*Full disclosure: I am pro-guns. I don’t think an assault
weapons ban will solve whatever social epidemic plagues us. I also don’t think
that banning assault weapons would be the worst compromise ever, but I also
don’t own one. I also don’t own a regular handgun, but that is mainly because I
don’t have the money to buy one, although I would like to at some point in the
near future. Basically, I’m middle of the road on all of this, but am open to
both sides of the discussion, as long as it doesn’t involve irrelevant pie
charts or gun violence graphs posted on Facebook.
I also
have a friend who’s been a vendor at the Eastern Sports and Outdoor show for
the last six years or so. He owns many guns and puts most hunters to shame
because he derives most of his meat from deer he either kills with one arrow or
a couple bullets (imagine that, being skilled enough to not need a 30-round
clip to hunt). He’s also built his business from the ground up, starting it
right before the recession, and nurturing it into a pretty stable business in a
pretty unstable industry. I actually helped him at his display the first year
he exhibited. This kind of show was crucial to his business in the beginning
for a couple reasons: 1) it was local, as was his business, and 2) it jumpstarted
the year and brought in many new customers and future customers.
Upon the cancellation of this year’s show, he will lose tens
of thousands of dollars in revenue.
Harrisburg, PA
I guess when I think about the
Outdoors show in Harrisburg, I think of it as a tradition just like the Farm
Show, one that annually falls only a few weeks after. It’s a lot of country in a little time. As a
regular camper and fisherman, I always knew that the hardest fish to ever catch
was the farm-raised trout in a liner pool, ignoring a piece of junk bait on the
end of a 1-pound test and a glorified stick. There’s was a beauty in the
fly-fishing seminars, in the way that the flick of the rod by a trained hand is
just as mesmerizing in a convention complex as it is in Montana. Also, there
was a beauty in the way the Skoal girls stood in front of the Skoal display,
beckoning you to take a dip. Not as wonderful were the clever “Git ‘er drunk
and git ‘er done” or “Calvin peeing on whatever truck wasn’t yours” stickers
sold every ten feet. But of all the things I’ve remembered from the times I’ve
been there, I’ve never remembered looking at Modern Sporting Rifles/assault
weapons. Maybe it was just ignorance, but I never even really knew they were
allowed there. But I do now.
This
year, the 50-year tenure of the Eastern Sports and Outdoor show will come to a
close, for now. It’s the largest hunting and fishing show in North America, generating an estimated $74 million in
revenues for exhibitors, small businesses, and not-for-profits, and $44 million
for the struggling, poorly managed, and essentially bankrupt city of Harrisburg.
The reasoning for suspending the show started a few weeks ago, but really, a
month and a half ago, with the Newtown massacre. In the midst of the modern
sporting rifle (MSR)/tactical assault weapon (pick your side, then your
nomenclature) gray area that developed with that tragedy, the event organizer (UK-based
Reed Exhibitions), decided to ban vendors from selling any MSRs or extended
capacity magazines, as well as the promotion of either or both. In the wake of
that announcement, vendors began pulling out by the bunches. First, the gun
vendors, then over 300 more of the roughly thousand slated vendors. The hammer
dropped when Cabela’s, the world’s largest direct marketer of outdoor goods, officially
pulled out.
In the case of Cabela’s, the move
was brilliant. As the banner vendor at the Outdoor Show, their name has
appeared in nearly every news story and every write-up related to the boycott.
The money they stood to make at the show should easily rebound as their
customer base’s loyalty level will soar higher than the craggy peaks of their in-store
mountain displays. The same probably goes for Trop Gun shop in Elizabethtown,
which is currently having a “Solidarity Sale” this weekend, giving away an
AR-15 to a lucky person who brings in a receipt from any of the vendors that
pulled out of the show. Gun shops around the country can’t keep their stock of
MSRs, with some models on backorder for up to a year or two.
This boycott was great for them, in
that they stood up for their beliefs, and will still profit from them.
Much of the boycott is focused on
these vendors and the David vs. Goliath storyline, David as the true American
rising up to defend his tribe against the tidal wave of reform bearing down on
his God-given rights. They were the impetus that defended this half-century
institution of east coast outdoorsmen, prying it from the hands of a nameless,
faceless events organizer from across the Atlantic. It makes for pretty good
news for both sides in this kind of post-Virginia Tech/Aurora/Newtown climate.
However,
of all that’s been said about the 300-plus vendors that pulled out, whether
good or bad, not much has been said about the 700 that didn’t. Without a doubt,
many of these vendors would’ve liked to make a stand in favor of MSRs, because
they either believed in it or knew their customer base would take the
pro-boycott stance hook, line, and sinker. And probably swivel, leader, and
pole. But that 10-day show is a lot of money, as much as some may generate in a
couple months of business at their brick and mortar or online store. Taking a
stance is one thing, losing a big chunk of your livelihood is another thing altogether.
