Avoid Theo Blignaut / Skin Afrika like the plague

[Royal27]

I also guess I look at it if the hunter books the hunt with info he gets from me and it cost him 10,000 and ask pieter for a quote direct and it is still 10,000 it is the same cost. unlike if the hunter gets a quote from the agent at 12,000 but direct gets the price of 11.000.

That's a big assumption though.

Sometimes I have no doubt that what you say above is true. But other times the hunt cost may be the same, or less through an agent, if he does enough business with a particular outfitter.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Phil, notice I said probably on the behalf of the agent, I believe they're kind of like real estate agents they're there to help you but in the end they're working for the seller.

Except normally there are two agents, the buyers and the sellers and by law (if not practice) their supposed to be working in the best interest of their clients. It's also not the best of analogies as most real estate agents at least in big areas know they're not likely to see you ever again. The booking agent is inspired to want you to come back from Africa happy so that you'll ask "So what do you have in Alaska? or something like it.

The concern I have here is I know a number of very reputable booking agents. The one in particular I have right at the moment in my mind would sooner cut his leg off as he would put the screws to a client OR the outfitter he's booking for. I also know one agent who has booked for HV that I wouldn't give the time of day to. He is someone working only in his own self interest in my opinion.

But lumping them all under the heading of useless isn't right. With the new person coming along here to AH and reading such and walking away with the only memory being that booking agents are useless may be doing themselves a disservice.

 

[billc]

I can only tell you what I have done or know myself and I have always done better booking direct no matter how much business the agent has done. All goes back to if you can get rich on hunting or not there is only so much that can be taken off of a hunt and the agent would need to pass on the saving he may have been offered over making the extra. I am not saying it cant happen but that would not be the norm I think.

This thread has gone way off track now. I have said it a couple times now if someone wants to use one go ahead but know you can do the same thing for yourself and NORMALLY always save some money. I think a few years ago agents did have a place but I think that has gone away some now on how much there worth to a person.

 

[jeff]

Phil I never said they're useless, your getting me confused with Bill. I've only bought three houses but on those the agents got paid by the seller and they were selling for multiple offices, they get paid less if they negotiate for less, not a lot of incentive.

 

[billc]

Except normally there are two agents, the buyers and the sellers and by law (if not practice) their supposed to be working in the best interest of their clients. It's also not the best of analogies as most real estate agents at least in big areas know they're not likely to see you ever again. The booking agent is inspired to want you to come back from Africa happy so that you'll ask "So what do you have in Alaska? or something like it.

The concern I have here is I know a number of very reputable booking agents. The one in particular I have right at the moment in my mind would sooner cut his leg off as he would put the screws to a client OR the outfitter he's booking for. I also know one agent who has booked for HV that I wouldn't give the time of day to. He is someone working only in his own self interest in my opinion.

But lumping them all under the heading of useless isn't right. With the new person coming along here to AH and reading such and walking away with the only memory being that booking agents are useless may be doing themselves a disservice.

Not sure anyone or myself said that agents try and screw hunters or outfitters. It is just like the word cheap that gets thrown around so much. Useless is the word I used and as i said it could be to strong but what I used. It could go both ways on how it helps or makes someone look at using and agent.

Your point on a real estate agent can be looked at like that by you but I see it different. Not many would look at not caring because they may not see you. They will want you to pass there name out and possible hope maybe a family member may use them. There is no wrong or right we are all free to see things the way we want and even not agree as we clearing do not on this subject but it is all ok with me.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Phil I never said they're useless, your getting me confused with Bill. I've only bought three houses but on those the agents got paid by the seller and they were selling for multiple offices, they get paid less if they negotiate for less, not a lot of incentive.

Not sure anyone or myself said that agents try and screw hunters or outfitters. It is just like the word cheap that gets thrown around so much. Useless is the word I used and as i said it could be to strong but what I used. It could go both ways on how it helps or makes someone look at using and agent.

