Are we really going to suggest that an outfitter decline to hunt a client unfortunate enough to come to him via Blair? Penalize clients because of their poor choice in agents? Not sure how I feel about that.

quote:

Originally posted by tendrams:
Are we really going to suggest that an outfitter decline to hunt a client unfortunate enough to come to him via Blair? Penalize clients because of their poor choice in agents? Not sure how I feel about that.

I'm suggesting that ethical outfitters would not like to have their name associated with shysters like Blair. If Blair isn't going to get any of the outfitter's money, then the outfitter isn't going to have a problem with the source of their clients.

IMHO some people are a bit over the top in their setting moral standards for others. I understand that this Blair fellow is a total corrupt Ahole from the description given. If you were in business selling widgets and someone wanted to buy a million would you say no the guy who referred you to me is an Ahole so you can't have my widgets ? Martin is a stand up guy and I'll wing man for him (not that he needs it). This guilt by association sounds like the Salem witch trials, if I don't like someone I have the right to control my behavior but not the behavior of others. Remember the old proverb'If you go seeking revenge dig two graves'.

quote:

Originally posted by martin pieters:
Gentlemen, I run an above board safari company under adverse conditions! I try to preserve and protect wildlife through consumptive use again during very difficult trying times.
If some choose not to book with me because of the fact that I am trying to stay in business for the preservation of wildlife and for the future of hunting in Zimbabwe, then that s entirely their choice!
Who knows you may book with someone that has far larger spiders in their closet!

Cheers

Mart

So, you're well aware of Blair's practices, and you choose to still be associated with him......that speaks volumes. As Gator said, I think you're making a huge mistake.

That was the essence of my post. Wasn't slamming any outfitter at all, just wondering if they knew Blair was saying he represented them and their hunts.

Larry Sellers
SCI Life Member

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Robinson:
I would not suggest that any blame attaches to any outfitters or companies whose name Blair is using without their knowledge.

Nor to any of those who don't know about his reputation.

I wouldn't be surprised, however, if someone, in the interest of truth and justice, were to give them all a heads up.

quote:

Originally posted by JGRaider:

quote:

Originally posted by martin pieters:
Gentlemen, I run an above board safari company under adverse conditions! I try to preserve and protect wildlife through consumptive use again during very difficult trying times.
If some choose not to book with me because of the fact that I am trying to stay in business for the preservation of wildlife and for the future of hunting in Zimbabwe, then that s entirely their choice!
Who knows you may book with someone that has far larger spiders in their closet!

Cheers

Mart

So, you're well aware of Blair's practices, and you choose to still be associated with him......that speaks volumes. As Gator said, I think you're making a huge mistake.

This is disappointing. This is the attitude that will keep Blair in business and allow him to continue to screw people. Damn, I really felt that once this was brought to light Martin would have publicly said that he will NEVER do business with Blair.

My simple response to Martin and all other outfitters, there are other booking agents who can fill those same hunts for you.

I would like to pose a couple of questions. First, how many of you run your own business?
How many took on this project of previously decemated Omay with the singular mission of rebuilding the wildlife? Actually I have a third question. How many of you have booked a hunt to help support someone who has busted his ass to support and protect the integrity of safari hunting in Zimbabwe?

Jeff

So now that it has been decided Martin should be run out of business how many are going to SCI in 2014?

Does not BWW show at SCI? I guarantee Blair books far more hunts at SCI than he does for Martin. Actually I would be willing to bet he books very few hunts for Martin.

So how many hypocrites on AR who will not have anything to do with Martin because he may or may not accept a client from Blair but will go to SCI, an orginization that actively supports Blair? SCI even has Blair in the top 25% of the 2013 Safari Club International Rankings.

It is easy to say "I will never" when you never would have anyway.

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana Bunduki:
I would like to pose a couple of questions. First, how many of you run your own business?
How many took on this project of previously decemated Omay with the singular mission of rebuilding the wildlife? Actually I have a third question. How many of you have booked a hunt to help support someone who has busted his ass to support and protect the integrity of safari hunting in Zimbabwe?

