Booking Agents:
Friend or Foe?
In previous articles, I
have offered my thoughts regarding proper preparation and attitude on the part
of clients who wish to improve their safari outcomes (“Seven Ways to Ruin an
Otherwise Perfectly Good Safari”), as well as rules of the road for
professional hunters and outfitters (“The Professional Hunter’s Ten
Commandments”). In this article, I explore the role of the booking agent in the
internet era.
Most hunters who have
contemplated or completed a hunting Safari in one of the African countries have
encountered a person calling himself (or herself) a “Booking Agent” or “Safari
Consultant”. Many have utilized the services of such a person, while others
have chosen not to do so. In both cases, clients have experienced good and bad
outcomes. So it is worthwhile to explore the role of these intermediaries (who
will be referred to as “agents” for ease and brevity), and to provide some tips
and advise in this regard.
The term “agent” is
sometimes confused with the term “outfitter” or “operator”. So let’s start with
some basic definitions. An “outfitter” in the context of the sport hunting
industry is a person or company who owns the rights to hunt in a specific area
or areas (another use of this term refers to a retailer who sells firearms,
equipment and clothing, but this usage is dated). The outfitter may also be a
PH or he may employ or contract with PHs to guide clients. The outfitter is
like the general contractor on a building site. He is the counterparty to the
hunting contract, if such a document exists. As such, he is obligated to
deliver the hunt according to the terms of the agreement. Sometimes,
individuals play multiple roles. For example, a South African outfitter or PH
who arranges a buffalo hunt for his client in Zimbabwe will usually receive a
commission from the Zimbabwean outfitter that actually provides the hunt, even
though the PH may accompany the client and behave like a PH for the duration of
the hunt. By definition, outfitters are
usually located in Africa … which fact gives rise to the need for an agent.
Agents are generally
located in the country where the hunts are marketed, normally the home base of
the client. I say generally because it is becoming more common for European
hunters to book across borders, even using American agents in some cases. But
traditionally, the agent speaks the same language, is located in the same or
near time zone, and is subject to the same legal jurisdiction as the client
…another important set of distinctions. The agent’s role is to market hunts on
behalf of the operators he/she represents, and receives a commission from the
operator for each hunt arranged. This is very similar to the role of a realtor
in a residential home purchase transaction. The agent has a fiduciary duty to
the operator, not to the client. In
some cases, agents have a legal agreement with the operator defining their
mutual obligations. It is highly unusual for an agent to enter into a legal
agreement with a client. The hunting contract, if any, is invariably between
the client and the operator. However, the agent by necessity makes
representations to the client regarding the hunt, pricing, and even travel
arrangements, which can lead the client to believe that the agent is the
outfitter. In other cases, the agent may act as if he/she represents the
client, assisting him/her in selecting a hunt from a smorgasbord of operators
(this type of agent prefers to be called a “consultant”). However, unless the client pays the agent a
retainer or fee, and has some form of explicit agreement with the agent, the
agent remains beholden primarily to the operator(s) he/she represents.
Why then would a client
bother with an agent, who after all is an intermediary working for the
outfitter? Particularly in today’s internet era, it is increasingly easy to
communicate directly with the operator by email and to make the booking
directly? This model works well for many clients, who shop on the internet and
then either book long distance, or consummate the arrangement at one of the
shows in his home country. These clients believe they are getting the “straight
scoop”, and “cutting out the middleman”, thereby saving money on their hunt.
And some clients do save money this way, particularly where the price is a special
“negotiated” price for a late season hunt. However, in the vast majority of
cases, there is no savings as the outfitter must recover his own marketing
costs and has little or no incentive to come off his price list for a client
booking a single hunt. The foundation of any agent/outfitter relationship is
that both parties work off the same price list. And in many cases, the
“straight scoop” turns out to be nothing more than sales talk on the part of
the outfitter. In the worst cases, the
client sends off his deposit in good faith and subsequently finds out that he
has been taken to a minor or major degree. He then faces the reality of trying
to recover money or some other consideration from a person or company located
in a foreign country. Even if he has a well-written hunting contract, it’s
rarely worth the time and hassle to try to obtain financial compensation for
what he perceives to be a breach of contract. And in many cases, hunting
contracts are rather vague on deliverables and heavy on contingencies and
protections for the operator.
