2012 SHOT SHOW SUMMATION -- Part ONE...
I left early yesterday and spent all day negotiating airports and window seats (which I dislike) to return home last night to a snowdrift where our car got stuck. To say I was 'beat' (and I'm still tired) would be beyond obvious. As I've posted before this was not my first Shot Show, nor do I believe it will be my last, but it was different.
For one thing, the Sands Convention Center has made a number of improvements. The aisles are wider and the numbering system of the booths is better, but there is still NO yellow brick road or central avenue off of which one can orient your sense of direction. In fact, due to the trapezoid shape of the damn place I was constantly finding myself 'lost' and disoriented. (Not a new experience for sure, but at least in my own defense THIS was well before 6:00PM!) It was hard to find the specific entrance/exit one used to the enter the place with the result being when you finally did leave the exhibit hall, you had to figure out how to traverse the rabbit warren maze of hallways and rooms belonging to the host hotel in order to even find daylight!
Personally, I like Orlando's exhibit hall far better than this cave.
The section of the industry that I've been a working member of for well over two decades has changed and the following observations and opinions (that are totally mine and belong to no one else) are going to rub more than a few of the denizens of the blogosphere all raw, butt hurt and angry, but they remain my opinions.
Gun print journalism is still alive. It hasn't died. Yes, it's lost a lot weight and it's not as big as it once was. Its place in the structure of things has changed perhaps and been diminished. It is no longer the Big Dog of the business in a couple of ways and some of that is due to the influence of 'bloggers' and 'blogging'. The 'immediacy' of having a new gun on the cover of a gun publication has gone away due to bloggers. I don't believe 'bloggers', however other than a handful of specific operations, have assumed any of the 'power' lost by the magazines.
I base these conclusions on the most reliable guide out there when it comes to business....MONEY!
The MONEY is NOT generally going to 'bloggers', with the possible exception of GUNBLAST and some others and even then it is merely a trickle when compared to what's moving to television advertising. This is going to have an effect over the long term, I believe, because MONEY people like to see immediate results or at the very least a connection between their advertising efforts and a sales increase.
Bloggers are really good at 'negative' advertising and exercising that kind of power, but they have yet to master the 'positive' advertising in a meaningful way with the result being the industry doesn't want to alienate bloggers in any way, shape or form, but a good number of the manufacturers and print journalism (because they are frequently, if not constantly, being approached by 'bloggers' wanting to become print writers) really, really wish they would just go away.
(Why do bloggers want to become print journalists? Because they want to get PAID for what they're doing. A big shortcoming that will always surround blogging.)
Negative advertising creates fear, but it doesn't create advocates. MONEY likes and wants advocates.
Print journalism and, now, television creates advocates. Bloggers and blogging have yet to master that aspect of commercial business and therefore I see a conflict coming.
The fiasco at 'Media Day' had many complaining behind the scenes afterwards. The line for credentials on that first day illustrated the problem. It was over 200 yards long as bus after bus disgorged their steerage passengers eagerly anticipating their new found journalistic power. In casual and not-so-casual conversations, I heard complaints from both manufacturers and others that it was wrong because time is a commodity and they didn't want to waste it on some dude from Dubuque who worked off a laptop in his mother's basement.
I could be wrong, but it wouldn't surprise me the organizers of the Media Day event over the next months will come under great pressure to stratify credentials with some sort of color coded badge or admission system. Otherwise the manufacturers will expand the practice of holding media events off site with admission being by private invitation only, which is what happened out at the Desert Sportsman Club this year while the Media Day event attracted all the bloggers. There were others I learned later as well at other non-disclosed sites, but you have to be invited.
Right now there is a lot of confusion in the sectors I've haunted for so many years because of this new digital technology, but I'll keep betting on the MONEY because it generally gets what it wants and MONEY will sort things out faster than what many expect because this is a commercial industry, not a social order. It's not even as stupid as politics.
It's just business...
