without them.

I missed the plug for SDI, and admit that it's super cringey, as that place really seems like nothing more than a scam intended to bilk veterans out of their GI Bill money.

 

[hlee]

If something is free, there's a good chance that you as the person consuming it are actually the product. That's true of pretty much anything on YouTube, or any social media.

Considering that one of the main complaints in this thread has been that PRS doesn't do enough to promote itself to new shooters, a fun, fast paced and upbeat video from a successful youtube channel about the one event each year aimed specifically at getting new shooters involved in the PRS seems to fit the bill nicely.

Would you prefer they made a video about their experience without talking about any of the gear they used, or just without mentioning the name of the items & who manufactured them? Or maybe just only talk about the items they purchased and leave out any mention of stuff that was provided to them? Would you hold Frank to that same standard - no positive comments about any gear that was provided to him for review by someone? If it came out that the PRS comped their entries for the match should they then also refrain from discussing the event in a positive light, or at all?

The GAP Grind is a "Pro/Am" match where an experienced shooter works with a new shooter as a team to help them learn what PRS matches are all about, and to coach them throughout the event by providing assistance during and between stages, including calling corrections on the clock. Having an experienced shooter there to help you is literally the entire point of the event, and a requirement for participation.

For these guys to discuss their experience without mentioning the dudes who helped them would make no sense. If anything, I think they should've taken more time to specifically talk on camera with the guys who played "Pro" to their "Amateur," as the YouTuber's participation in the match would not have happened without them.

I missed the plug for SDI, and admit that it's super cringey, as that place really seems like nothing more than a scam intended to bilk veterans out of their GI Bill money.

Remember, there are dudes that want to see feminine hygiene ads because targeted advertisement is too invasive…

 

[ma smith]

Considering that one of the main complaints in this thread has been that PRS doesn't do enough to promote itself to new shooters, a fun, fast paced and upbeat video from a successful youtube channel about the one event each year aimed specifically at getting new shooters involved in the PRS seems to fit the bill nicely.

This is a classic "base class" propaganda video which only fools and idiots believe.

 

[ma smith]

The only thing more contrived and repetive than PRS "stage design"... is "base class is a good idea for novices"...

 

[Tx_Aggie]

This is a classic "base class" propaganda video which only fools and idiots believe.

What does that even mean?

 

[Oldloser]

What does that even mean?

Same here. I'm wondering who has really shot any matches.

 

[carbonbased]

If something is free, there's a good chance that you as the person consuming it are actually the product. That's true of pretty much anything on YouTube, or any social media.

Pffffhhhh!!!

This is pretty massively obvious? C’mon man.

And add upon the fact that while watching a heavily shilled product vid, you are often still nailed with YT ads. You are still the product! Just 10x.

I mean, wtf is your argument??? 1x = 10x? One shouldn’t care about excessive shilling because you are already being used by YT?

I’m just commenting upon the shilling. Not on other motives, like trying to get others into the sport. Hell, I’m not in the sport.

The fact is, the more one shills (or promotes), the less trustworthy one comes across. This is undebatable.

I mean, you aren’t going to seriously debate that, are you?

It helps to imagine that you are in the live audience, next to the camera, and the hosts are talking directly to you. How would you feel about the hosts?

Even worse, now imagine the host is talking right to you in a personal conversation, saying the exact same things? Gross man, gross.

As I mentioned, there’s better and worse ways of promoting. Garand Thumb/9holes promote products much less offensively (and less) than that specific Dirty Civ video.

It helps to think about the word “shill.” Shilling is different than promoting.

The prototypical shill is a planted member of an audience that is loudly enthusiastic with whatever the host is saying/doing in order to whip the crowd into a frenzy.

Promotion bleeds into shilling if you do it wrong.

 

[carbonbased]

I’ll add, if your goal is to get others interested in the sport, you are harming the cause when over-promoting or worse, shilling.

My argument is one can produce a video exactly like the Dirty Civ vid, but do it in a way that isn’t icky. Remember, the video was about learning, which amplifies the shilling’s inappropriateness.

• Stop the million mini-shills that hit like Chinese water torture
• Group the promotions into 3 spots (max, start, middle, a thank you at the end)
• Be willing to critique stuff. Especially stuff that was provided for free.
• Disclose conflicts of interest.

