The Problem With Hunting Clothing Brands Today

Brad@Argali

WKR
Rokslide Sponsor
Joined
Oct 12, 2016
Messages
608
Location
Idaho
As someone who has spent a lifetime in the backcountry and the last 10 years building a technical hunting gear company from the ground up, I’ve seen something happening in our industry that is a bit frustrating as a consumer.

In the early days of technical hunting clothing, most of the big names in technical hunting apparel were built by hunters — for hunters. They were focused, scrappy, and obsessed with the details: fabric performance, minimalist weight, and true mountain-tested functionality. And, they cared deeply about you and I, the consumer.

Today, things feel different.

All of the big technical hunting apparel brands have grown and sold to private equity or large corporations. That alone isn’t a crime or necessarily bad. And in some ways, you could argue that would be a benefit to us as consumers because of the resources it brings to R&D, scales of economy, etc. But what comes next, unfortunately, has been predictable: growth for growth’s sake. SKU expansion just to make things to sell. New customer segments. New product categories. Lifestyle apparel. Fishing. Turkey vests. Waterfowl. Whitetail. Products that are good enough but not great. And, endless camo patterns instead of focusing on arguably the most important items for clothing: fabric, fit, and function. You can't make the BEST western big game clothing if you're distracted and constantly chasing new markets.

A big part of this trend is the influx of private equity money into the hunting space, and the corporatization of brands that used to be in touch with the consumer, which seems to have impacted all of the major clothing companies and their priorities. Taking on funding isn’t a crime, nor does it have to result in poor outcomes, but the results in the hunting clothing space seem clear. The motivation isn’t long-term customer value and innovative products for the western market, but short-term profit maximization. Instead of focusing on making innovative western hunting products, the focus is on what will sell the most. And that key difference takes away the focus on where these brands all started: western backcountry hunting.

At some point, it becomes impossible to make the best gear for western, whitetail, waterfowl, upland and everything in between, while also making street clothes. If you take a look at the new products being released, the vast majority are focused on non-western hunting markets.

All of the current big brands were founded and run by real hunters, but that’s not the case anymore as they have been sold (and sometimes sold again), and the people who started them and knew their core consumer are no longer in charge. I don’t mean that as an insult, but it’s true.

So, I come back to this: loss of focus on western hunting, the symptom that the big clothing brands are all suffering from. As a founder, I don’t fault anyone for building something and cashing out. But I believe something has been lost, and I want to build a clothing line that brings it back and gets back to what matters to me: the core western hunting market. And I want to do it with your input and feedback.

I’m genuinely interested in the priorities you think are important for a western clothing line. How important is being quiet, fit, function, price? How important are feature sets? I’m listening to what you have to say.
 
How important is being quiet, fit, function, price?
Fit, function, price are all key for me. Quiet is nice for archery but most stuff breaks in. I'll sacrifice a little bit of noise for durability.

Personally, I see a lot of stuff that is very expensive but still made overseas. IMHO the price should represent that. If I can get things that perform just as well but the cost is half it's a no brainer. Both are made overseas.. so the rest is markup.
 
I recently reviewed a lot of jackets for function, and found the big name brands did very well compared to cheaper brands (not surprising the cheapest jacket was the worst in performance) but i was shocked at the first lite offering. It performed the worst of all the big name brands.

It seems the big name brands still are creating good functional gear for hunting purposes, and if they can add some different lines and still he good, why not?

Having said that, i have heard plus and minus on first lite for a while (since it was acquired by someone) but have been pleased with their merino briefs. That is the only stuff i have had from them for a long time.
 
Clothing that flat out works is what is needed. Everything else comes second (colors, camo patterns, features that don’t get used, the list goes on). What’s important are quality/type of materials used, overall quality control of the manufacturing, and fit/function for all pieces.

When you compare most “hunting” brand clothing side by side with the “technical” clothing brands, there are very few “hunting” pieces that come out on top performance and longevity wise. But folks still buy them for the “name” or “camo pattern”.