A good agent who is in the
business for the long haul has a huge incentive to provide a reliable and
honest service to his clients. He is mindful of the power of referrals, and of
course most clients return to Africa time and again, providing the agent with
repeat business. The agent will have
researched the companies he represents, and in most cases he will be an
experienced hunter who knows the hunt country in general and the specific areas
he markets through personal experience. He will have a more than one area/hunt
in his portfolio, and will be able to point a client in the right direction,
having established the hunt objectives. Establishing realistic objectives is
the first of four ways in which agents provide value to clients. Guiding the
client to the right country/area/operator is the second. Filling in the
multitude of details is the third. Handling the money is the fourth.
1.
Establishing
Objectives. Many first-time clients
draw up a list of species that they wish to hunt (too often based on a notion
of what horns they wish to hang on their trophy room walls) and then try to
find the cheapest quote. And some have an unrealistic idea of what $10,000 will
buy. This can be a very frustrating
exercise as Africa is not a hypermarket, where one can find a 55” Kudu in on
aisle, a Sitatunga in another, and a Sable in a third. If there are two or more
hunters in the group, this becomes even more complicated. Jim may want a Sable
and a Leopard, while Bob has his mind set on an Eland, a Kudu and a Nyala. A good agent can save these two gents a lot
of time and frustration. In addition, one can pay a large price premium for a
species in an area where the species is uncommon (or sadly relocated a few days
prior to the hunt). An Oryx in the Eastern Cape is going to cost a lot more
than the same animal in Namibia. Conversely, Impala and Warthog are expensive
in Namibia but rather cheap in Zululand. Many hunters try to mix dangerous game
and plains game hunting. From a cost perspective, it’s usually better to take
one’s plains game at a $350 daily rate, spending only the time necessary to
complete your DG wish list at $1200 or more per day. Furthermore, the chances
of getting a really good trophy vary greatly from area to area due to genetics
and diet. Most outfitters provide a long list of species available but fail to
point out that some of them are very seldom encountered in the hunt area. The
agent should be able to clarify which species are common and which are not.
Then there are important questions about hunting style, physical condition,
time and money and so on. It’s important to spend some time sorting out which
species are most important, what the household budget will withstand (not
forgetting taxidermy!), whether the hunt is about horns or memories, what side
trips a spouse may find interesting, and so on. The agent will help the client
to develop a realistic and feasible set of objectives before making specific
recommendations for a hunt.
2.
Selecting a
Hunt. Once a budget and set of
priorities are established, a good agent will iterate between areas and
species, help the client to make tradeoffs and compromises, and eventually
settle on a hunt that will provide a high probability of connecting with a
short list of quality trophies at a price that fits the client’s budget, even
if some species have to be crossed off the list. Often this discussion leads to
a multi-year hunt plan, with the hunter taking some of his species the first
year and then returning a year or two later to collect the remainder. For
example, the first hunt may concentrate on the common Kalahari species in
Namibia, with the Sable and Buffalo hunt taking place in Zimbabwe on a
subsequent trip. Or it may be necessary to arrange a back-to-back hunt to achieve
the hunt objectives. If an agent does not have the “right” hunt in his
portfolio, he can usually develop a solution by working his contacts and doing
some research.
3.
Filling in the
Details. Once the destination
country, area and operator are decided, the agent will recommend the best
travel routing, provide advice regarding calibers and packing list, explain the
firearms importation process, identify necessary disease prophylaxis, provide
references, and answer the many questions the client will have about the camp,
the area, the best months and so on. This can all be done in person, on the
phone, or by internet, in half the time it would take to extract all this
information from the typical operator. The latter, due to location, time zone,
and profession may be incommunicado for long periods of time.
4.