For example:
You mimic GT/9hole and right away say “This video is sponsored by Leupold Training (or whatever, just not Sig) and Hornady provided the ammo.” It’s over fast.

It’s stupid that SIG is providing rifles for such a thing. Like providing a Honda Accord for a F1 race…so transparently bullshit. Sig is just trying to get some of the high-end sheen of, say, a Lone Peak to rub off upon them.

Someone must have two PRS rifles that these two dudes could borrow. If any bits were provided to the borrower under a sponsorship, mention that.

Leave in the middle ad because it’s obviously an ad and therefore less offensive (delete SDI). It’s way more offensive to try to sneak stuff in, like product placement or shilling.

Anyone here remember those horrible car-fixing shows of the late 1980s-1990s? The ones where every damn second the host was opening a box with a paid product placement and fawning over it?

That’s what you don’t want to do.

 

[Tx_Aggie]

Pffffhhhh!!!

This is pretty massively obvious? C’mon man.

And add upon the fact that while watching a heavily shilled product vid, you are often still nailed with YT ads. You are still the product! Just 10x.

I mean, wtf is your argument??? 1x = 10x? One shouldn’t care about excessive shilling because you are already being used by YT?

I’m just commenting upon the shilling. Not on other motives, like trying to get others into the sport. Hell, I’m not in the sport.

The fact is, the more one shills (or promotes), the less trustworthy one comes across. This is undebatable.

I mean, you aren’t going to seriously debate that, are you?

It helps to imagine that you are in the live audience, next to the camera, and the hosts are talking directly to you. How would you feel about the hosts?

Even worse, now imagine the host is talking right to you in a personal conversation, saying the exact same things? Gross man, gross.

As I mentioned, there’s better and worse ways of promoting. Garand Thumb/9holes promote products much less offensively (and less) than that specific Dirty Civ video.

It helps to think about the word “shill.” Shilling is different than promoting.

The prototypical shill is a planted member of an audience that is loudly enthusiastic with whatever the host is saying/doing in order to whip the crowd into a frenzy.

Promotion bleeds into shilling if you do it wrong.

I guess I just don't see it. But maybe I'm just not as sensitive to it, or as easily offended by it, as you are.

I'd honestly be more likely to agree with you if they were lying about what support they received and what product was provided to them instead of stating it clearly for the viewer.

I'd say them reading sponsorship ads (Mod Light, Snoring Desert Institute, etc) in the middle of the video instead of closer to the beginning like Henry & Josh (who are mostly funded by Patreon and very upfront about asking you to support them there) or GT is a matter of taste. But again, maybe I'm just less sensitive to someone who's obviously trying to make content for a living paying the bills with advertising.

When a guy says "We used these Sig Cross rifles - thanks to Sig & to Kyle Lamb for connecting us with Sig - which are fine and were great to get us started but honestly aren't as good for this game as a purpose built match gun."

or

"Thanks for Leupold for sending us these Mk4 HD scopes to use - they've been a sponsor of the channel for a while now. We chose the Mk4 because it represents a balance in spending on rifle and optic, falling closer to the price of the rifle than a more or less expensive optic." "The guys a Leupold were a huge help to us and taught us a lot about precision rifle shooting"

or

"We bought these Kestrel Elite devices with our own money, and they were painfully expensive, but they provide enough capability that we thought they were worth it. Still, you can totally also just use a phone app to get started."

None of that strikes me as shilling, which as you said is essentially dishonest marketing by someone pretending to be impartial and disguising their relationship with the product in order to be more persuasive.

Another example: "Here's why keeping your rifle level is important, and we used these MDT Send-It levels which are great because they use LEDs and so you don't have to come out of the scope to look at them - thanks MDT for providing them for us" does come off as a product promotion, because it clearly is exactly that, but to me it doesn't cross the line into shilling or make the video unwatchable. Especially since what they said in support of the Send It is true and is the main reason folks are willing to buy the damnably expensive little thing.

Maybe we should just agree to disagree?

Just out of curiosity, does this strike you as shilling? In some ways it's even more of an obvious advertisement than the DC video we've been arguing over, even though there's no direct disclosure of a relationship with the brands being promoted:

 

[carbonbased]

I guess I just don't see it. But maybe I'm just not as sensitive to it, or as easily offended by it, as you are.