The other aspect is the sheer lack of use the “hunting” clothing gets with the average user. Guys will say things like “Those pants have been excellent for me for 5 years now!” When in reality, that rebates to maybe 25-30 field days of use. In my opinion that is nowhere near enough field days to make an informed “opinion”.

The market here is saturated, so being a differentiator is going to be a tough road. I’d let the quality/longevity/performance speak for itself and customers will come.
 
For a blue collar price is a big deal to me. Which I know ther are a lot of guys on this sight that have a large hunting budget so take that for wat it's worth. I would say fit is also a high priority as ther are plenty of nonhunting brands that make decent fitting clothing. If u want to build clothing u can truly hunt in they need to be moderate to extreme on the quiet scale

To summarize. I don't mind paying a lot if it's truly the best. But because of various styles of hunting and opinions I feel it's hard to please everyone so at a lower price point u would interest a wider range of hunters. Durability should also be a concern. Must be stealthy
Overall I feel to compete with the already loaded clothing market u need to stand out in some way
Reasonable price
Quieter than most
Durable
Non camo colors available
 
First lite was on the right track in the beginning with Scott and Kenton, but I dont blame them for selling. That was the plan all along. Ive known Scott for over 20yrs, long before FL was even an idea in his head. When he started it and I got some of the first items long before they sold anything to consumers back in 07', the goal from day 1 was to build a western clothing company based off merino wool, then sell and enjoy life. Which they both are doing. I have multiple friends who worked for the company in the original days who are no longer there due to the Meateater ways and takeover. Its a corporation based on making money. Now that they seem to spend more focus on whitetail and other shi* that was never the original message, I have a hard time wanting to support the company anymore. I think the hard thing is, when it gets into creating gear, consumers keep wanting to see more and more, and expansion which has pushed brands to go away from quality and the original focus of western hunting.

I personally find myself wearing solid colors almost always. The fad of creating new camo etc, is just wasted money IMO. Solids have killed animals for decades. I feel like you could save money focusing on the actual gear and how it functions instead of worrying about creating new camo patterns for one. Lightweight and ability to handle sweat such as Merino is definitely an important quality especially for backcountry hunters who dont change clothes daily I think. I also think with the prices of most the main brands now adays all pretty relatively close to each other for similar items, durability is very important. My FL 308 pants barely lasted a full scouting trip last year before tearing when i sat down on some rocks to glass. I understand wear and tear, but its not like it was razor sharp rocks, it was just scree gravel. So I would say including durability in the areas that see more abuse, would be important in keeping customers happy when they dont have torn gear after normal hunting use. For pants, i really like a more stretch material for comfort, and I also like the Prana zion type belt system that is part of the pant, cause i hate wearing a belt under a heavy pack if dont need to.

I guess the hard part is deciding what you can create that hasnt been done with the materials that are out there now adays. Your brand has a great following due to the time and effort you have put into everything so far, so Im sure you have some great ideas, its just harder now adays when you have so many people trying to be in the industry and "create" something.
 
I think that unless a dedicated hunting clothing brand is going to remain boutique, employ a handful of people and be content with making enough money to make their payroll, cover their expenses and make a highly variable amount of profit that may be slim, then the scenario described is inevitable and unavoidable if the expectation is turn an ever increasing amount of profit and compete in the marketplace with the established brands.

I don't think that in the case of the "big" hunting brands having casual/lifestyle lines equals a dilution of the technical gear in any real sense. I would imagine that the lifestyle lines have their own dedicated management and team that are exclusively focused on lifestyle fashion where the team that handles the technical wear has their own dedicated management and direct reports. If hunters are only going to buy big ticket technical wear every so often, then you need to make something to sell them in the interlude in order to keep turning a profit year over year. That's likely the case for growth whether or not private equity or parent corporation become involved and I think that is why that trend seems to be inevitable once brands reach a certain benchmark of growth. They have to compete with each other, their marketing budgets have to swell, pro staff has to grow, you need management for the pro staff..... you need more revenue to feed all of that and the profitability on selling $129 branded flannel shirts is likely quite high with little investment. On the consumer end, some dude is going to buy a flannel shirt because he wears flannel shirts, he likes X hunting brand, so he pays more to buy it from them. Likewise, his spouse and family know that he likes X hunting brand, so maybe they buy him some X hunting brand whiskey glasses or travel bags for his birthday.

