I wrote 32 newsletters in 2024, totaling somewhere around 40,000 words. Every newsletter reaches tens of thousands of people with an average open rate of 54%. It's a bit mind-boggling to think about. I'm quite chuffed that so many of you read 1500 words – and then take the time to respond with your own thoughts.

My goal for 2025 is mainly to continue to keep the quality bar high. A secondary personal goal is to "get out there" a bit more in the industry through speaking/strategy/etc, and I'd also like to cultivate more relationships – or at least get on more folks' radars for collaborations. I also need to take more advantage of finding interesting Europe/international topics that don't get quite as much coverage in the US. Anyways, glad you're here. Onwards.

Re: Everyone makes everything

"This one made me think of a recent one I stumbled upon around the wind tunnel effect creating conformity in car brands. I wonder if a similar thing has happened with outdoor brands—each brand makes a puffy that's more or less the same material, cut, pocket placement, etc. Or every shoe brand", regardless of how they were founded, now makes a Hoka-looking extra cushion shoe.”

This hits home, especially working in tech and seeing similar things happen in design. Every startup website also tends to converge towards the same style (whatever happens to be on trend at the time). When you’re focused on similar consumers, everyone ends up chasing similar metrics, employing similar strategies, and relying on broadly understood and successful patterns. The results naturally converge into sameness. This isn't necessarily inherently bad (there's a reason that ux patterns become widely used, they're understandable), but the constant trend towards the mean feels a bit sad sometimes.

“Do you think there’s ultimately still a sustainable space for a “we do this one thing, and do it exceptionally well” kind of small brand, or is it inevitable that a 500-lb gorilla in that sector will come and disrupt their space as part of a diversification effort, or that the small brand will feel pressure to grow and thus lose that identity?”

Oooof. It’s hard. You can’t begrudge anyone for wanting to grow their idea into something bigger or selling it to a larger company. Growth-wise it has a lot to do with the mentality of the founders and their goals. The same is true in tech – if your goal is to have a comfortable, successful lifestyle business you can make different decisions than if your goal is to be the next Facebook and you raise a ton of VC capital. As far as the competitors…it’s inevitable. But, brand equity, trust, and niche dedication is often something that they can’t really compete with (see, all the ultralight cottage backpack companies).

“I do wonder what to say about Patagonia. They have expanded waaaay beyond what anyone would have thought 10 years ago. How much do you think their approach influences the way other outdoor companies think about expansion?”

It’s interesting for sure. Patagonia’s product line is massively larger than ten years ago. I think they often get extra scrutiny because their brand is so closely tied to sustainability, but they’ve been equally susceptible to chasing the more casual and athleisure demographics as everyone else.

Re: Mountain lions and Prop 127

Mountain lions and wolves generated by far the most replies in my inbox this year. The combination of wildlife, hunting and policy tends to bring out both the most thoughtful and the most unhinged responses, no matter how middle-of-the-line and measured I try and approach things.

“If you think the people that hunt and kill mountain lions do so for the meat and it has nothing to do with trophy hunting you are sadly mistaken. I have seen far too many “stuffed” mountain lions, i. e. “Trophy’s” in the homes I have photographed over the years to believe that is true.”

I understand the feeling behind this. However, even if you feel that they’re “actually” doing it for a trophy, that law says that the meat must be used, the same could be said for other game species re: trophies. And, it still made for a disingenuous framing of the issue.

“You are so full of shite about Prop 127...just like every other uneducated person out there who opposes it. You clearly have no understanding of what really goes on with hunters gunning down mountain lions. Pinning the sex of the puma? Right. Last year 46% of the lions killed were female. You think hunters give a crap? What about the cubs left behind to starve to death? You still believe that the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation is relevant? Have you even read it? Lion populations will explode under Prop 127? Have they in CA where they're not hunted for sport? Have you even studied mountain lion populations to know that they, like every other apex predator, self-regulate their numbers? Take your ridiculous and smarmy American opinions to London and keep them there. We don't need you in these parts any longer.”

Alright, a quick run-through. The take rate is determined by CPW, and they manage male/female ratios of hunting quotas every year as part of population management strategies. Yes, I believe the North American Model is relevant. I read the decadal review recently. Yes, lion populations have grown in CA and there’s evidence that they’ve possibly negatively impacted bighorn sheep populations. I literally covered self-regulation in the article. My smarmy American opinions currently reside in London, but I’m gonna keep sharing them, even from here 😂.

“One of my staff subscribes to the Mountain Gazette and he shared your recent article on Proposition 127, which I felt was an excellent bit of journalism so thank you for that. As a wildlife professional myself, I will almost always side with my colleagues that are charged with real day-to-day wildlife management and I'm sure they appreciated your reporting as well.”

This one was from the CEO of a major wildlife organization, so it felt quite good to juxtapose it with some of the more emotionally charged emails.

Re: Mallorca and the GR221

“I know Mallorca is a mecca for cycling but I hear that it too has gotten a bit out of hand. Were you very aware of the cyclists?”

There were definitely a lot of cyclists out and about in Mallorca, both on tours and more local/self-guided. Hard for me to say if it was "out of hand" but definitely noticeable. The topic came up on a recent Second Nature episode with Michael Mazzara, where I learned that the bike trip industry was estimated at over $1B internationally. Wild. It’s on my to-do list to dig into that a bit more.

Re: All Maps are Wrong

I got quite a few appreciative emails from GIS engineers, guides, and AllTrails/Strava employees. It ended up getting re-shared in a few other places (thanks HackerNews for the traffic). I learned a lot from the professionals who reached out.

“One way to slightly improve location accuracy is to recalibrate the built-in compass in the iOS/Android device while the activity app (Strava, Garmin, All Trails, etc.) is off. Turning your mobile device completely off at least once a month also helps general device performance; I note a lot of people not doing this more often and usually resolves weird app behavior.”

A couple other folks mentioned the need to recalibrate both phones and devices like watches for accuracy – something I have never done before 🙃.

“Orientation can make a huge difference in accuracy…if people want the best accuracy with their phone they should probably put it sitting in the top of their pack (ideally at a 45º angle facing up)”

You mean my running vest pocket or deep in a jacket aren’t the ideal operating conditions?

“One thing: I think a barometer is used to measure ambient atmospheric pressure and an altimeter is used to measure altitude (compared to Mean Sea Level) using the correct local barometric pressure setting.”

I think we're both kinda right on this one (although I’m closer to wrong). Although I referred to it as a barometer, what's used in watches is technically a "barometric altimeter" or "pressure altimeter". I think it's still a "barometer", just calibrated to measure changes in altitude. As I understand, using "barometer" by itself typically implies weather usage, which would mean I was using it incorrectly.