Jeff

Jeff,

I run my own business, and I refuse to deal with any shady characters.

I have been hunting with the same people in Zimbabwe for years, despite Mugabe.

The only reason I stopped hunting in Zimbabwe is because the people I supported lost their concessions to Mugabe's henchmen.

I still hunt with them in Tanzania.

Martin of course has his choice of dealing with Blair or not.

And prospective clients have their choice with whom to hunt too.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike70560:
So now that it has been decided Martin should be run out of business how many are going to SCI in 2014?

I don't want Martin to go out of business, I want Jeff Blair to go out of business. Jeff Blair is no different than an ambulance chaser, he doesn't give a damn about the client, he just wants to make his money. Jeff Blair is a piece of shit and he's a black eye for our sport and industry IMO

I hope that Martin makes a better decision and tells Jeff Blair to pound sand. I would rather find something else to do for a living than rely on Jeff Blair to do anything for me.

Anybody that knows what Jeff Blair has done and how he conducts his business and still makes a conscience decision to work with him deserves whatever repercussions come of that. That isn't directed at Martin individually, its directed at any outfitter that knows the situation and takes clients from him. We should police our own and there is no room in this industry for guys like Jeff Blair.

To answer the OP's question, I will not be at SCI this year and I feel that SCI should kick that piece of trash to the street.

Jeff Blair wouldn't even refund the "commission" that he feels he "earned" from that $70,000 screwing that he facilitated. How anybody can work with that man knowing this is beyond me

Martin, please make the right decision here.

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana Bunduki:
I would like to pose a couple of questions. First, how many of you run your own business?
How many took on this project of previously decemated Omay with the singular mission of rebuilding the wildlife? Actually I have a third question. How many of you have booked a hunt to help support someone who has busted his ass to support and protect the integrity of safari hunting in Zimbabwe?

Jeff

I've run several of my own businesses. I offered to participate, at least on a small scale, in helping to fund several bore holes to bring year round water into a game depleted area for the purpose of rehabilitation. Before I got the funds together, the project was fully funded, so I would have to say I at least tried to participate in your second query, but there will be other opportunities I hope. And yes, I've booked numerous hunts that have helped support someone who has busted his ass to support and protect the integrity of safari hunting in Zimbabwe! I can't help to think you didn't give those 3 qualifications much forethought on a forum of this quality!

To the topic at hand, I'm not saying I would or wouldn't book with Martin over this issue. It's a bit pointless as I've booked the majority of my Zim hunts with another outfitter. That has not been because of a problem with Martin, just that I found an organization I like to hunt with already.

But from a factual standpoint, Martin says Blair is not his agent, but he accepts hunting clients from him that Blair has booked, as a booking agent. That is a statement I do not understand.

Then Martin's next comments were along the lines that he has to accept clients from whatever source due to the climate he conducts business in. This leads me to believe he knows of Blair's reputation but has made the decision to continue doing business with him. I think several of us had hoped that Martin was just unaware of Blair's practices. In any event, the second statement that he has to accept clients from whatever source seems to contradict the first statement that Blair isn't one of his booking agents.

Hey, I'm not passing judgements on anyone. I have my opinions of Blair Worldwide Hunting. I'm taking in info and asking questions that interest me in regards to forming or modifying other opinions. I can't help but notice a few smoke screens being run however!

Actually yes you sre passing judgement. I was in my queiries referring to Martin Pieters. Martn is lauded frequently in this "quality" forum for his efforts towards ZPHGA and salvaging the Omay. So now the quality forum turns on him because he booked clients who personal choice in "agents" were questionable. Thank you for highlighting your personal contribitions. What have you done to help Martin? Have you walked a mile in his shoes? I appreciate the swipe at me also.

Jeff

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana Bunduki:
Actually yes you sre passing judgement. I was in my queiries referring to Martin Pieters. Martn is lauded frequently in this "quality" forum for his efforts towards ZPHGA and salvaging the Omay. So now the quality forum turns on him because he booked clients who personal choice in "agents" were questionable. Thank you for highlighting your personal contribitions. What have you done to help Martin? Have you walked a mile in his shoes? I appreciate the swipe at me also.

