earthworm77

Guy's I own a tackle company and have operated it and watched it grow for the last 10 years. I've been very successful and I get a ton of sponsorship requests. I hate to put anyone down but understand, just because you have a rod and a reel, can cast and occassionally catch a fish or even win a tournament, this does not qualify you to earn any sponsorship. The word is EARN. Why do you think you have any shot at getting sponsored when there are literally 100's of thousands of bass anglers out there who are likely more skilled, can write a better resume, have more accolades etc.? I'm not trying to bash anyone but these "anyone know where I can get sponsored" posts are ridiculous. I currently have 10 sponsors, ranging from rods to baits to clothing. I gained each of them the old fashioned way......I worked for them, sent resumes, actually used the products etc. I suggest to those of you who think you are ready for a sponsorship deal to actually work at it rather than think someone here will guide you to it or give you a freebie.

Amen George! Most guys don't get it, and even fewer get that kind of deal.

Guys one thing you need to understand is that manufacturers are looking for people with marketability. You could be the best fisherman in the world but if you aren't marketable or likable to the public, you will not be a very good candidate for sponsorship. All anglers seem to think that getting sponsored is a great way to get free stuff. Realize that anglers are a dime a dozen. Why would anyone want to pick you? You must stand out from the other 99.9% of people who are persuing the same sponsorships that you are. Once you understand that you need to be different, then you can get on track and really be serious about obtaining these sponsorships. This is NOT for everyone and certainly not for anyone who is merely looking for free stuff. Manufacturers will see through that quickly.

Since you are a young guy, you need to develope a strategy to show potential sponsors you are marketable. You can successfully endorse their products and people will actually hold your endorsement with value. For the average angler, this is very tough. My advice is at the moment, don't try to get sponsored, instead hone your skills and become a good angler and attempt to gain a positive reputation locally. Maybe join a club in the future and get some accomplishments under your belt that would show potential sponsors you are a force in the fishing community. I also advise you to get Fish For Free I and II. These are two books that go through the steps you should take when trying to attract sponsors. I have both books and they helped me. I'm sure guys will chime in and say the same. One thing I would do is clean up your profile/signature. I've noticed that in order to walk the walk, you must also talk the talk. Don't advertise that you are a new guy trying to learn tubes and plastics in your signature. Think about it, why would any lure manufacturer consider a guy who isn't already proficient with these particular baits? You want to give the impression that you know what you are doing without looking like a egotistical maniac. I would just go with a nice clean, basic signature with no personal info. You don't want to have people thinknig you are really young based on what you have written. And although DimeBag was the force behind Pantera, I'd leave his photo out as well. You want to project a positive, clean cut image. As someone who owns a successful tackle company, I deal with people from all walks of life, I do a ton of business with people from the South and mid west. These areas are often referred to as the bible belt. This is the home of bass fishing as we know it. These people are much more conservative in their lives than you may be, keep that in mind as you may be writing your resume to someone who is more refined. There are people from various manufacturers who cruise these sites.

I followed your diagrams and made some nice baits as well. I used tin snips to cut the blades and a dremel to drill the holes. The baits run exactly like the original Chatter Bait. Nice job, thanks for sharing.

Nice job on the diagrams. How does the bait move in the water?

No difference at all.

I think you could do that but the end result would be rather thick.

Currently there are none available to the public. You could get one milled butit would likely cost several 100.00

You might want to check this website out, sign up for the newsletter. There are some great tips. www.fishingsponsorship.com

00 or 0

I have to say that although this bait is called a Chatterbait knock off, it really is quite different. I use a duo lock snap. It keeps the line tie and the hook eye inline and prevents any leverage and the blade will not collapse into the hook point.

worm oil

Bassbum, go to micromark.com and buy their 1 to 1 silicone material. It will produce LC type molds. I have made a ton of them lately. You will get about 5 or 6 molds out of it compared to 1 or 2 from the LC silicone and the price is 32.00 for 2 pounds which is great. What you need to do is make a square or rectangle frame in the size of the mold. Next, take some old plastic and melt it down, when it is liquid, pour it into the frame, just enough to cover the area within the frame, while it is still hot carefully place the bait you want to dupe in position. The p[lastic you poured will keep the bait in place and prevent it from floating up into the silicone, thus eliminating any cutting you would have to do to free it. I used to use Durhams water putty when making molds, it is a quick fix....silicone works much better. If you've seen any of the swimbaits I've posted here, I made them with silicone and don't believe I could have gotten the same or similar finished product using plaster.

