predator quest scope sucks like no other

No way I could push garbage on my fellow hunters for a paycheck. Apparently Les has no problem with it.

If my name is going on something, it will be something worth putting it on, or it ain't happenin'.......
 
Originally Posted By: Orneryolfart357 I'd sure like to see through HIS personal scope that he impresses folks with on the TV show, and see if its the same as what we are offered from Simmons.


Before anyone says that this doesn't happen, I want to say that I know with %100 certainty that this does happen in golf on the PGA tour. A tour players set of irons cost in excess of $5,000 per set to make and share similarities in aesthetics alone compared to what the golfing public can buy.



Chupa
 
Originally Posted By: COYKILLi had the Simmons Pedator Quest scope and at first I thought it was pretty nice but when it was powered up past 8 or 9 power evan with the side parralex it was foggy. Sent it back to Cabela's. If I was Less Johnson I would be ashamed to advertise for it. I also figured if it was good for him it would be good for me. That wasn't the case.



iT'S ONLY ON THE DOUBLE RIFLE(the one thats edited in )...... he wouldnt shoot that
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I got to wondering about something.

If Simmons Optics wanted to buy a sponsors banner here, as in pay to advertise their products here on Predator Masters, would Predator Masters tell Simmons Optics that they sell crap, refuse their money, and tell them they do not want them advertising here?

Let us ponder that one for a bit.
 
Originally Posted By: doggin coyotesI got to wondering about something.

If Simmons Optics wanted to buy a sponsors banner here, as in pay to advertise their products here on Predator Masters, would Predator Masters tell Simmons Optics that they sell crap, refuse their money, and tell them they do not want them advertising here?

Let us ponder that one for a bit.

Even if they did sponsor, I would not support them. Their optics ARE crap and I wouldnt mount them on anything.
 
PM would take their money, no doubt. However, the members would still be free to voice their opinions of the company's wares.

Eventually, after much bad press, Simmons would pull out, and PM would say thanks for the loot, see you later.....
 
I can recall many a huntin' shows I've watched where Leupold is not even a sponsor, but some other company like Simmons or whoever is.

They try to not show you any close ups of the scopes they are using, but sometimes you can tell someone is sporting a Leupold and not the crap they are advertising during the commercials.....
 
Originally Posted By: 2muchgunPM would take their money, no doubt.

PM would say thanks for the loot, see you later.....

Swap the letters PM with L.J.

Follow the money.
 
along with endorsements come freebies.. Its prolly tough to not advertize for folks paying the bills. If you dont pay much to shoot, its easy to embelish the results regardless of the outcome.
 
Originally Posted By: 2muchgunWhen Les Johnson is hunting but not filming, I can guarantee you he isn't sportin' a Simmons on his rifle........

But Simmons is selling a whole buncha scopes because he says he is. And that's really all that matters.
 
You got that right Shane.. But it can carry further IMO. How about Websites that promotes the same thing. Misinformation can bring Millions to a vendor. Could a website be enticed to celebrate the acalades of a product that actually does not help a hunter? I think that they could. If folks stand to recieve gifts from a said Vendor, they may change their own view on a product in order to accept whatever gifts come along with the advertising. Im not a Marketing kida Guy, but it makes sense to me.
 
Advertising goes a long way! How many people know about a vastly inferior oil filter when much betters exist for better pricing and better performance, minus the fancy orange paint and "grippy". Ok I may be losing some people hear but you get the idea. We buy stuff because our role models have always used said item, etc. Dodge vs Chevy, Rem vs Savage and the list goes on.

I just don't appreciate some of our "Mainstream" hunters endorsing junk and passing it off as a 'signature' line product "X". It's like saying the Honda that Andretti drives is a "slightly modified Civic".

Ok, I guess my rant is over, for now.
 
Originally Posted By: Verminator2With Les Johnson being one of the most prominent predator callers in the world, I never understood why he didn't at least get a sponsorship from Bushnell, Nikon, Burris, or Leupold. Instead all he can get is Simmons and Nikko Sterling? Seems like he ought to be able to acquire better sponsors than that.

Ill just say that there IS a reason why he has to get new sponsors soo often.
 
I will not mention names but I can say that the posters above pretty much have
it right...... follow the money. I know of occasions when a major TV hunting show changed products only because they got a better offer/more money from a company who's product was perceived of lesser quality. Was the product totally junk absolutely NOT but they made a business decision to take the money and use the product BUT they did work with the sponsor to give them feedback and help the sponsor to improve and tailor their product to make it more appealing to sportsmen,hunters who used the product. I think most here would like to think they if put in that situation would only take advertisers who were selling top notch products but as in all things it depends on the situation and how the sponsor approached you.
If some company came to you with a piece of junk and says hey use this overhyped overpriced (all scent suits)
rolleyes.gif
because we make them in China and there is 500% profit and you can help us to convince folks to buy it then you are selling out IMO. If they OTOH say look we make this product we feel is good but need someone who uses it all the time to help us make it better because we want to sell THE Best. That's different.
 
Back
Top