Jeff

I specifically answered the questions you generically asked the members of the forum. Since you asked!

If the shoe fits ... well, you know the rest!!

Agent is defined as follows:

: one who is authorized to act for or in the place of another: as
a : a representative, emissary, or official of a government <crown agent> <federal agent>
b : one engaged in undercover activities (as espionage) : spy <secret agent>
c : a business representative (as of an athlete or entertainer) <a theatrical agent>

I do not see Blair being Martin's agent as defined above any more than I see the grocery store being the agent for the company that grows the produce sold in the store. Now, if BWW was the only entity to sell safaris for Martin, that might be a different story.

I get Martin's position on the matter. It would be interesting to know if that position would have been any different before things crashed in 2008. Most of the industry is struggling now.

Having said that, it is unimaginable to me that Blair did what he did about the sheep hunt. He cannot be out out of business fast enough to suit me. I would not book an armadillo hunt with BWW.

I unfotunately was not aware I had to be so literal in my questions regarding Martin Pieters. It is okay to pile on the guy. It should not be. You have chosen instead of anawering my questions about some one I am trying to defend to insult me. Deflection and obfuscation are terms that apply. My shoes fit quite well. Thank you.

Jeff

Let me ask you a question. Is it okay for M. Pieters or anyone else to pay money to Blair WWH KNOWING that they are crooks and shysters? Do you consider that to be ethical behavior?

If so, why do you think they ones who pay them money (commissions) have clean hands?

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
Agent is defined as follows:

: one who is authorized to act for or in the place of another: as
a : a representative, emissary, or official of a government <crown agent> <federal agent>
b : one engaged in undercover activities (as espionage) : spy <secret agent>
c : a business representative (as of an athlete or entertainer) <a theatrical agent>

I do not see Blair being Martin's agent as defined above any more than I see the grocery store being the agent for the company that grows the produce sold in the store. Now, if BWW was the only entity to sell safaris for Martin, that might be a different story.

I get Martin's position on the matter. It would be interesting to know if that position would have been any different before things crashed in 2008. Most of the industry is struggling now.

Having said that, it is unimaginable to me that Blair did what he did about the sheep hunt. He cannot be out out of business fast enough to suit me. I would not book an armadillo hunt with BWW.

Larry, quickly just going to Wiki for a reference, your examples are certainly listed, but there are at least 20 other examples as well. Under the subtitle "LAW", there are several types of agents listed. Specifically, 8 items down, it lists "Talent agent or Booking Agent - a person who finds jobs for actors, musicians and models, etc, in various entertainment businesses. Not to get too boged down in definitions or semantics, but it seems that even though this definition is speaking of different specific participants, the action is the same, ie, a job is being found by the agent for someone who is soliciting contract work.

I suppose this is where I'm getting tripped up. If Blair (A Booking Agent) is sending clients to an outfitter (Martin in this instance) can it not be said that Blair is finding jobs for the outfitter (ie. clients to hunt)? From that definition, it appears that Blair is his agent.

I've asked it, or alluded to it several times now, but am I missing something in the statement? How is a guy who specifically defines himself and his business as being a Booking AGENT, not that outfitter's AGENT if jobs are being directly sent from the former to the latter?

It depends on the details which neither you nor I posess. FwIW I am privilaged to serve as the ethics chairman for my profession in my state. So I do know a little about the subject. Please explain where Martin violated ethics or laws. As a disclaimer; i am neither a friend or client of Martin's but i have communicated with him and admire his work in the Omay and the ethical bar he has raised for PH's in Zimbabwe. I would like to hunt with him because of this.

Jeff

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana Bunduki:
I unfotunately was not aware I had to be so literal in my questions regarding Martin Pieters. It is okay to pile on the guy. It should not be. You have chosen instead of anawering my questions about some one I am trying to defend to insult me. Deflection and obfuscation are terms that apply. My shoes fit quite well. Thank you.