(more later today after I get out of bed for the 2nd time)
All The Best,
Frank W. James
For one thing, the Sands Convention Center has made a number of improvements. The aisles are wider and the numbering system of the booths is better, but there is still NO yellow brick road or central avenue off of which one can orient your sense of direction. In fact, due to the trapezoid shape of the damn place I was constantly finding myself 'lost' and disoriented. (Not a new experience for sure, but at least in my own defense THIS was well before 6:00PM!) It was hard to find the specific entrance/exit one used to the enter the place with the result being when you finally did leave the exhibit hall, you had to figure out how to traverse the rabbit warren maze of hallways and rooms belonging to the host hotel in order to even find daylight!
Personally, I like Orlando's exhibit hall far better than this cave.
The section of the industry that I've been a working member of for well over two decades has changed and the following observations and opinions (that are totally mine and belong to no one else) are going to rub more than a few of the denizens of the blogosphere all raw, butt hurt and angry, but they remain my opinions.
Gun print journalism is still alive. It hasn't died. Yes, it's lost a lot weight and it's not as big as it once was. Its place in the structure of things has changed perhaps and been diminished. It is no longer the Big Dog of the business in a couple of ways and some of that is due to the influence of 'bloggers' and 'blogging'. The 'immediacy' of having a new gun on the cover of a gun publication has gone away due to bloggers. I don't believe 'bloggers', however other than a handful of specific operations, have assumed any of the 'power' lost by the magazines.
I base these conclusions on the most reliable guide out there when it comes to business....MONEY!
The MONEY is NOT generally going to 'bloggers', with the possible exception of GUNBLAST and some others and even then it is merely a trickle when compared to what's moving to television advertising. This is going to have an effect over the long term, I believe, because MONEY people like to see immediate results or at the very least a connection between their advertising efforts and a sales increase.
Bloggers are really good at 'negative' advertising and exercising that kind of power, but they have yet to master the 'positive' advertising in a meaningful way with the result being the industry doesn't want to alienate bloggers in any way, shape or form, but a good number of the manufacturers and print journalism (because they are frequently, if not constantly, being approached by 'bloggers' wanting to become print writers) really, really wish they would just go away.
(Why do bloggers want to become print journalists? Because they want to get PAID for what they're doing. A big shortcoming that will always surround blogging.)
Negative advertising creates fear, but it doesn't create advocates. MONEY likes and wants advocates.
Print journalism and, now, television creates advocates. Bloggers and blogging have yet to master that aspect of commercial business and therefore I see a conflict coming.
The fiasco at 'Media Day' had many complaining behind the scenes afterwards. The line for credentials on that first day illustrated the problem. It was over 200 yards long as bus after bus disgorged their steerage passengers eagerly anticipating their new found journalistic power. In casual and not-so-casual conversations, I heard complaints from both manufacturers and others that it was wrong because time is a commodity and they didn't want to waste it on some dude from Dubuque who worked off a laptop in his mother's basement.
I could be wrong, but it wouldn't surprise me the organizers of the Media Day event over the next months will come under great pressure to stratify credentials with some sort of color coded badge or admission system. Otherwise the manufacturers will expand the practice of holding media events off site with admission being by private invitation only, which is what happened out at the Desert Sportsman Club this year while the Media Day event attracted all the bloggers. There were others I learned later as well at other non-disclosed sites, but you have to be invited.
Right now there is a lot of confusion in the sectors I've haunted for so many years because of this new digital technology, but I'll keep betting on the MONEY because it generally gets what it wants and MONEY will sort things out faster than what many expect because this is a commercial industry, not a social order. It's not even as stupid as politics.
It's just business...
(more later today after I get out of bed for the 2nd time)
All The Best,
Frank W. James
Labels: SHOT SHOW REPORT
20 Comments:
None of this effects me in any detrimental way as of yet, but I feel you're probably correct. That doesn't make it good, but anyone hoping to pick up a few dollars will have to accept the truth of it.