I don't think you can compete with those brands without doing that. I don't think you can turn an ever increasing profit year over year without doing that. None of the successful brands set out to do that, yet they all ended up there. There's a reason for that.

The consumer wants, desires and needs for technical hunting clothing is obvious: lighter, more durable, more weather resistant, warmer/cooler and cheaper. Though the marketplace demonstrates that the consumer will pay a high price for what they perceive as quality and higher pricing within a margin can actually create more demand for high ticket items. We say we want cheaper, but the consumer has shown time and time again that they will pay more for "better" and this is game of always one upping and providing "better", therefore the costs keep going up.

My advice is if you want to set out to provide high quality hunting gear without falling into the inevitable trappings of capitalism, don't venture into the hunting apparel side of the industry because you're going to end up right there doing what these other brands are doing. The ski apparel industry is just as seasonal and no different in their approach than these hunting brands.
 
A big part of this trend is the influx of private equity money into the hunting space, and the corporatization of brands that used to be in touch with the consumer, which seems to have impacted all of the major clothing companies and their priorities. Taking on funding isn’t a crime, nor does it have to result in poor outcomes, but the results in the hunting clothing space seem clear. The motivation isn’t long-term customer value and innovative products for the western market, but short-term profit maximization. Instead of focusing on making innovative western hunting products, the focus is on what will sell the most. And that key difference takes away the focus on where these brands all started: western backcountry hunting.

At some point, it becomes impossible to make the best gear for western, whitetail, waterfowl, upland and everything in between, while also making street clothes. If you take a look at the new products being released, the vast majority are focused on non-western hunting markets.
Same thing has happened to most outdoor retailers over the last 20 to 40 years. Traditional brands like Woolrich, Filson and LL Bean, more modern brands like Mountain Hardwear or North Face, they've all kind of followed the same path and stopped making reliable clothing in favor of "lifestyle" branding. It's disappointing when you have older pieces that were durable and reliable and you genuinely cannot find a replacement.
 
Fit, function, price are all key for me. Quiet is nice for archery but most stuff breaks in. I'll sacrifice a little bit of noise for durability.

Personally, I see a lot of stuff that is very expensive but still made overseas. IMHO the price should represent that. If I can get things that perform just as well but the cost is half it's a no brainer. Both are made overseas.. so the rest is markup.
Appreciate that feedback. The overseas thing is interesting. The reality is the best manufacturers for outdoor apparel are outside of the U.S. The labor cost is for sure less expensive in most of Asia, but by no means is it "cheap" to produce apparel if you are using one of the better sewing factories. They have their pick with who they work with because they are good, and they pay their sewers a living wage to keep them around. The other thing to keep in mind is tariffs. Even before the dramatic increase in tariffs this year, tariffs for outdoor apparel were fairly high already (midlayer jackets are 33%). The complexity of the sewing, the raw materials and fabrics, shipping, tariffs, etc. all go into the cost. Not making excuses, just trying to be honest and transparent about costs.
 
I’m finding myself veering farther and farther away from hunting branded clothing and into higher end mountaineering gear. I haven’t found a set of pants that are more versatile temp wise and durable than my fjallraven kebs. I love my Kuhls as well. Arcteryx makes fantastic puffys, there’s a plethora of great tops out there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Clothing that flat out works is what is needed. Everything else comes second (colors, camo patterns, features that don’t get used, the list goes on). What’s important are quality/type of materials used, overall quality control of the manufacturing, and fit/function for all pieces.

When you compare most “hunting” brand clothing side by side with the “technical” clothing brands, there are very few “hunting” pieces that come out on top performance and longevity wise. But folks still buy them for the “name” or “camo pattern”.