Jeff

Now how do you figure that. You asked 3 generic questions. I answered those 3 questions specifically in how they applied to me. My comment was that surely, in this group of guys, many, many others have participated in conservation and rehabilitation of formerly wild, game plentiful areas. Take a look at Frostbit and his relationship to Fairgame!

Where have I piled onto Martin? I've asked a couple of questions. Hell, I didn't even ask the original question.

Now you say that instead of answering your questions about someone you are trying to defend, I insulted you instead? Really? Where. I answered the questions you posed.

You asked 1) "How many of you run your own business"? I have!

2) Your second question did contain the specific of the Omay. I simply took your question in a more broader sense than Martin and the Omay. So, OK, I'll give you that one. No I have not taken on to rehabilitate the Omay.

3) You actually had a third question. That was: How many of you have booked a hunt to help support SOMEONE who has busted his ass to support and protect the integrity of safari hunting in Zimbabwe? Well, I have booked with someone who IMO has busted his ass to support safari hunting in Zimbabwe; 4 times now.

I also stated that my not booking with Martin in the past has NOTHING to do with Martin, just that I found someone I am comfortable with already. Not a slam on Martin.

The reason I made the shoe comment is that believe it or not, the "smokescreen" reference wasn't specifically referring to you. But since you took it that way ... OK, that'll work.

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana Bunduki:
It depends on the details which neither you nor I posess. FwIW I am privilaged to serve as the ethics chairman for my profession in my state. So I do know a little about the subject. Please explain where Martin violated ethics or laws. As a disclaimer; i am neither a friend or client of Martin's but i have communicated with him and admire his work in the Omay and the ethical bar he has raised for PH's in Zimbabwe. I would like to hunt with him because of this.

Jeff

Please show me where I accused Martin of violating either ethics or laws? You are making a leap there that I haven't made!

Again, a particular connection was brought to light. I've asked a few questions about it to get a clearer picture so that I may form or refine my opinions. I have not called for a boycott against Martin. In fact, I don't think I've called for a boycott of Blair on this thread. I have an opinion of Blair and his business practices. I also have an opinion of anyone who does business with him. I've stated neither here, just for the record!!

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana Bunduki:
It depends on the details which neither you nor I posess. FwIW I am privilaged to serve as the ethics chairman for my profession in my state. So I do know a little about the subject. Please explain where Martin violated ethics or laws. As a disclaimer; i am neither a friend or client of Martin's but i have communicated with him and admire his work in the Omay and the ethical bar he has raised for PH's in Zimbabwe. I would like to hunt with him because of this.

Jeff

What details? Do you think Blair is sending M. Pieters clients for free?

Let me ask you this, if you buy goods from a source at a discount to the prevailing market price in order to help your business's profit AND then discover that the source is stealing SOME of the goods he sells, would you continue buying from him? After all, YOUR goods might not be stolen? Would that be ethical?

If you support a crook by continuing to provide his business with income, knowing he is a crook, is that ethical?

I could go on and on, but if you don't see this as an ethical problem, then there is no use in discussing it with you.

I'm not attacking M. Pieters but to continue to do business with Blair KNOWING what he now knows is a poor business and ethical decision IMO. I don't know if I'll ever make another African trip, but my son almost certainly will and you can bet your bottom dollar that as long as Blair is in business, that ANYONE they represent won't be on his potential list of African outfitters.

I'm retiring from this thread, I don't have anything substantive to add; we all make choices in this life, some right and some wrong, but most of us try to avoid KNOWINGLY making wrong choices. As Saeed mentioned we all have multiple choices about who to spend our hunting dollars with and, in my and my family's case, that will NOT include anyone Blair represents.

It is a bit tiring that every micro statement which could be even vaguely seen as a mild form of challenge of Martin Pieters safaris is always getting such unnecessary responses by his supporters.

Of course your example is rife with unethical behaviour. But again you are making assumptions about Martin that are just that. Assumptions. I doubt seriously that Martin will continue to accept clients from Blsir now that this is brought to light. You all are stoning a good man.