I think you're right Frank, and it IS all about money. Thanks for the update, and I think your other points are well made and will probably result in a 'tiered' system going forward (and of course the bloggers will scream about discrimination)...
Frank,
I suspect the growing body of smartphone 'apps' will be the venue of the future. Distributors will be able to enroll subscribers to get to their content, which will open the door to paid, permission-based distribution similar to cable used to be and magazines are.
I think the hey-day of TV and magazines are past; people are moving to online content, and a growing number are further moving onto smart phones instead of desktop or portable computers. The likelihood that the paid-for venue of the future will lie between for-pay websites and smartphone apps, I think, is nearly here.
Brick and mortar stores still exist, years after Amazon.com started making a profit. Gun magazines still sell, even after many municipal newspapers have folded. Radio stations, and programs, still plug on, years after TV 'replaced' the role of radio for entertainment and news.
But now online stories, and pictures, and events, are ever-more-prominent in TV, cable, and print news, reports, and entertainment.
Yellow pages ads have been big business in the last decade. But more people are finding that getting the word out and customers in, costs less online in various forms. And that, as when there was only one yellow pages or phone book in each community, the go-to source for most new customers is ever-increasingly online search engines and respected word-of-mouth, from names and sites that have earned respect.
It might be that the total revenue stream for writers is expanding, because the internet has created opportunity for many thousands -- very few of which make much money at all.
It might be that the SHOT Show is a PR event, a leftover from the days when PR meant getting the print media to notice you and carry your word.
It will be interesting to see if the off-site, invite-only events come to haunt vendors or pay off. Estranging the "new media", particularly if there is a generation divide occurring, won't be a long-term solution, and might well kill the goose with the eggs.
Luck!
Judging by the turnout at the blogger meetup anda scan of the badges in the media room, I'm not certain the crush at media day was due to hordes of new media types.I think it'd behoove the NSSF to release the actual stats on new media vs. "traditional" media at SHOT to see who was actually there.
As for negative results driven by new media, yes, they're out there (on the NSSF's own blog, no less). However, one of the things I mentioned numerous times to the NSSF is that they need to show off the positive examples of NSSF companies engaging new media and succeeding. The fact of the matter is, for small companies who don't have Ruger's marketing budget, reaching out to bloggers and forums makes a lot of ROI sense, especially given that Google doesn't allow ads for most firearms-related subjects, and getting involved with new media gets around those gatekeepers. Other businesses are reaping the rewards of the digital age, and the firearms industry will as well. It's not a question of "if", it's only a question of "when and who".
Brad and Kevin: You're both missing the point that up till now Bloggers and the new media only know "...how to beat the dog!"
The new media has demonstrated it knows how to damage and ruin a companies sales virtually overnight, but where is the opposite example where in a period of 24 hours they've put over a million dollars in a gun company's sales????
And where they have the power to do it repeatedly????
Until that day arrives, the new media will be treated with fear and NOT respect and believe me the two in this instance is NOT the same.
MONEY demands results; as in positive results and this is interpreted as "a demonstrated increase in sales revenue due to a specific event"; television, radio to some extent and even print media can do that.
Again, I ask the question when has the new media and bloggers done that? And on a one-time basis, but repeatedly?
You can't continue to beat the family dog and then expect him to be friendly to you. 'Treat' rewards are a better way to train the dog as opposed to constant cruelity.
I see little difference in this situation...
All The Best,
Frank W. James
Actually, I'd disagree to the point of vehemence about bloggers "beating the family dog". Quite the opposite: We love this stuff, we do it for free. If there's money involved, so much the better. I'm not CZ fanboy because they pay me, I do it because I love their products and I want them to be better. If they screw up, I'll say so, not out of spite, but out of a desire for better product from a brand I trust. We want gun companies to succeed, but by that same token, if someone belittles us because we do it for love and not money, yeah, that's kinda hard to take lightly.