The other aspect is the sheer lack of use the “hunting” clothing gets with the average user. Guys will say things like “Those pants have been excellent for me for 5 years now!” When in reality, that rebates to maybe 25-30 field days of use. In my opinion that is nowhere near enough field days to make an informed “opinion”.

The market here is saturated, so being a differentiator is going to be a tough road. I’d let the quality/longevity/performance speak for itself and customers will come.
I agree with all of what you have to say. It is a saturated market, but there is a lot I do not like about what I currently own from all of the bgi brands, which is what led me down this path. Either the fit is atrocious, the fabrics sound like velcro, or the feature set seams obviously poorly thought out. I think every brand has at least one great piece to be fair. And some brands I've used for years, have recently started using cheaper fabrics (merino wool that used to be soft, 17 micron, is now 21.5 micron) to increase their margins. So yes, it's saturated, but I don't think I'm alone in being frustrated with direction all the major players are headed.

Can we do anything better? I don't have the answers, but I've built a company with a stubborn commitment to only putting out products I believe in 100%, and I will have the same comittment to clothing. Appreciate your thougthful comments.
 
I’m finding myself veering farther and farther away from hunting branded clothing and into higher end mountaineering gear. I haven’t found a set of pants that are more versatile temp wise and durable than my fjallraven kebs. I love my Kuhls as well. Arcteryx makes fantastic puffys, there’s a plethora of great tops out there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've done that as well. Which honestly is a sad statement about where we are at. I have 2 pairs of Keb's, but they use cotton and frankly aren't very durable. Arcteryx makes some great pieces, as does Patagonia. But neither makes a full kit that is designed for what I want in a kit as the design purpose is entirely different. Arcteryx also seams to be transitioning into a fashio brand, IMO.
 
Same thing has happened to most outdoor retailers over the last 20 to 40 years. Traditional brands like Woolrich, Filson and LL Bean, more modern brands like Mountain Hardwear or North Face, they've all kind of followed the same path and stopped making reliable clothing in favor of "lifestyle" branding. It's disappointing when you have older pieces that were durable and reliable and you genuinely cannot find a replacement.
Agreed.
 
I think that unless a dedicated hunting clothing brand is going to remain boutique, employ a handful of people and be content with making enough money to make their payroll, cover their expenses and make a highly variable amount of profit that may be slim, then the scenario described is inevitable and unavoidable if the expectation is turn an ever increasing amount of profit and compete in the marketplace with the established brands.

I don't think that in the case of the "big" hunting brands having casual/lifestyle lines equals a dilution of the technical gear in any real sense. I would imagine that the lifestyle lines have their own dedicated management and team that are exclusively focused on lifestyle fashion where the team that handles the technical wear has their own dedicated management and direct reports. If hunters are only going to buy big ticket technical wear every so often, then you need to make something to sell them in the interlude in order to keep turning a profit year over year. That's likely the case for growth whether or not private equity or parent corporation become involved and I think that is why that trend seems to be inevitable once brands reach a certain benchmark of growth. They have to compete with each other, their marketing budgets have to swell, pro staff has to grow, you need management for the pro staff..... you need more revenue to feed all of that and the profitability on selling $129 branded flannel shirts is likely quite high with little investment. On the consumer end, some dude is going to buy a flannel shirt because he wears flannel shirts, he likes X hunting brand, so he pays more to buy it from them. Likewise, his spouse and family know that he likes X hunting brand, so maybe they buy him some X hunting brand whiskey glasses or travel bags for his birthday.

I don't think you can compete with those brands without doing that. I don't think you can turn an ever increasing profit year over year without doing that. None of the successful brands set out to do that, yet they all ended up there. There's a reason for that.

The consumer wants, desires and needs for technical hunting clothing is obvious: lighter, more durable, more weather resistant, warmer/cooler and cheaper. Though the marketplace demonstrates that the consumer will pay a high price for what they perceive as quality and higher pricing within a margin can actually create more demand for high ticket items. We say we want cheaper, but the consumer has shown time and time again that they will pay more for "better" and this is game of always one upping and providing "better", therefore the costs keep going up.