Your point on a real estate agent can be looked at like that by you but I see it different. Not many would look at not caring because they may not see you. They will want you to pass there name out and possible hope maybe a family member may use them. There is no wrong or right we are all free to see things the way we want and even not agree as we clearing do not on this subject but it is all ok with me.

Understood, was talking in general in regards to "useless" not specifically you @jeff.

Indeed on the real estate agent. They can go either way with regards to your interest or not, just as the booking agents can. Is it worth using the booking agent to you? Perhaps not as you feel you can get a better deal.

But for some a "better deal" doesn't necessarily mean the cheapest deal. The agent I spoke about in previous post, the honest one, for people who know him personally or are referred to him by those that do, the "better deal" is the one that comes with his backing. Yes he's that well respected by those that know him that they feel confident they're going hunting with someone they can trust, and that is worth a few extra bucks to them.

In the end I'm just recommending when we make such comments to be careful how broadly we're speaking on whatever the subject is and not just look at things through our own eyes.

 

[jeff]

Booking agents have their place, on some exotic hunts I might use them.

 

[ActionBob]

Phil I never said they're useless, your getting me confused with Bill. I've only bought three houses but on those the agents got paid by the seller and they were selling for multiple offices, they get paid less if they negotiate for less, not a lot of incentive.

Wow don't get me going on RE Agents... i'm sure I may end up insulting someone, but I have bought and sold probably more than the average guy... some of those RE Agents seem to have gotten that job right after they lost their paper route.. At about age 30! Yet others are really good and take the approach that there will always be the next deal coming along so they don't have to make it all on this one..... But yes for the largest part, they get paid by a percentage of the sale so the financial incentive is there to see it sell for the highest price... On the other hand, their commission is small enough that the most important thing to their success is closing the deal and moving on to the next one. I have worked with a couple RE Agents who are definitely working towards doing the next deal with me and so those relationships are more like a hunt booking agent... Looking for repeat business. So yes I agree they get paid by the seller and a percentage of what the deal is.. however all the good ones are working to keep the clients happy and gain return business. As are the good outfitters and PH's.

But damned there are a lot of worthless RE Agents out there.

 

[CAustin]

Never used an agent to book a hunt in Africa but I could see where I might use one in North America.

 

[Red Leg]

I have used Jack Atcheson Jr for a decade and highly recommend him to anyone. I also strongly recommend a first time hunter to Africa use a REPUTABLE agent. The Atcheson's, father and sons have been at it a while. I don't use them for every hunt, but I have never been disappointed with an outfitter whom they recommended. That is worth something to me. Particularly in an age when anyone can build a pretty website.

 

[Red Leg]

That's a big assumption though.

Sometimes I have no doubt that what you say above is true. But other times the hunt cost may be the same, or less through an agent, if he does enough business with a particular outfitter.

Agree. My experience is that most reputable outfitters who have a Stateside representative will not quote you a cheaper price to encourage yo to go around him. Indeed, the Stateside agent, at least the quality ones, represent an asset and business relationship whom the outfitter tends to guard pretty jealously.

 

[billc]

That's a big assumption though.

Sometimes I have no doubt that what you say above is true. But other times the hunt cost may be the same, or less through an agent, if he does enough business with a particular outfitter.

Well you can think that but I am only stating facts that I know have happened to people I know. I think it is more a big assumption to think that it does not happen. I dont think the outfiitters go out of there way to screw there agents but as tough as times have been they will lower cost direct to client if asked.

Again I dont care if anyone wants to use a booking agent who gets a fee. Just one more person in the middle of your hunt when I would rather deal direct with who I am hunting with. Each there own and all can lead to good or bad hunts if you do or dont do your homework. I'd rather just do my homework on the outfitter not the outfitter and the agent.

 

[ActionBob]

It still baffles me how loose the financial connection actually is in the hunting industry. Many other industries where there is large sums of money changing hands and products and services being delivered over great distance. The dealers and agents are required to be bonded.