So instead of pulling out, they took the wait-and-see approach.
In the
same way, if—God forbid—one of the many non-gun vendors sided with the MSR ban,
as a logical business decision they couldn’t possibly announce their views
publicly to a customer base that defends the Second Amendment like it’s their
first-born son. A stance against the general consensus of your own customers
would surely cement your place as next-in-line on the Second Amendment heretical
chopping block.
In this
situation, in the midst of a “with-us-or-against-us-issue,” the atom splits
again, so that the whole things starts to look like a pyramid scheme of epic
divisiveness. Pro-gun and not pro-gun. Beneath that, pro-gun, but not
pro-assault. Further down, pro-boycotting, but not pro-boycotting and losing money.
And so the boycott became a lopsided split comprised of those who voiced vehement
demands, or those who stayed mum and hoped for the best.
Turns out,
those hoping for the best got a good dose of the worst, from their fellow
outdoorsmen, nonetheless.
Albeit,
all of the blame for this loss shouldn’t be placed squarely on the boycotters—it
is pretty crummy that the MSR ban was made known to them a mere two weeks
before the event, after many of them booked plane tickets, hotels, over-stocked
their goods, etc. In fact, it seems that Reed didn’t work much with the vendors
at all in terms of communication, notification, or compromise. Prior to the
current gun control debate, they heavily supported guns and shows of all kinds,
and even managed the National Shooting Sports Foundation Shot Show, held two
weeks ago in Nevada (note: although they manage this show, all policies and
actions are made at the NSSF’s discretion.)
To that
extent, surely some responsibility should be attached to Reed Exhibitions for
their overarching hand in all of this. But consider this—they’re the world’s
largest events organizer, with 500 events in 39 countries. They grossed over $1
billion in revenue last year. Most of their events aren’t attended by the
typical Outdoor Show attendee who strolls the Pennsylvania Farm Show complex with
a hunk of beef jerky in one hand and a spitter cup in the other, sticking
around to catch the log-rolling competition in the Equine Arena. Many of the Reeds
events around the world center around sustainable energy, biofuels, the
entertainment industry, etc. In fact, Reed’s biggest show is MIPCOM- a five-day
marketing and networking event for people in the TV and film industry. Held in
Cannes, France, it attracts heads of large studios and networks, as well as the
movers and shakers from across the cultural spectrum—from Facebook execs to the
cast of hit television shows like Mad Men and The Walking Dead. Out of all their North American shows
scheduled for this year, it appears only two are related to in any way to guns
or outdoor supplies. Their world isn’t Harrisburg, PA. It’s literally the
world. And in that world outside of this world, MSRs aren’t as widely accepted
as they are in Bucks or Perry County.
To put it
another way, imagine this, as a corporate business owner:
You own a
company that mostly sells fruits and vegetables all over the world. However, in
Brazil, there’s a large contingency that eats meat, and loves it, and has
always loved it since their country’s inception, since they produce some of the
best meat in the world. You have a store in Rio that stocks and sells mostly
meats. In the last fifty years, Brazil produced a strain of super meat that was
very healthy to some people, produced more powerful flavors, and could be made
in a variety of ways. In the hands of a good chef it is not inherently
dangerous, but if it is not kept at the right temperature, or if handled by an
irresponsible cook at a restaurant, it could poison all the customers sitting
down to eat if it were put on the buffet that night. One day, this meat kills
24 people who had no idea it was even in that restaurant. Unfortunately, this
incident happened six weeks before the biggest month for meat and super meat
sales in Rio. During the interim, a social debate ensues, with a kind of
ferocity that hasn’t been seen in nearly twenty years.
Questions
arise. How do we know this super meat won’t accidentally get labeled wrong and cooked
by a teenage kid with no training? Why can’t people be satisfied with the other
meats that are generally delicious? Why is there such a focus on this super
meat if it only killed a handful of people in comparison to the deaths of
others who choked on the tougher kinds of meats? How can we make sure no one in
a restaurant (not located in a poor, crime ridden part of the inner city) ever
dies from this super meat again?
Despite
the debate, most of Brazil still loves meat and is okay with most of it. Strict
vegetarians don’t see the point, because their lives are fine without it. On
the other hand, those who had a taste of this super meat, and who have working
refrigerators with shelves high enough that their kids can’t reach it, are
embittered. And so the fire rages, pulling back and forth between the super
meat eaters, the normal meat eaters, the sometimes meat eaters, and the
vegetarians.