Handling the
Money. Taking the deposit and final
hunt payment is another way the agent can be of help. It is far more convenient
to make payments via an agent located “at home”, vs. wiring money to a bank in a
country that may change its name before the hunt takes place, or getting on a
plane with a money belt bulging with $100 notes. Clients headed to Zimbabwe, in
particular, are often asked to bring cash to pay for their hunts. It is far
safer to entrust the funds to the agent who will arrange to pay the operator at
the appropriate times. In some cases, agents will hold some of the funds until
the hunt is completed to the satisfaction of the client. This is a tricky area
as “satisfaction” is a subjective concept. However, in cases where there is
major uncertainty as to the outcome, this is a wise way to proceed.
You will note that I have
not listed trophy handling in the list above. An agent will sometimes stay in
the loop until trophies are hung in their reserved spots, but in reality, an
agent cannot provide much help in getting trophies home. The outfitter is
responsible for getting the trophies to the selected taxidermist for mounting
or dip/pack, and for providing the necessary paperwork to cause the government
cogs to turn in the necessary manner. The agent cannot do much to facilitate
this process, other than to make sure the client understands how the process
works. Many clients allow the outfitter to select the taxidermist, who in turn
selects the shipper. This works but is usually not the lowest cost solution.
The client should appoint and negotiate directly with the taxidermist, as well
as pick the export carrier based on crate dimensions and weights when these are
known. This part of the process is rife with kickbacks and these can add to the
final bill if the process is not managed.
Some clients believe they
can protect themselves against fraud by booking through an agent. This is
somewhat true, to the extent that a good agent is not going to hook a client up
with a fly-by-night outfitter as his reputation is his only asset. But even if
the client pays for the hunt via the agent, he may not be able to recover
damages by suing the agent if the hunt goes bad, other than perhaps the rather
modest commission retained by the agent, and even then only if the agent has
operated in bad faith. So in the event
of a major letdown, the best the agent can usually do is to lean on his
outfitter to settle the matter. If the agent is a good source of clients for
the outfitter, he usually has a lot more leverage with the outfitter, and can
negotiate a settlement on behalf of the client. But the main role of the agent
is to help the client to avoid making a booking mistake in the first place.
Another point worth mentioning
is the fairly common situation where a client wishes to book a repeat hunt with a particular
operator. Many clients believe it is appropriate to go direct for follow-up
hunts. However, in practice, most agents have an agreement with the outfitter
that he/she will receive a (reduced) commission on follow-up hunts, and the
ethical outfitter will refer the client back to the agent for subsequent
bookings anyway. Furthermore, an agent will sometimes advise a client to book
with a different operator for a subsequent hunt. When he does so, it’s usually
for a good reason. In a recent situation, I advised a client who wished to book
a third hunt with a particular operator, against doing so. The outfitter’s
access to a particular hunting area had been revoked, something the client was
not aware of. The client chose to ignore my advice based on his relationship
with and confidence in the outfitter. His hunt, in his own words, was a “bust”,
and he returned trophy-less, having hunted a secondary area and not seen as
much as a fresh track made by the desired beast.
Finally, it is necessary
to point out that not every agent is a “good” agent. There is no certification or qualification required to become an
agent. Pretty much anyone can hang out a shingle and many do, mostly on a
part-time basis. There are slipshod agents who have only a superficial
knowledge of the hunts they sell, will tell the client what he wants to hear,
take his deposit, skim off a commission and then move on. These don’t survive
very long. And many hunters return from their first hunt in Africa having
established an informal agreement with their PH to the effect that if the
client returns with enough of his “buddies”, he will enjoy a free hunt. These
folks are not bona-fide agents, they clearly have a major conflict of interest,
their knowledge is usually limited to one high-fenced ranch, and they
invariably fail to disclose their real role to their “clients”.
In summary, an agent can be a valuable and efficient resource in the
hunt-planning process, provided one sticks to agents who are professionals and
not amateurs, who have been in business for a number of years, and who are
willing to take the time to understand and discuss the client’s objectives and
constraints before suggesting a hunt. On the other hand, clients who know
exactly what they want and where to find it will not find an agent very useful.
Russ Gould owns and operates Big Five HQ (bigfivehq.com), a website offering heavy caliber magazine and double rifles, shooting and hunting accessories, and hunting safaris for plains and dangerous game in Zimbabwe, South Africa, Namibia, Tanzania and Mozambique.