I'd honestly be more likely to agree with you if they were lying about what support they received and what product was provided to them instead of stating it clearly for the viewer.

I'd say them reading sponsorship ads (Mod Light, Snoring Desert Institute, etc) in the middle of the video instead of closer to the beginning like Henry & Josh (who are mostly funded by Patreon and very upfront about asking you to support them there) or GT is a matter of taste. But again, maybe I'm just less sensitive to someone who's obviously trying to make content for a living paying the bills with advertising.

When a guy says "We used these Sig Cross rifles - thanks to Sig & to Kyle Lamb for connecting us with Sig - which are fine and were great to get us started but honestly aren't as good for this game as a purpose built match gun."

or

"Thanks for Leupold for sending us these Mk4 HD scopes to use - they've been a sponsor of the channel for a while now. We chose the Mk4 because it represents a balance in spending on rifle and optic, falling closer to the price of the rifle than a more or less expensive optic." "The guys a Leupold were a huge help to us and taught us a lot about precision rifle shooting"

or

"We bought these Kestrel Elite devices with our own money, and they were painfully expensive, but they provide enough capability that we thought they were worth it. Still, you can totally also just use a phone app to get started."

None of that strikes me as shilling, which as you said is essentially dishonest marketing by someone pretending to be impartial and disguising their relationship with the product in order to be more persuasive.

Another example: "Here's why keeping your rifle level is important, and we used these MDT Send-It levels which are great because they use LEDs and so you don't have to come out of the scope to look at them - thanks MDT for providing them for us" does come off as a product promotion, because it clearly is exactly that, but to me it doesn't cross the line into shilling or make the video unwatchable. Especially since what they said in support of the Send It is true and is the main reason folks are willing to buy the damnably expensive little thing.

Maybe we should just agree to disagree?

Just out of curiosity, does this strike you as shilling? In some ways it's even more of an obvious advertisement than the DC video we've been arguing over, even though there's no direct disclosure of a relationship with the brands being promoted:

Don’t get me wrong. The Dirty Civ vid was a 5 of 10 on the shill scale. It’s saved by the actually good content.

The Kestrel bit, as I mentioned, was awesomely handled. Not shilling.

Let’s take innocent promotions, which are fine independently and one at a time.

If you hit people over and over with them, they turn into something like shilling when taken as a whole.

You want to approach a learning video like you’d talk to a friend.

 

[carbonbased]

Frank vid:

Good to disclose:

Less good:

Now I fast fwd through this vid as I’ve devoted enough time to this subject. I didn’t see any note that the Manners stock, Gap rifle, and Leupold etc were given to him, loaned to him, or whatever.

If that’s the case, he absolutely should have mentioned that.

Sometimes content creators are so immersed in the industry’s soft-power promotion machine that they think their viewers understand what’s going on behind the scenes. It’s really bad with guitar/amp review YT channels.

Barring a manufacturer finding someone important that organically likes their stuff, they fall back upon making it seem like impt folks like their stuff. That is bad stuff to fall for man, and it corrupts content creators.

P.S. I am not saying this happened to Frank.

 

[carbonbased]

I’ll leave you with this:

Best reviewer:
Paul Harrell (RIP)

Good reviewer:
9 Hole Reviews
My main crit is they don’t disclose that they own Slate Black Industries, which “supports” the show. Which they own. And are the sole members of.

Honest Outlaw:
was just informed by @Tx_Aggie that he’s a member of the ad group Leviathan. Jury’s out.

Bad reviewer in general:
Precision Rifle Network

(He might have some ok vids, but he sucks so hard that I don’t watch him at all except in moments of “YT recommendation weakness”. His vids invariably disappoint.)

The big tell of a horrific reviewer is if they like almost everything they touch. That plus if you came away from the review not knowing anything more than reading a product brochure.

If you cannot see the difference, well then, you’re the perfect mark sucker.

 

[Tx_Aggie]

Don’t get me wrong. The Dirty Civ vid was a 5 of 10 on the shill scale. It’s saved by the actually good content.

The Kestrel bit, as I mentioned, was awesomely handled. Not shilling.

Let’s take innocent promotions, which are fine independently and one at a time.

If you hit people over and over with them, they turn into something like shilling when taken as a whole.