Jeff

At the risk of getting my head bitten off, is now a good time to point out that (IMO) working on some of the logic above, only unethical people hunt Zimbabwe because sooner or later, Mad Bob gets a slice of the pie from any and all businesses in Zim by way of taxes. (Which will go straight into his Swiss bank accounts) And therefore no right minded individual should hunt in Zimbabwe.

That suggestion is of course as ridiculously unreasonable as the suggestion that any individual should have the barefaced cheek to believe he can tell MP who he does business with.

quote:

Originally posted by Bwana Bunduki:
You all are stoning a good man. Jeff

+1

I am familiar with this Blair/Heathington issue and it appears as a case of the middle man ( Blair) getting stuck in a very bad deal. Maybe he should have returned his commission but the hunter bears some responsibility as he choose to use a middle man rather than dealing directly with the outfitter.

From the outfitters prospective, if they have an unexpected cancellation and need to fill the spot, and some booking agent pops up and offers them a paying client, they would be foolish not to take it. It does not mean however that the two sides are business partners.

Booking agents are self employeed middle men and many are no different than the guys on the street in 3rd world countries that steer you into a store and tryto sell you the goods at prices over what the store owner is asking. If you pay them and the goods prove to be bad, you may get a refund from the store owner for what he made but you certainly will have a hard time getting the money back from the middle man.


Even though most outfitters, guides, booking agents and hunters are honest, there are plenty of pit-falls in this business. Do your homework.

I would not hesitate to book a hunt with Martin, I just wouldn't do it through Blair in any shape, form or fashion. Doing so wouldn't put a dime in Blair's pocket, so I fail to see the unethical part.

JMO, your mileage may (and likely will) vary.

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
I would not hesitate to book a hunt with Martin, I just wouldn't do it through Blair in any shape, form or fashion. Doing so wouldn't put a dime in Blair's pocket, so I fail to see the unethical part.

JMO, your mileage may (and likely will) vary.

Jeff

I'm not sure if the last part of your comment was in rely to my post or not?

If it was, we're in agreement.

I wasn't saying it's unethical to hunt Zim but rather, such a suggestion is of course as ridiculously unreasonable as the idea that any individual should have the barefaced cheek to believe he can tell MP who he does business with.

I am booked to hunt buffalo with Martin Pieters in the OMay in 2014. One reason I chose to hunt with him was the outstanding reputation he has on this forum and others. The other reason was my personal interaction with him. I believe him to be a man of character. Seven years ago I booked a hunt through BWW. I will never do it again. It was with one of the other outfitters listed on their website. Great hunt, etc, but there were some financial issues that came to light on the last day of the hunt that I was not pleased with. I will not go into details as I am not here to bash anyone. I spoke with BWW after the hunt and they were less than helpful. I made my decision then to never book with them again. The sheep hunt incident only reaffirmed my thoughts. The clients are the ones that can put BWW out of business. Many are asking Martin Pieters and other outfitters to take food out of their mouths to accomplish the goal of putting Blair out of business, yet these individuals are not making the sacrifice that is being asked of Martin Pieters and other outfitters. If client A shows up to Blair and says book me a hunt, then client A is going on a hunt. Period. There will be an outfitter that will accomadate the hunter. If Blair sends Martin Pieters 3 or 4 clients per year. That is conservatively $50,000 in sales a year. That is a big sacrifice to ask someone to make when the person asking isn't doing the same, and it realistically won't accomplish the goal getting Blair out of the business. We really need to educate the clients and not crucify the outfitters who are just trying to survive.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
I am familiar with this Blair/Heathington issue and it appears as a case of the middle man ( Blair) getting stuck in a very bad deal. Maybe he should have returned his commission but the hunter bears some responsibility as he choose to use a middle man rather than dealing directly with the outfitter.

From the outfitters prospective, if they have an unexpected cancellation and need to fill the spot, and some booking agent pops up and offers them a paying client, they would be foolish not to take it. It does not mean however that the two sides are business partners.