Can anyone tell me why hunting agents are not bonded???

I used an agent on my first hunt and I think it was the right thing to do given my total lack of experience in such matters. However, the agent I chose met with an untimely demise... To which I was completely un-aware until the hunt was nearing and I googled him to discover he was dead! Fortunately for me and the outfitter we had discussed, I had not yet sent in a deposit. Another agent picked up the slack and everything worked out great... But in other situations I later became of aware of, there had been large sums of money that the agent had received and not passed on to outfitters yet... Hunts came up and the outfitter had to either make the deal right or the hunters would lose their deposits... I'm sure it cost several outfitters a lot of money. Yet they rely on these agents to help them book hunts so continue to work with them. I was actually surprised how understanding of the whole thing the outfitter was.

Now don't take that the wrong way, I think there is indeed a place for good booking agents. I received a lot of good advice and had a great comfort level having a stateside agent to talk to. And most of us know of hunts that seemed to go well, but then when the hunter is back home and has time to reminisce, he may question some of what went on... And sometimes it is difficult to raise issues as you are thousands of miles from home. A good agent with a good working relationship and a fair amount of leverage may be better situated to have any issues corrected. To truly act as a go between.

But I still don't understand why the larger agents don't get bonded.... Seems it would set them apart and reduce risk to everyone involved. And I don't think it is very expensive. Maybe non of them have sound enough financial histories?

 

[Red Leg]

Well you can think that but I am only stating facts that I know have happened to people I know. I think it is more a big assumption to think that it does not happen. I dont think the outfiitters go out of there way to screw there agents but as tough as times have been they will lower cost direct to client if asked.

Again I dont care if anyone wants to use a booking agent who gets a fee. Just one more person in the middle of your hunt when I would rather deal direct with who I am hunting with. Each there own and all can lead to good or bad hunts if you do or dont do your homework. I'd rather just do my homework on the outfitter not the outfitter and the agent.

Bill, I am sure you are "stating the facts" as you believe them, but have you considered it is just possible, there are some folks here, who also have a lot of experience with different outfitters, agents, etc who have a different set of "facts"?

 

[Royal27]

Well you can think that but I am only stating facts that I know have happened to people I know. I think it is more a big assumption to think that it does not happen. I dont think the outfiitters go out of there way to screw there agents but as tough as times have been they will lower cost direct to client if asked.

Again I dont care if anyone wants to use a booking agent who gets a fee. Just one more person in the middle of your hunt when I would rather deal direct with who I am hunting with. Each there own and all can lead to good or bad hunts if you do or dont do your homework. I'd rather just do my homework on the outfitter not the outfitter and the agent.

The facts as you know them in a very small sample size of personal experience.

Maybe that is why people try and find a good agent and use them? To get a larger sample size and not have to do all of the research themselves?

I haven't read back through the thread, but I know I didn't make the assumption that using an agent was always cheaper. I don't know that anyone has either, although I'm not going to take the time to look. Any third party adds cost, even you to Pawprint. Unless you are telling me you pay full list price for all animals and hunts? Perhaps the smart clients only consider outfitters that don't use agents or reps, so they can get the cheapest price possible. You know, cut out the middle man like you're suggesting.

You keep making broad brush statements that simply aren't true. Maybe the outfitters that you've dealt with will undercut an agent and not pay him commission after the agent has sent him a client in these hard times, but I seriously doubt all will.

 

[Dragan N.]

Well you can think that but I am only stating facts that I know have happened to people I know. I think it is more a big assumption to think that it does not happen. I dont think the outfiitters go out of there way to screw there agents but as tough as times have been they will lower cost direct to client if asked.

Again I dont care if anyone wants to use a booking agent who gets a fee. Just one more person in the middle of your hunt when I would rather deal direct with who I am hunting with. Each there own and all can lead to good or bad hunts if you do or dont do your homework. I'd rather just do my homework on the outfitter not the outfitter and the agent.