My advice is if you want to set out to provide high quality hunting gear without falling into the inevitable trappings of capitalism, don't venture into the hunting apparel side of the industry because you're going to end up right there doing what these other brands are doing. The ski apparel industry is just as seasonal and no different in their approach than these hunting brands.
I appreciate the thoughtful take. I don't think lifestyle apparel is bad or can't be done in conjunction with technical apparel. That wasn't my point. My point is that if you look at where we are at today, the focus of the big brands has changed away from western hunting towards whatever will sell the most, and that isn't western hunting. That's also why Eddie Bauer went from being the premier technical mountaineering brand decades ago to being a lifestyle apparel company and nobody remembers that they once put the first American team on Everest (literally). There are WAY more whitetail hunters than western hunters, and understably so, most of the big brands are putting most of their attention there. I don't think that's a bad thing, but it comes at a cost.

I've never been focused on how to make the most money. I've always been, and continue to be, focused on making the best gear possible. That's what motivates and drives me. Yes, it needs to make money. And yes, growth and competition require any smart business to adapt and make decisions that may not have been in line with where you started. That's completely understandable. But there is a tradeoff for that choice, and as a western hunter, we are dealing with the repercussions of that choice that seemingly all of the big players have made. That's my point. When I look at what I wear now, and the brands I look to to make a super light, layerable kit for backpack hunting, I do not look to the hunting industry for most of the pieces. It isn't that they don't know how to make it, but they aren't.

I'm not saying I have the answers, but I do have a pretty good sense of what I want, and unlike the big brands, I want to hear what you want instead of telling you what you should want for clothing.
 
For a blue collar price is a big deal to me. Which I know ther are a lot of guys on this sight that have a large hunting budget so take that for wat it's worth. I would say fit is also a high priority as ther are plenty of nonhunting brands that make decent fitting clothing. If u want to build clothing u can truly hunt in they need to be moderate to extreme on the quiet scale

To summarize. I don't mind paying a lot if it's truly the best. But because of various styles of hunting and opinions I feel it's hard to please everyone so at a lower price point u would interest a wider range of hunters. Durability should also be a concern. Must be stealthy
Overall I feel to compete with the already loaded clothing market u need to stand out in some way
Reasonable price
Quieter than most
Durable
Non camo colors available
I agree with all of that. Quiet is key for me, as is durability and fit. I think you'll also like where my head is at on colors.
 
Not making excuses, just trying to be honest and transparent about costs.
I've always been curious what the markup is, but I don't expect you post it. Companies need to turn a profit for obvious reasons but I wonder what the margin actually is.

Example, hunting company A sells its logo T shirts for $10, company B sells theirs for $35? Where does the huge difference come from?
 
I’m genuinely interested in the priorities you think are important for a western clothing line. How important is being quiet, fit, function, price? How important are feature sets? I’m listening to what you have to say.
Fit is really high on the list for me, there's too many brands I just flat-out can't wear because the tops are designed for a standard beer belly or the pants are built for twig legs. Function is important, price is obviously a factor but it depends on my expectations. I can budget for a more expensive jacket if I believe it will either last longer or do more.

Feature sets I'm less interested in, at least for clothing: they usually seem so focus-designed that if I don't use them precisely as intended, I have a bunch of confusing pockets. Fjallraven is really guilty of this from what I've seen.

One thing I don't see addressed often is durability, and honesty about the tradeoffs. I come from a backpacking / climbing background, and everyone there understands that you generally trade light weight for durability. Ultralight gear is often pretty fragile, but you accept that so you can move faster. Your ultralight, paper-thin puffy coat is made to be worn at a belay station, not while you're cruising up an ice gully. I have a light rainshell for alpine climbing, but I still use the rubber Helly Hansens for fishing.