Booking agents are self employeed middle men and many are no different than the guys on the street in 3rd world countries that steer you into a store and tryto sell you the goods at prices over what the store owner is asking. If you pay them and the goods prove to be bad, you may get a refund from the store owner for what he made but you certainly will have a hard time getting the money back from the middle man.


Even though most outfitters, guides, booking agents and hunters are honest, there are plenty of pit-falls in this business. Do your homework.

Blair got STUCK in a very BAD DEAL! Interesting perspective!!

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
I would not hesitate to book a hunt with Martin, I just wouldn't do it through Blair in any shape, form or fashion. Doing so wouldn't put a dime in Blair's pocket, so I fail to see the unethical part.

JMO, your mileage may (and likely will) vary.

Jeff

I'm not sure if the last part of your comment was in rely to my post or not?

If it was, we're in agreement.

I wasn't saying it's unethical to hunt Zim but rather, such a suggestion is of course as ridiculously unreasonable as the idea that any individual should have the barefaced cheek to believe he can tell MP who he does business with.

Steve,
Only partially. I'm not as well versed as many here about the ins-and-outs of the business of booking hunts, but if I were booking a hunt for myself and could do so with an operator who is, by all accounts, absolutely professional and honest (which word, like "virginity", needs no qualification, it's an either/or deal), which Martin is, I would not hesitate to do so. I have no doubt that operating in Zimbabwe requires a certain amount of compromise that, in a perfect world, an ethical operator would prefer not to do, but I've never lived in a perfect world, nor met anyone who has.

Based on what I've learned on AR I would not buy a bird dog puppy from Blair, but Martin Pieters is not Blair.

I can certainly understand & sympathise with the OP wanting to hammer Blair but I don't think it's fair to also hunt decent honourable men like MP as part of the crusade.

If it was me, I'd register & build a website with a VERY similar name to Blair's, key word it similarly & put his whole story on the site.

That way everyone who uses the search engines will see one site right next to the other.

I would however also ensure every word on my site would be absolutely true AND completely proveable.

So let’s see . . .

. . . an agent

- books hunts on an outfitter’s behalf, i.e., they send the outfitter a client and in return the outfitter pays them a commission,
- includes the outfitter in their advertising indicating that they book hunts with the outfitter, and
- liaises with the customer to help coordinate matters relating to the booking.

. . . here

- BWW is booking clients to hunt with certain outfitters and in return the outfitter will pay them a commission,
- BWW includes the outfitter in their advertising indicating that they book hunts with the outfitter, and
- Presumably, BWW will liaise with the customer, at least until the deposit is paid.

Unless someone tells me that the outfitter is not paying BWW a commission for hunts booked through BWW, then this whole situation sort of reminds me of the saying, a rose by any other name is still a rose. I do not see how someone can credibly maintain that they are aware that someone is booking hunts on their behalf, including them in their advertising and they are paying them a commission for doing so, but the booking company is not acting as their agent. I mean no disrespect to anyone but for people to suggest that this is not really something that it seems is disingenuous, to me. Nor do I mean to impugn the character of the outfitter or suggest that guilt by association is applicable . . . I am just saying that trying to convince people that this is not something that it otherwise appears to be is a stretch.

I pass by blair world wide huntings office a lot, they are on 4th st here in flagstaff. I never do see anyone (customers) in the parking lot, just the company trucks. That in and of itself doesnt mean much.
coues

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:
I can certainly understand & sympathise with the OP wanting to hammer Blair but I don't think it's fair to also hunt decent honourable men like MP as part of the crusade.

To say that I am also "hunting decent and honorable men" is a bit disingenuous don't you think? I have stated that I felt Martin was a good man but am asking him to reevaluate who he does business with. That's not head hunting.

People here are splitting hairs. If Martin told Blair to pound sand it wouldn't put him out of business. It's not like Jeff Blair is the only booking agent out there. There are lots of options. I'm not singling Martin out either, I will ask this of anybody accepting hunters from Blair.