Look I agree with you in that I personally wouldn't use an agent and would rather deal with an outfitter directly. However with that being said a reputable and professional outfitter would not do that to their agent. Simply because that agent probably brings them a lot of business every year and they would not want to sour relations with them. A good agent and outfitter have a symbiotic relationship with each other. Secondly to many clients I would imagine that would look really "dirty" and unprofessional. If an outfitter were doing that to their agent, that would make me wonder what corners said outfitter might cut during the hunt/safari to cut costs?

Now no doubt what you have described happens as I am sure there is no shortage of unreputable or unprofessional agents and outfitters, like in almost every other industry...

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Never used an agent to book a hunt in Africa but I could see where I might use one in North America.

Correct me if I'm wrong, Charlie, but I believe you're hunting leopard with Pieter in Zimbabwe this year? If this is correct, I'd presume that Pieter will be along on your hunt which makes things somewhat different, but for the most part Pieter is playing the role of a booking agent. He won't actually be outfitting the hunt or be the PH on license for the hunt.

 

[billc]

Correct me if I'm Charlie, but I believe you're hunting leopard with Pieter in Zimbabwe this year? If this is correct, I'd presume that Pieter will be along on your hunt which makes things somewhat different, but for the most part Pieter is playing the role of a booking agent. He won't actually be outfitting the hunt or be the PH on license for the hunt.

Phil if you think that is the same thing your kidding yourself. Pieter will be on the hunt and doing what ever he can to make it go right. No law saying he can not do as much or more as the zim ph there just needs to be a zim ph there. When jacques did his hunts in zim was he a booking agent or a ph.


For the rest of you I am not saying everyone is a crook or cheating each other. Just like you all know good agents I know a few bad ones and also many outfitters who will do what they need to period to sell a hunt. I am saying the facts as I know them to be and some of you are telling your side. I dont deal with any of them but talked with enough to know it happens. This very thread shows what can happen agent or not so take what I say for what it is worth.

I am saying what I feel and dont believe I ever said anyone else is wrong or tried to prove I am right. I just call it like I see it no sugar coating anything because I have a friend in the business or because I want everyone to believe I am right.

AGAIN USE AN AGENT IF YOU LIKE. Just dont mislead people thinking they make for perfect hunts or dont end up costing more sometimes.Both sides of the story are out now for all to see and that is why I said what I did.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Phil if you think that is the same thing your kidding yourself. Pieter will be on the hunt and doing what ever he can to make it go right. No law saying he can not do as much or more as the zim ph there just needs to be a zim ph there. When jacques did his hunts in zim was he a booking agent or a ph.

Read my post again Bill. I expect Pieter will be on the hunt and said that made things a bit different. But the bottom line is a Zim PH will by law need to be present and I also believe a licensed Zim will have to outfit the hunt. So will Charlie be paying for two PHs? The Zim guy and Pieter?

I may be wrong as I don't have the details, but I'd guess Pieter is earning a commission from the outfitter which of course Charlie has to pay for but he won't be paying Pieter as PH.

From that point of view it's very similar to a booking agent. Yes it's different than the normal booking agent in that Pieter will be there.

Am I suggesting this is a bad thing? Not in the least, if Pieter is there to make sure all goes well and better yet Charlie gets his cat, then it's a great thing. But make no mistake about it, a price will have been paid for that.

And yes, when Jacques books hunts in Zim, this is exactly what he does, makes sure clients get there with no problems and experience no problems.

 

[billc]

You should have stuck with the I maybe wrong as I dont have the details. Because the -make no mistake about it, a price will have been paid for that. just may not be true. Again dont think because people you know do things one way that means we do it the same. Sometime things get done for other reasons over money.

This is really going no place and getting way off track. starting to go places it should not be so i will try and bow out nicely.

I will keep booking my owns hunts my way and helping anyone who needs help be it with pawprint or any other trip at no charge.