For hunting, I'd love to see less "ultralight" gear that's designed for use above treeline, and more focus on quiet durability for the vast majority of western hunters that return to their truck camp at night. I rarely backpack on my hunts in the PNW, might cover 8 to 15 miles in a day, a few thousand feet of elevation, so I just really don't need the kind of gear that seems intended for sheep hunters. Seeing that stuff marketed to treestand whitetail hunters really blows my mind.

I missed out on the redkettle ventile jackets before they stopped production, but by all accounts, that's closer to what I'm looking for. Same with the varusteleka wool pants, something with a more modern cut/design and some cordura reinforcement panels would be perfect for late season hunts. I'm gradually moving back towards natural materials where I can for their longevity, I've got wool shirts that must be from the 80s and are just now starting to wear out in a few spots. Thick material, good sewing, and I can't find a single thing made today to replace them. I can't help but think most brands have no interest in selling me a product that will last decades, as opposed to planned obsolescence and selling me a new "ultralight" outfit every 2-3 years.
 
basic, durable gear the keeps up with how hunters use it as technology/gear changes.
example: I've got two early season jackets I like but rarely use now. one has two breast pockets which I love, phone in one, range finder in the other. My phone barely fits so it's a pain to get it in or out.
The other jacket only has one pocket and it's too small for my phone.
We use our phones for so many things now, it's just part of our kit now and it needs to be handy.

I agree with others, performance, fit and durability over camo and looks/lifestyle stuff.

One thing I've been looking for is a serious puffy vest, like 400-600 fill. The idea is I can add warmth under my puffy jacket around my core without making my arms so layered and bulky I can't move. If my core is warm, my arms/legs are warm.
 
Made in the USA.
Durability should be non-negotiable.
Fit matters. Not “athleisure-for-the-mountain” fit. I mean quiet fabrics, functional, and layering that works with a pack, rifle, and bino harness
Solid colors over gimmicky camo, functional fit over fashion -If a garment can’t hold up under real conditions like rock, brush, snow, and sweat, it doesn’t belong in the western market.
A focused lineup shows commitment. If a company’s pumping out gear for turkey hunting, waterfowl, and everything in-between all in one season, they’ve lost me. Give me a small catalog that reflects real design priorities: backcountry durability, thoughtful construction, and performance that’s field-tested and not influencer-approved!!!!!!!
I’m not looking for cheap and I expect to pay top dollar for gear that’s made in the USA and backed without excuses (like the EXO MTN model)
 
For several years, "hunting" brands have held little to no interest for me. Generic backpacking brands are ahead of them in every way, so there's no reason to shop with companies marketing only to hunters. Clothing is best off doing a few things well, rather than trying to make a million different options. Base layers, one kind of pants, one kind of basic top, some kind of fleece, a puffy (maybe two different fill weights), puffy pants, and a rain shell set. That's it.

  • Pants-Durable, able to deal with moisture etc. Maybe one pair of quiet ones for bow hunting. Currently wearing Fjallraven Keb for most things.
  • Base layer-Some durability is nice. Cheap merino/poly blends that don't cost more than $45 a set for top and bottom are as good as anything.
  • Fleece-Light and warm. Durable for some things. There are so many cheap options I'm not sure if there's much need for more. A natural fiber Alpha Direct type fabric would be cool. Currently using a cottage brand Alpha Direct 120 for most things. With all the dirt cheap grid fleece and hi-loft fleece out there, expensive fleece layers are stupid.
  • Puffy- ~5oz fill and under 13oz for most use. A ~9+oz fill under 26oz would be useful.
    • Puffy pants: Definitely need zips to go on and off without removing boots and gaiters
  • Top-Merino or blend, nothing fancy. Durable would be a benefit.
  • Rain gear-Not much to add to the current market. All of it is a compromise one way or the other, just depends on the conditions.
Most importantly? A company that isn't filling Youtube with hunting videos. Gear videos are plenty, there's already too much media promoting hunting. Just promote the gear. This is the cherry on top for me not shopping with hunting brands; it also avoids supporting the Youtube people.
The only advantage to coming up with another company would be if one place got every piece right, for a reasonable price, and kept things in stock.
 
Back
Top