Phil, to say that the hunters that got screwed on that sheep hunt bear some responsibility is ridiculous! They paid Blair $70,000 freaking dollars and its partly their fault that they got screwed? Really? You say that Blair is the one that finds himself "stuck in a bad spot". Really? Maybe you should go back and read that thread again. You say that Blair "maybe" should have returned his commission? You have to be kidding me. I have a lot of respect for what you've done in your career and I'm not trying to be an ass but in my opinion you are way off base with who was "in a bad spot" and who "bears responsibility" for that cluster fuck

quote:

Originally posted by drummondlindsey:

quote:

Originally posted by JGRaider:

quote:

Originally posted by martin pieters:
Gentlemen, I run an above board safari company under adverse conditions! I try to preserve and protect wildlife through consumptive use again during very difficult trying times.
If some choose not to book with me because of the fact that I am trying to stay in business for the preservation of wildlife and for the future of hunting in Zimbabwe, then that s entirely their choice!
Who knows you may book with someone that has far larger spiders in their closet!

Cheers

Mart

So, you're well aware of Blair's practices, and you choose to still be associated with him......that speaks volumes. As Gator said, I think you're making a huge mistake.

This is disappointing. This is the attitude that will keep Blair in business and allow him to continue to screw people. Damn, I really felt that once this was brought to light Martin would have publicly said that he will NEVER do business with Blair.

Well, the never ending quest for the almighty dollar can take your character where it doesn't want to go. I do run my own business and choose not to be associated with bottom feeding scum like BWW. Some in the same position obviously don't care. I feel it's paid off for me over the long run. I have to look myself in the mirror and be happy with who I see.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
I am familiar with this Blair/Heathington issue and it appears as a case of the middle man ( Blair) getting stuck in a very bad deal. Maybe he should have returned his commission but the hunter bears some responsibility as he choose to use a middle man rather than dealing directly with the outfitter.

From the outfitters prospective, if they have an unexpected cancellation and need to fill the spot, and some booking agent pops up and offers them a paying client, they would be foolish not to take it. It does not mean however that the two sides are business partners.

Booking agents are self employeed middle men and many are no different than the guys on the street in 3rd world countries that steer you into a store and tryto sell you the goods at prices over what the store owner is asking. If you pay them and the goods prove to be bad, you may get a refund from the store owner for what he made but you certainly will have a hard time getting the money back from the middle man.


Even though most outfitters, guides, booking agents and hunters are honest, there are plenty of pit-falls in this business. Do your homework.

Blair got STUCK in a very BAD DEAL! Interesting perspective!!

Before I comment, I think Blair's conduct was reprehensible.

Blair was stuck is a very bad deal. When he sold the hunt and got a deposit, by all appearances, Heathington was fine. No problems at all. Subsequently, Heathington went off the deep end. Blair had sold a hunt with a reputable outfitter that suddenly went bad. That put him in a difficult position. He knew or should have known about Heathington's subsequent problems.

IMHO, Blair should have alerted the client to the problems right then. He should have given the client the opportunity to walk away if they wanted. I will bet that right now, the client wishes that they had walked away. Blair should have returned the commission. The client would have been fine had they purchased insurance in the trip.

Yes, Blair got stuck in a bad deal which they made worse by their own incompetence & lack of integrity. The client ended up the loser.

Blair had better be glad it was not me he screwed. I would not have gone away so easily.

Phil:

I have always respected you but you just lost a huge amount of respect from me.

I agree with the majority here: we all have choices. I choose not to hunt with outfitters who accept business from Blair. I want Blair out of business.

Not to steal the thread, but also have no time for those who do business with US Outfitters, including outdoor writers who serve as their mouthpiece.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
Not to steal the thread, but also have no time for those who do business with US Outfitters, including outdoor writers who serve as their mouthpiece.

X2! George Taulman and Jeff Blair are cut from the same cloth

Larry, you at least got what I was trying to say. I am in no way standing up for Blair, I too have had serious past issues with both him and with Heathington and do not recommend either. And I think Jeff should have returned his commission right away. But I was trying to explain that issues like that can be a bit more complex when you look at it from all sides.

Blaming some other outfitter, from an entirely different country who happens to accept a hunter once in awhile from Blair, and who otherwise has an excellent record is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.