You want to approach a learning video like you’d talk to a friend.

I agree that in a perfect world I would prefer to watch content that was made absent any sort of paid product promotion, sponsorship deal, etc. Unfortunately that's not the world we live in, and folks who create firearms content for YouTube as a job have to find someway to earn outside of the ad revenue and view based payment scale that more PC YouTubers have access to.

Frank vid:

Good to disclose:
View attachment 8545494

Less good:
View attachment 8545495

Now I fast fwd through this vid as I’ve devoted enough time to this subject. I didn’t see any note that the Manners stock, Gap rifle, and Leupold etc were given to him, loaned to him, or whatever.

If that’s the case, he absolutely should have mentioned that.

Sometimes content creators are so immersed in the industry’s soft-power promotion machine that they think their viewers understand what’s going on behind the scenes. It’s really bad with guitar/amp review YT channels.

Barring a manufacturer finding someone important that organically likes their stuff, they fall back upon making it seem like impt folks like their stuff. That is bad stuff to fall for man, and it corrupts content creators.

P.S. I am not saying this happened to Frank.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm almost certain that the scope and rifle were provided free to Frank so that he would make videos featuring them. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I remember him boasting in the past about all of the free product he has received from manufacturers (and good for him, no hate intended). I'm sure he can confirm this, or refute it, if he likes.

I would also be shocked if there's not some monetary compensation involved (in addition to the free product) in a video like that one. Frank has a huge platform and him making what amounts to an advertisement for a GAP rifle and Leupold scope without payment just doesn't make much sense to me, considering the potential sales it would drive (especially for Leupold). Again, good on him for building and monetizing the platform, no hate intended whatsoever.

I’ll leave you with this:

Good reviewer:

Honest Outlaw

Gun reviews for the people. Make sure you subscribe to our new channel, Outlaw Life, here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXzy3Lyr8pDSs1VbWttxWUw Here is a link to donate to a local shelter in Ames Iowa that could use your support: https://www.yss.org/donate/ Want to support the channel? Get...

m.youtube.com

Bad reviewer:

Precision Rifle Network

Precision Rifle Long Range Shooting Videos. For competitors, hunters, and operators. Bringing you news, product reviews, and competition coverage in the precision rifle firearms industry! Occasionally playing with pistols, shotguns, and other firearms as well! Contact me: Joel Wise - Owner...

m.youtube.com

If you cannot see the difference, well then, you’re the perfect mark sucker.

I'll agree that PRN isn't good. While I enjoy some of Honest Outlaw's content and appreciate the fact that Chris will occasionally give negative feedback on a firearm (and sometimes uses viewer supplied funds to purchase some of the guns he reviews) the dude is still a member of Leviathan Tribe and does paid content. It's up to the viewer to judge what exactly is being provided as part of that paid content, and whether or not the folks doing the reviewing are willing to gloss over negatives to keep their real customer (the company paying for the review) happy.

General 3 — Leviathan Group

www.leviathangroupllc.com

 

[carbonbased]

I agree that in a perfect world I would prefer to watch content that was made absent any sort of paid product promotion, sponsorship deal, etc. Unfortunately that's not the world we live in, and folks who create firearms content for YouTube as a job have to find someway to earn outside of the ad revenue and view based payment scale that more PC YouTubers have access to.

If the only way to make firearms content on YT is to turn into a full-on whore…well, maybe not choose that path in life?

I’ve described a way to do it right(er)…well, as right as you can while still getting/using free stuff.

Real story: I was a member of this guitar/amp reviewer’s patreon. I slowly became aware of some bias and asked him some pointed questions. He said:

• Everyone in the industry knows it’s pay-to-play. Pay with your integrity, that is.
• Everyone in the audience knows, or should know, about these back room deals

This from an avowed Christian who plays in his church’s band every Sunday.

It was abundantly clear that talking about or disclosing this stuff in a transparent manner made him intensely uncomfortable.

Which should be a sign that you know you’re doing something wrong.

I stopped supporting him.



P.S. I’m going to look into Honest Outlaw a little more carefully. Thanks for that.

 

[DocRDS]

Same here. I'm wondering who has really shot any matches.

HAHAH I pretty much always finish last!!! (I'm slow) But I do shoot! Accuracy is up to about 75% though

I'm pretty jaded on the vids/reviews as well. But that's just me.