It's not up to bloggers to provide the numbers on a company's marketing ROI: That's the company's job, not mine. Have gun companies "cracked the code" on making money off the internet? If they have, they've not telling anyone.
I do this stuff for a living, so I completely understand the need for ROI. And as an internet marketing type, I can tell you the gun companies are about eight or so years behind the times. Blogs have been "big time" since 2004 when they brought down Dan Rather and gun companies are only now realizing the power of new media and how it can be used as a positive source of action (think Tea Party).
Now, do we bloggers talk down to "dead tree media"? Yeah, probably, but I'm a J-school survivor so at least I understand the traditions a bit. There will always be a demand for hard-copy media, but the bottom for that market has yet to be reached. What will take their place (and the place of the current model of firearms TV shows) has yet to determined
Gun companies will change: They HAVE to change. What that will look like, quite frankly, I don't know, and I work in the industry. But it will happen, because the Internet, with it's disintermediation of information is a natural fit for the disintermediation of personal protection that a firearm provides. We CLOBBER the antis online. Let's keep it that way.
Frank, this was a very intelligent assessment of the media part of the industry.
Your analysis of why the money goes where it does makes perfect sense.
I do believe the online media will be capable of attracting that money in the future but not so long as it is a scattered community where (from the point of view of the manufacturer) it's not only difficult to tell who's good and who isn't but most importantly so few have the reach to make a positive difference.
From a business point of view, there is a growing need for a PJmedia/huffpo for guns and everything related to them (and it will be integrated with TV programs).
Michael Bane has, I think, a good business model.
Just my opinion.
Terry
"I don't believe 'bloggers', however other than a handful of specific operations, have assumed any of the 'power' lost by the magazines."
They most certainly have. I'm 31 years old. Outside of an NRA magazine that comes with membership I don't get gun magazines.
I don't watch television much, and when I do it's either via Hulu where I see 6 commercials per show or via my DVR where I fast forward through them all.
It's not intentional, but I'm extremely hard to reach via "old media" for advertising. Pour all of the money you want into them -- it's not going to show up on my radar. The last time I saw a magazine ad that got me excited was 2001, for the Springfield XD, and I found that because a buddy had a magazine laying on his coffee table.
Haven't bought one yet.
Just because you're seeing the money go toward the TV industry doesn't mean that's going to work. Industries have been known to make errors.
Now, I'll grant that all of my (limited) research and education into advertising in the new age is centered around local retail shops. We're being told that word of mouth is now more important than it's been since the 80's. With Facebook having 18 jillion people on it word travels fast now. Usually that means bad word, but if you can go above and beyond for a customer they'll start pimping your own product for you.
Granted, we sell plants. There's very little investment into the actual product for the consumer.
But for durable goods, like guns or appliances, stuff in the $300-$1500 range, people are starting to ask friends (online) before they make a move. It's cheap, easy, fast, and they trust their friends. Of course, I think this was still pretty popular before the interwebs had everybody on it, but people I haven't spoken to in 5-10 years can easily find me and ask my opinion on something.
Things are changing.
Justin Buist: Until I see some solid research that says you're right. I'm going to watch what the SERIOUS MONEY does and right now it's NOT doing what you say.
My feeling is your beliefs are a myth promoted by the new media, but its not backed up by the facts.
MONEY seldom spends foolishly, in any venue; i.e. the bank fraud disaster. They came out of it pretty good because they knew the politicians.
That didn't happen by accident.
The new media will never reach commercial acceptance until it can demonstrate to MONEY it can produce the desired results (in terms of direct, traceable sales) and despite your personal opinions and youth, all the old tech like television, radio and even print journalism can do a decent job of answering that requirement.
That's not saying the new media can't deliver. That's just saying that in today's world, right now, it AIN'T HAPPENING.
My son is involved with a southern California comedy group that posts stuff daily and they average, AVERAGE, 3 million hits a day, yet they struggle to pay bills. Yeah, they're good, but it takes more than being just good or even GREAT to be commercial and, more importantly, PROFITABLE!!!!
