It was discussed, perhaps here, the notion that we are able to develop a shitstorm when something goes wrong, but the author could not recall an atta boy resulting in a built business.
I currently carry in a crossbreed, but my next holster will be a Dragon Leatherworks. By all accounts, all subsequent holsters will likely also be by Dennis.
I first noticed the notion he is referencing here:
I agree completely with you. Plus, bloggers are going to have to learn how, as a group, to give ‘treats to the dog’.
They certainly know, as a group, ‘how to beat the dog’, but they have yet to learn the opposite.
When they do that, then you might see that $20,000 back page ad payment. Otherwise, the ‘dog’ is continue to give money to those that do give it ‘treats’ and don’t beat it or throw stones at it all the time…
All The Best,
Frank W. James
… And responded with:
Otherwise, the ‘dog’ is continue to give money to those that do give it ‘treats’ and don’t beat it or throw stones at it all the time…
Right, because those bought-and-paid-for “reviews” that are nothing more than multi-page, effusive advertisements for the product in question have nothing to do with print media’s declining readership.
Oh. Wait. Was that too much of a “stone”?
… But, really, my comment falls short in one primary fashion: Frank James is simply wrong. Coincidentally, he is wrong for much the same reason that Paul Helinski is a bleeding moron, hence the "disparate thoughts".
Consider, as Oliver did, the story of Dragon Leatherworks. A little over a year-and-a-half ago, Jay G. introduced us to the Fugly, and in those intervening 20 months, Dennis’ business has grown from "just a hobby he was doing because someone encouraged him" to "he barely has time for anything other than work and holsters", all through the power of the gunblogosphere. Yes, Dennis did have one
ad photo on the back of the Concealed Carry Magazine, and his Quantum IWB/OWB Holster just got reviewed in Shooting Illustrated, but fully 99% of his business growth has been a direct product of word-of-mouth blogging, commenting, and communication.
I dare say taking a man from a hobby to an almost-sustainable primary business constitutes "giving ‘treats to the dog’", but what do I know?
Pretty much the same thing could be said for Michael’s Custom Holsters – so far as I know, the vast majority of his advertising and support has been by way of weblogs such as this one, and, hey, look, his leather is going to be on cable television. Oh, and by the way, his holster fabrication is his primary form of employment (I believe), and it has been made possible through the positive exposure through weblogs.
So, we "have yet to learn the opposite", huh?
Which brings us to an all-too-amusing email I coincidentally received very shortly after Oliver’s comment:
I’m stunned at the recent comments by Paul Helsinki of GunsAmerica — as you have pointed out, he seems to think that gun blogs are somehow "secondary" media, at least for the purpose of obtaining Shot Show credentials.
My new book‘s ONLY exposure was a mention on a couple gun blogs. The Kindle version now is outselling 96% of all Kindle books on Amazon (and Amazon now sells more Kindle editions than paper books).
Message to Paul: There’s nothing "secondary" about the gun blogosphere. A few positive words from a couple gun bloggers are going to put a nice dent in my three kids’ college tuition. Take the hint.
Director of Media Relations
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Proclaiming Liberty: What Patriots and Heroes Really Said about the Right to Keep and Bear Arms
Wow. That was a mighty big "stone" we webloggers threw at Phil, what with his climbing to the top of a very competitive stack within only a few weeks. Shame on us and all that.
No, we "nobody" webloggers are nowhere near being movers-and-shakers amongst the media elite, and that is ok, because we have something better: public opinion. Not only do we report on it, we can shape it with nothing more complicated than a few hundred-word post and a few pictures, the ripples of which can still be felt years and (small) fortunes later. And, yes, it is far easier to generate a negative public opinion wave than a positive one; helpful hint to those who have been residing in their ivory towers for a leeetle too long: it has always been that way. Reputations are difficult things… it takes you forever to generate a good one, and all it takes is one solid slip-up for you to destroy all that hard work; and that holds true regardless of the medium of communication.
If companies do not like getting negative reviews from upstart webloggers like me, I would suggest they stop producing/selling items that are deserving of negative reviews. If self-absorbed jackasses like Paul Helinski do not like being crowded by "nobodies" with a keyboard and a processor, I would suggest their get over their faragosis and stop being a dick. The introduction of the Internet and, specifically, "social" systems like weblogs, Twitter, Facebook, etc. has created an arguably more-substantial sea-change than the fielding of long bows at Agincourt; only a true idiot would bitterly cling to the supposed superiority of knights when barely-skilled craftsman are equipping barely-armored farmers who are knocking down human tanks left and right.
Get with the times or be left behind – for someone genuinely interested in his business, or maintaining his position in the world, I would think the choice would be simple.