 

[Dead Eye Dick]

Part of the outlaw matches that are held at Altus is a free shoot. No bags, no bipods, no nothing but what GOD granted you when you were born. Standing, kneeling, sitting and prone. Just like I used to do with my old marlin 30-30 and surplus 1917 Remington Enfield in .30-06 in the 1960’s. It’s a tough stage and in three tries I have managed one (1) point. Most of the stage I just zero out. (Due a bad shoulder I can no longer physically hold a Precision Rifle in a standing position and can no longer shoot prone) But I’m no longer a contender, just a supporter. I pays my money and I has fun.

Talked with the match director today and he related that at least two new shooters weren’t coming back if they continue to have this type of stage.

I call that BS. The sport is hard. It’s pretty much supposed to be hard. If it was easy, it would be pointless. I do pride myself in making it though all 10 stages, regardless of the heat or other weather (76 years old I am). It also pains me to see fellows who are young enough to be my grandchildren drop out because it’s too hot or too hard or too anything. it’s happened this year.

Point. We need to make it doable for the new folks. But the new folks need to know that it’s tough, it’s never gonna be less tough and that’s a pretty good analogy of life itself.

Having coaches for shooters until they reach a certain level of confidence and having larger targets for those newer shooters is probably the only answer to encourage new people. But it’s gonna be tough. (Coach for just the first match isn’t enough).

I predict that the sport will size down to a core group of shooters nationwide and that will be that. It’s hard and not everyone has either the talent, the resilience or the no-quit attitude to stick with it. Let us hope for the young fellows in the sport that core is large enough to be self sustaining.

 

[ma smith]

What does that even mean?

Sig cross is a 7lb truck gun/backpack hunting rifle...
classic example of "bad idea" prs gun

 

[hlee]

Wow, this thread really needs some Summers Eve.

 

[Cynical]

Part of the outlaw matches that are held at Altus is a free shoot. No bags, no bipods, no nothing but what GOD granted you when you were born. Standing, kneeling, sitting and prone. Just like I used to do with my old marlin 30-30 and surplus 1917 Remington Enfield in .30-06 in the 1960’s. It’s a tough stage and in three tries I have managed one (1) point. Most of the stage I just zero out. (Due a bad shoulder I can no longer physically hold a Precision Rifle in a standing position and can no longer shoot prone) But I’m no longer a contender, just a supporter. I pays my money and I has fun.

Talked with the match director today and he related that at least two new shooters weren’t coming back if they continue to have this type of stage.

I call that BS. The sport is hard. It’s pretty much supposed to be hard. If it was easy, it would be pointless. I do pride myself in making it though all 10 stages, regardless of the heat or other weather (76 years old I am). It also pains me to see fellows who are young enough to be my grandchildren drop out because it’s too hot or too hard or too anything. it’s happened this year.

Point. We need to make it doable for the new folks. But the new folks need to know that it’s tough, it’s never gonna be less tough and that’s a pretty good analogy of life itself.

Having coaches for shooters until they reach a certain level of confidence and having larger targets for those newer shooters is probably the only answer to encourage new people. But it’s gonna be tough. (Coach for just the first match isn’t enough).

I predict that the sport will size down to a core group of shooters nationwide and that will be that. It’s hard and not everyone has either the talent, the resilience or the no-quit attitude to stick with it. Let us hope for the young fellows in the sport that core is large enough to be self sustaining.

I think the standing, kneeling, sitting, prone unsupported stuff is fantastic except for the reality that mission creep and gear creep has “evolved” us into having 20lb+ rifles. So I hate that stage for its difficulty with the equipment we use even though I usually perform nearer to the top on it. Maybe that’s age, maybe it’s strength. But one day I won’t have either of those.

To Jim’s credit, it’s something a little different in a world of routine. It challenges or punishes the gear race in modern “barricade benchrest” events. What’s he supposed to do as an MD? I don’t want same shit, different day matches because the novelty really wore off a few years ago. To that point, I don’t even participate as much anymore because I don’t have the same competitive burn to beat myself. It was never about winning, but now I struggle to even want to get out there. I love the process—reloading the best rounds, thinking through position building, etc.—but I’m almost to the point that the competitive drive in these matches has escaped me. I have no answer on how to fix that problem for myself.