Show me the profit in blogging, web-seriers, twitter or any of the other new media, because so far it's been pretty damn elusive...
All The Best,
Frank W. James
Kevin: You reinforce my point "Blogs have been big time since 2004 when they brought down Dan Rather..."
Just another example of bloggers 'beating the dog', so it worked in everyone's favor. It's still NOT marketing in a postiive manner.
Just another reason to FEAR bloggers, NOT embrace them.
Bloggers have to demonstrate a method or a means for commercial profit in order for MONEY to embrace them. 'Cause it won't do it out of the goodness of its heart (if it has one) or because it's the RIGHT thing to do.
It all involves PROFIT and everyone seems to have forgotten that aspect of our capitalistic system.
Business is in business to make MONEY and that is all BIG MONEY understands. Like the dog that gets beaten it sees no need to spend time or even interest in the kids that continually throw rocks at them.
If you think otherwise, you are NOT capitalistic oriented and should acknowledge your communistic tendencies...
All The Best,
Frank W. James
Speaking as a selfish consumer I thought the internet coverage of the show this year was lousy just because there was so little of it and only from a few sources.
As far as the money goes I only get one gun magazine and am bored by gun TV. So it is internet boards for me and I am much more interested in the opinions of guys who spent their own money on guns and equipment and what they think than the guys worrying about editors and advertisers.
So the industry can try to shut out the bloggers but I don't see how they will profit from it in the long run. The world has changed.
Anon 4:11: The industry is NOT shutting the bloggers out. That's why they got press credentials at the shot show, but neither are they embracing them in a meaningful way.
For that matter, bloggers aren't maximizing the situation either.
Here's the deal part of this is a cultural problem; the young ignoring the traditional sources for the reasons stated, while at the same time the industry, if it can't find a method responsible for direct, traceable sales increases, deciding the new media MAY HAVE potential, but they are going with the methods that work the best for it at the present time.
Just because you don't watch gun/hunting tv doesn't mean it doesn't work for the industry, because it clearly does.
Just because you don't read gun magazines, doesn't mean they still don't have circulation and readers because they clearly do.
Just because you get all your info off the interweb doesn't mean the advertising execs for the gun industry are going to cater to your interests; because so far many within that community feel whether they say it out loud or not, this community doesn't respond with a recognizable 'method' for traceable increases in sales...
And THAT is the name of the game...
All The Best,
Frank W. James
One thing that I've increasingly noticed is the deep discounting of magazine subscriptions. The magazines are willing to loss-lead on the subscriber rates just so they can point to the distribution numbers when justifying their advertisement rates.
For we wee little bloggers to start having this positive rather than negative effect; they've got to start trusting us.
They don't trust us because of that negative effect we've demonstrated so well.
That negative effect, though, shows that bloggers have the power and reach to effect the positive.
Trust needs to be earned just like the fear was, that's in we blogger's corner.
"Justin Buist: Until I see some solid research that says you're right. I'm going to watch what the SERIOUS MONEY does and right now it's NOT doing what you say.
My feeling is your beliefs are a myth promoted by the new media, but its not backed up by the facts."
Fact: A $1200 ad in print media didn't pay for itself when it ran this winter for our garden center. The $2 we spent posting a picture to Facebook of our Poinsettias did result in a sale. That's pretty good considering it costs us an average of $6 in traditional advertising to make a sale during peak season.
As a content creator (in print and TV) you're watching where the SMART MONEY goes in those venues. And I'm sure they're right in that TV is where it should be right now. NICS checks are through the roof, I think we're seeing a lot of first time buyers, and they're impressionable. So, TV is where it's at. It's not like first time buyers are signed up for SWAT Magazine or Guns & Ammo.
But, as a retailer I know we can't ignore the "new media" -- we have to play that game. For one it can result in sales. Secondly you don't want a void where the only message is negative.