Back to
the store you own that sells the super meat. This store represents about a
quarter of one percent of your total revenue globally. The majority of your
other stores are okay with that store selling their normal meats, but on the
other hand, many of the clientele and managers of those stores are diametrically
opposed to the super meat. So, as the owner of a large corporation dealing with
a lot of customers on the con side of the meat argument, you decide that
sacrificing a small portion of your business will be better in the long run,
for you and the majority of your customers. After all, it wouldn’t be prudent
for you if the managers of your mega-stores in New York City and Los Angeles see
that you’re allowing the controversial super meat to be sold in another store,
and decide to shut down until you pull the meat from the shelves. This would be
a huge revenue hit for you and for those local economies.
So for
now, you decide the super meat should be banned from your stores in Brazil
until the issue settles down a bit. The stores can still conduct business as
usual otherwise. Some of the contracted in-store meat vendors will have to sell
their super meat as street vendors, but will still make almost as much money as
they would have selling in-store (if not more, since super meat loyalists will
flock to them). In addition, all of the other employees will get to keep their
jobs.
Except the
management at that store thinks your business decision is violating their rights
as all-around meat-lovers, who feel they should be able to eat whatever they
want, whenever they want. So they refuse to come into work on account of your
decision. As do half the cashiers, and twenty percent of the stockers. If you
don’t support their eating habits, you won’t get their money.
Meanwhile,
the people who are working as meat slicers want to keep their jobs because they
need to provide for their families this month, and February is the busiest time
of year for selling meats. Same goes for the bread bakers (Brazilians like
bread for a side), who have no idea how they got wrapped up in this. But
because so many people stopped working at the store, you can’t hire enough
people to fill their spots and the other 70 percent of the workers who still wanted their jobs, are suddenly
without work and an entire month’s paycheck. Not only that, but this poor
section of Rio is hammered with losses in its struggling business sector (not
to mention the down economy in Brazil as a whole), as their meat selection is
one of the best in the country and people come from hundreds of miles away to visit
here this time of year. Most of the tourists have little to no interest in the
super meat, but enjoy the atmosphere of the store and the many other food
offerings it carries.
Your store
isn’t entirely pleased with this, but it’s barely going to move your bottom
line this fiscal quarter. The big-time meat vendors just gained a ton of loyal
meat customers for sticking up for their rights. Those people will come back
again and again and buy from them. The ban on super meat in the Rio store might
have been the best thing that happened to them to this quarter. All the other
meat vendors have back orders and will be fine.
Back to
reality.
The small
archery store looking to jump-start their business in a slow January just
suffered a huge setback for their 2013 profits. The fishing guide from Virginia
lost possibly months worth of bookings this summer, and will have to crack
other shows or regions with which they’re completely unfamiliar. The new
business owner from Harrisburg who is trying to sell his innovative RV
accessory won’t get an initial surge in revenue, and will struggle for the next
year to get his company off the ground, if it even does.
It’s
obvious Reed didn’t exactly play the role of the good guy in this disaster, but
they’re also a large corporation pulling their PR puppet strings from an office
across the Atlantic, so one can only expect so much in terms of cooperation and
compassion. It also seems that the original boycotters merely wanted their
voices to be heard in the beginning, to gain a little leverage and back Reed
into a corner. They probably didn’t see it blowing up into the wildfire that it
finally became, and the ensuing cancellation of the show for all involved.
In the end
though, the boycotters aren’t exactly sticking it to the man on this one. There
wasn’t much to gain for the smaller guys, although the larger ones will have a
nice cushion of loyal customers following them through the ensuing arms desert,
where lines will surely be drawn into the sand until the winds of some kind of
change come along and change them once again. Unfortunately, the boycotters are
joining in with Reed in sticking it to the man next to them in line at Bass Pro,
the one who’s buying his compound bow there because the store down the street
went out of business this year. There's even calls by some to release the names of the other 700, so people can boycott them (their own outdoorsmen family!), an act that would twist the knife even deeper.
There’s a
reason when something major happens that affects other people, it’s called a
trickle down effect. The river doesn’t typically surge upstream. In this case,
it’s carrying a swift tide to those below, and for their sake, and the outdoors
trade in general, let’s hope they’re not dashed on the rocks by a knee-jerk
swell, for the mere purpose of making a statement.
Let’s hope
the collateral damage isn’t so severe that we can’t enjoy this kind of show for
years to come, without the controversies and soapboxing that can derail the
main goal of these gatherings—to promote the outdoors and the many
unadulterated pleasures it provides, without taking away from those who provide
us the means to do that.