That said, I do like NRL Hunter with my 11lb 15 oz hunting rifle. I like different venues and different looks. It’s a different challenge altogether than the 4-5 basic barricade or prop positions that make up (with slight variations) 90% of PRS-type matches. And even though I don’t shoot in the class, I like that anyone can bring their 30-06 and Vari-x 3 and shoot skills division just for fun at a very reasonable cost. That’s the entry path and growth path for those matches. I don’t think there is an equivalent in PRS. I don’t know how there really would be an equivalent given what PRS matches have become.

 

[Mormegil87]

I think the standing, kneeling, sitting, prone unsupported stuff is fantastic except for the reality that mission creep and gear creep has “evolved” us into having 20lb+ rifles. So I hate that stage for its difficulty with the equipment we use even though I usually perform nearer to the top on it. Maybe that’s age, maybe it’s strength. But one day I won’t have either of those.

To Jim’s credit, it’s something a little different in a world of routine. It challenges or punishes the gear race in modern “barricade benchrest” events. What’s he supposed to do as an MD? I don’t want same shit, different day matches because the novelty really wore off a few years ago. To that point, I don’t even participate as much anymore because I don’t have the same competitive burn to beat myself. It was never about winning, but now I struggle to even want to get out there. I love the process—reloading the best rounds, thinking through position building, etc.—but I’m almost to the point that the competitive drive in these matches has escaped me. I have no answer on how to fix that problem for myself.

That said, I do like NRL Hunter with my 11lb 15 oz hunting rifle. I like different venues and different looks. It’s a different challenge altogether than the 4-5 basic barricade or prop positions that make up (with slight variations) 90% of PRS-type matches. And even though I don’t shoot in the class, I like that anyone can bring their 30-06 and Vari-x 3 and shoot skills division just for fun at a very reasonable cost. That’s the entry path and growth path for those matches. I don’t think there is an equivalent in PRS. I don’t know how there really would be an equivalent given what PRS matches have become.

This is why I got out this year. The novelty wore off, especially for the amount of time required to be competitive. If the PRS wants to continue down the current path that's fine, like I said I hope they're successful. More successful businesses in the 2A space is a good thing.

As far as gear, a lot of it is marketing hype. "Buy this level, you'll get extra points". "If you don't have this timer, are you even being competitive". "This chassis has hardly changed from the last version but we're going to charge $300 more and you need another 3-500 in accessories to make it fully functional" i bought into it hook line and sinker for a long time, the gear race was part of the fun, until it wasn't. It's good to see Ben Gossett win the season with an older Matrix BA chassis.

 

[Rob01]

The gear race has always been there. Nothing new. I laugh when I see people say you need that electronic level as it’s better than a bubble when in reality you rarely check it when shooting a stage but pony up that money. I used an electronic level about 18 years ago and it worked but funny how now it’s “new!” so buy one. Lol Same for timers. People just need to be smarter as they move on in the sport but we have all been there. Is what it is.

 

[lash]

Talked with the match director today and he related that at least two new shooters weren’t coming back if they continue to have this type of stage.

I ended up with that same problem. I told people upfront four years ago that my long range .22 matches would always include one stage with positional shooting in it. After the first year and very low scores with mostly zeros and me making targets larger and closer, I adjusted to one stage that would include 6 rounds positional followed by four rounds of some sort of supported shots.

Still got regular complaints since many of the regulars were also centerfire PRS shooters and had matched the weight, chassis and setup to their CF rifle. Thus many 25+# rifles.

This year, after continuing complaints about that type of stage, I relented and removed that type of stage. Face it, since a match is a product, if you don’t offer the product they majority of customers are after, your sales (attendance) will drop off.

Wow, this thread really needs some Summers Eve.

Why? There’s already enough of us douches in here to take care of that problem.

That said, I do like NRL Hunter with my 11lb 15 oz hunting rifle. I like different venues and different looks. It’s a different challenge altogether than the 4-5 basic barricade or prop positions that make up (with slight variations) 90% of PRS-type matches. And even though I don’t shoot in the class, I like that anyone can bring their 30-06 and Vari-x 3 and shoot skills division just for fun at a very reasonable cost. That’s the entry path and growth path for those matches. I don’t think there is an equivalent in PRS. I don’t know how there really would be an equivalent given what PRS matches have become.