You tell me that's not where the SMART MONEY is going but I've got Remington and Sig popping up on my Facebook feed all the time. That's SMART but there's not much MONEY behind it because it doesn't take hardly any. All they've got to do is pay somebody on staff with a modicum of public decorum to maintain their online image. Given that it should very well be a part-time gig that could be $10-$20k a year. That's pretty much nothing, even for our little garden center. For a large company like Remington or Sig I can't imagine they even notice it.
It doesn't cost much to get on the "new media" bandwagon but it'll cost a whole lot for those that don't.
Justin: I accept this portion of your position for your business.
But there are a lot of business models that don't apply to the firearms business for various reasons; gov't regulations such as the NICS check being only one of them.
Yes, every firm is working with the new media and for the reason you mention; it's cheap, but is it traceable when it comes to the firearms industry?
There still remains the problem of the 'dog' getting beaten and not rewarded?
If you're right, over the next few years NSSF will grant even more privileges to bloggers and new media at Shot.
If I'm right we will begin to see them marginalized...
All The Best,
Frank W. James
If new media is squeezed out by the NSSF they will suffer because of it. My guess is that some people who make money writing articles have their shirts in a wad because others are stealing their thunder.
One thing is certain - traditional media is dying. I follow the money in publishing because I'm a writer. At every turn I'm hearing the same thing over and over - "We have to get online, we have to embrace new media."
This response is from major publishing houses, magazines and newspapers. I've been in journalism for 30 years. The way forward is new media. Those who try to fight it are no different than those who tried to stop the switch from manual to automatic transmissions. Sure, you can buy a manual but most don't.
SGB: I don't see NSSF shutting anyone "out", but it wouldn't surprise me to see different levels being applied to their press credentials. (After all, NSSG is subject to pressure or else Paul Barrett wouldn't have his press credentials pulled from the 2012 Shot Show.)
I'm old enough that's it is not going to affect me one way or the other economically and I've had a good run in terms of my professional writing life, but it does raise certain issues about the economics and professionalism of media distribution in our industry.
No one to my knowledge is making the kind of money (even without being adjusted for inflation) with the new media that the first gun magazines enjoyed back in the 1950's when they started.
In fact, only those enjoying numbers that are virtually impossible in the gun market are seeing any real MONEY with the new media and those numbers still don't compare to the heyday of thick Madison Ave. 'Slick' women's magazines. Even NEWSWEEK has failed and tried to survive as 'new media'.
So, the question really is will professional writing (in any form) be doomed by the 'volunterism' of the new media and gun bloggers?
Because like it or not blogging has yet to find a way with all the technology available to be highly profitable.
The only way seen so far to earn income off a blog is the old method; vis-a-vis advertising, and that raises suspicions among those who now read blogs to the point creditability is lost almost immediately.
You say you're a writer and I assume by that statement you mean professionallyy, so I ask you, "HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PAY YOUR BILLS AS A WRITER WITH THE NEW MEDIA?"...
All The Best,
Frank W. James
I will pay my bills as a writer the way I have for the last eight years. Diversity. I don't write about one subject or in one medium. And I've done well online but the realm of firearms is different for me because in firearms I'm defending my human right to self defense. Ergo, when it comes to growing the community of gun owners, bloggers, vloggers, etc, I will continue to welcome more people because with more people we all win with respect to freedom. Freedom is the core issue and in pursuit of it I'm willing to forgo nice paydays to insure the survival of the right to keep and bear arms.
10 years ago publishing houses said "We will never convince authors to move to digital media" and yet, now, authors take the lead. Those who adapted are doing well. Those who didn't ended up in the dung pile.
Good writers can sell and ship.
By the way, I do admire you Mr. James. You are a very classy, top of the line writer. I'm just of a differing opinion on the role of magazines and new media which, by the way, isn't new but rising.
SGB: Thank you for your kind words.
I've reposted this exchange (with expansion) a new post today.
Thank you for being a gentleman...
All The Best,
Frank W. James
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home