The two are different niches that will both have their following and really don’t compete that much for shooters except maybe in some regions. To some degree it’s no different than other sports in that aspect.

 

[NiteQwill]

Local outlaw match had a COF that was positional shooting for 1-2 stages. Guess what? It no longer exists.

The PRS and PRS22 matches sell out...

You either cater to your customers or you become a relic.

 

[DocRDS]

Reminds me of IDPA BUG matches. Run with your carry gun rather than your 4k infinity. Its nice to switch it up. I was a bastard with that 12lb trigger Makarov though. Not a lot of people like to "push" themselves though.

"The old is safe, the old is familiar, so why change?"

I'd love a PRS match with BDL style rifles (probably most common rifle out there) and I may or may not be shooting an M1A next year. But I think I'm rare.

 

[hlee]

Why? There’s already enough of us douches in here to take care of that problem.

The crying about “shills” got pretty wild for a minute. And, it goes along with my contention, quoted below…

Remember, there are dudes that want to see feminine hygiene ads because targeted advertisement is too invasive…

 

[lash]

Reminds me of IDPA BUG matches. Run with your carry gun rather than your 4k infinity. Its nice to switch it up. I was a bastard with that 12lb trigger Makarov though. Not a lot of people like to "push" themselves though.

"The old is safe, the old is familiar, so why change?"

I'd love a PRS match with BDL style rifles (probably most common rifle out there) and I may or may not be shooting an M1A next year. But I think I'm rare.

I shot the local IDPA BUG match once since at the time I was a weekly competitor in the local IDPA matches. Had a blast and I think that they only offered it one more time and I was busy, so that’s that.

I was shooting my S&W 642 with .38 special wadcutter loads so was tricky. But fun. Silly contrived stages like sitting on a toilet with weapon on counter/table 1 foot out of reach, engage by grabbing weapon and firing on two different distance close targets and a couple swingers. Maybe a hostage target. Good fun though.

 

[carbonbased]

Remember, there are dudes that want to see feminine hygiene ads because targeted advertisement is too invasive…

The crying about “shills” got pretty wild for a minute. And, it goes along with my contention, quoted below…

Pro tip:
I see zero ads anywhere on the internet when using the mobile Safari browser.

Well, I might see 2-3 seconds of an ad on YT once every three days before it’s zapped.

I use an iPhone, obv.

Just use ad blockers (1Blocker) plus some other shortcuts. Keep the blockers updated. Also, to KO YT ads either immediately refresh (sometimes works) or full-screen it. The latter somehow blocks YT from inserting ads during playback.

YT has recently limited the max resolution for mobile browser videos to 360p, but I don’t gaf. If I want high rez I’ll use my laptop.

 

[Oldloser]

This is why I got out this year. The novelty wore off, especially for the amount of time required to be competitive. If the PRS wants to continue down the current path that's fine, like I said I hope they're successful. More successful businesses in the 2A space is a good thing.

As far as gear, a lot of it is marketing hype. "Buy this level, you'll get extra points". "If you don't have this timer, are you even being competitive". "This chassis has hardly changed from the last version but we're going to charge $300 more and you need another 3-500 in accessories to make it fully functional" i bought into it hook line and sinker for a long time, the gear race was part of the fun, until it wasn't. It's good to see Ben Gossett win the season with an older Matrix BA chassis.

But it was a new barrel. And it would be interesting to look at his chassis very closely. I sure as hell will not change a dang thing on mine now that I have it shooting 1/4 MOA all the time and keeping the exact same zero when it's back together.

The top shooters are not only very dedicated, but they have tweaked their gear constantly to eliminate all but the human as the variable. I have hundreds of hours in my rifle and my processes around it. It's the gear but at a point you don't need anything new.

A lot of this sport is having a rifle that shoots the same all the time. I often watch other shooters and think that it's their rifle not them. A lot of hunting rifles have the same flaws and they are easily fixed with about 100 hours of effort and patience.

 

[Dead Eye Dick]

One thing we must never forget….

 

[Oldloser]

I agree that in a perfect world I would prefer to watch content that was made absent any sort of paid product promotion, sponsorship deal, etc. Unfortunately that's not the world we live in, and folks who create firearms content for YouTube as a job have to find someway to earn outside of the ad revenue and view based payment scale that more PC YouTubers have access to.



Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm almost certain that the scope and rifle were provided free to Frank so that he would make videos featuring them. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I remember him boasting in the past about all of the free product he has received from manufacturers (and good for him, no hate intended). I'm sure he can confirm this, or refute it, if he likes.

I would also be shocked if there's not some monetary compensation involved (in addition to the free product) in a video like that one. Frank has a huge platform and him making what amounts to an advertisement for a GAP rifle and Leupold scope without payment just doesn't make much sense to me, considering the potential sales it would drive (especially for Leupold). Again, good on him for building and monetizing the platform, no hate intended whatsoever.



I'll agree that PRN isn't good. While I enjoy some of Honest Outlaw's content and appreciate the fact that Chris will occasionally give negative feedback on a firearm (and sometimes uses viewer supplied funds to purchase some of the guns he reviews) the dude is still a member of Leviathan Tribe and does paid content. It's up to the viewer to judge what exactly is being provided as part of that paid content, and whether or not the folks doing the reviewing are willing to gloss over negatives to keep their real customer (the company paying for the review) happy.

General 3 — Leviathan Group

www.leviathangroupllc.com

View attachment 8545545

Great job putting this all together.

I recently interviewed for an executive VP job and in researching the industry and firm found this pretty much this goes on everywhere. The entire marketing industry has changed in the last decade to this model for consumer end products. The firm I interviewed at was not doing that and admitted in the interview that their sales were declining. I found out a friends wife is an IG influencer with 4 M followers and she helped me understand how it worked.

My deck showed them their brand message was shit and not consistent across channels. And their customer service sucked and they were not managing negative reviews. Needless to say I did not get the job - feedback I got was that the owner of the firm who was in the interview had personally done their outreach strategy and did not want to change it. We shall see.

At the end of my deck was the message that the firms that found a way to talk to their consumers directly AND had a product strategy around taking feedback from them to make better products - would win. In retrospect I should have led with that idea, and had some BS about finding a way to do it, then spend time with the owner on the ground for him to see with his eyes.

 

[carbonbased]

One thing we must never forget….

View attachment 8547868

A CD stuck in an apple?

lol that’s the worst “apple with a slice cut out of it” illustration that I’ve ever seen.

 

[carbonbased]

Great job putting this all together.

I recently interviewed for an executive VP job and in researching the industry and firm found this pretty much this goes on everywhere. The entire marketing industry has changed in the last decade to this model for consumer end products. The firm I interviewed at was not doing that and admitted in the interview that their sales were declining. I found out a friends wife is an IG influencer with 4 M followers and she helped me understand how it worked.

My deck showed them their brand message was shit and not consistent across channels. And their customer service sucked and they were not managing negative reviews. Needless to say I did not get the job - feedback I got was that the owner of the firm who was in the interview had personally done their outreach strategy and did not want to change it. We shall see.

At the end of my deck was the message that the firms that found a way to talk to their consumers directly AND had a product strategy around taking feedback from them to make better products - would win. In retrospect I should have led with that idea, and had some BS about finding a way to do it, then spend time with the owner on the ground for him to see with his eyes.

Next time come in with a logo redesign proposal that is so breathtakingly full of bullshit that they have no choice but to give you millions!

Confused?

I give you the successfully-pitched-in-2008 Pepsi logo redesign proposal for $1 million from the (retarded grifters) Arnell Group. And yes, it’s a true story and yes, Pepsi did give them $1m, and yes, Pepsi rebranded in 2009.

A little background and a download link to the pitch in PDF format:


Same thing, different d/l link:

Pepsi's Nonsensical Logo Redesign Document: $1 Million for This?

Pepsi paid $1 million for its new logo (even though it looks a lot like other brands' logos), but the details of exactly how Arnell Group justified that astonishing fee have remained hidden -- until now. AgencySpy obtained a fantastic PDF of a work-in-progress document from Arnell on the logo...

www.cbsnews.com

https://www.goldennumber.net/wp-content/uploads/pepsi-arnell-021109.pdf

This pitch is the reason Pepsi fucked their logo up and gave us this:

Pepsi recently rebranded again btw. Thank god.