Bobo, you can do it two ways- 1- get a mold like the one available at delmart.com and literally mold them. This mold comes with an insert in the mold that makes the hollow part. or 2- You can dip them on steel rods like I do. This is a time consuming process but I prefer it to the mold. I can change the diamter of my tubes by dipping more or less. Either way you will need some kind of cutting tool to make the tails. I wrote a book on pouring soft plastics and I'm working on a follow up, I haven't even begun to talk about dipping tubes in them. There is a lot to cover.

If photoman was my source you would be correct. ;D Perhaps the person who told me heard it from him. Doesn't matter. This thread is surely better than another Ike thread.

Felch, next time, I'll run it by you first to make sure you approve. : Whether the information I got was right or wrong, I certainly wouldn't post that persons name, that is the most ridiculous thing I ever heard. That would pretty much kill any privleged info coming my way in the future. If I told you Mr. Brown gave me that info, does it really matter. I too want to know what really happened. Matt, that guy was really close with just about everything he said. I know you are in the know, you just never answer your emails. lol Any truth to a 21.5 caught yesterday at ?Shasta?

The reason why I asked this question was this: On March 14th of this year, I learned of this fish being caught by someone out in California who is in the big bass circle. The weight, the person and the facts, pretty much dead on par with what was reported on March 20th. Now, the story broke a full six days before this catch was made public but the report said that the fish was caught on the 20th. Initially I thought it was just another April Fools joke come a little early but then I got some calls from my Staffers out there and it seemed to be legit. Was it a smokescreen and did it really happen at Dixon. These guys are notorious for giving false info. After all Mike Long claimed this fish was dead several years ago and that he saw it floating on the surface.....I guess not. I think there is more to this than a simply lone gunman theory.

Avid, lol.

I'm not so sure about that. This fish seems to go through being dragged around on a stringer once every 4 or 5 years. I doubt that just because somebody like Mike Long claims to see the bass dead, really means it is dead. That could be just a ploy to relax some of the pressure on any given body of water. This fish will make news again.

Certified scales is the only way. Which Perry used Perry claimed he weighed his fish at a gereal store, there are no eyewitness accounts to back this up. His fish simply sounds like a fish story. Nobody seems to have seen it. Trap, what is your reason for believing this other than you are from Georgia? Also, questioning Mattlures experience is a little out of your league. I know about him based on his big bass fishing. He might be the last guy you should have said that to.

For all the guys who believe Perry's fish was true as claimed, you have been offered many snippetts of information on why it looks like a bogus record. Can you name a few facts on why it should stand? Obviously the IGFA was not as stringent 75 years ago because it seems that this fish was hurried along into a vacant slot with little proof at all. Like I said in a post weeks ago, according to my research a photo doesn't exist. I even went so far as to contact the IGFA and they do not have one. I just would like to know what motivates someone to adamantly defend this record with absolutely no proof that it even was caught. As for the photo I posted, Matt, I couldn't find the tacklebox photo in which Perry posed with a 13.4 that one the 1933 Flield and Stream contest....that fish, certainly wasn't even close to even 8 or 9lbs. The photo I posted has the 13.4 weight listed in the caption so I think it is of the same fish but it does look a little bigger, possibly 8lbs or so but still not close to a teener. I simply can't believe in a record simply because it is on the books. As important as this seems to be for the sport we love, it should be met with some scrutiny since there are no supporting facts to back it up. Simply accepting it because its been around for 75 years isn't reason enough for me....especially under the curcumstances.

I think they are both the same fish. They are both listed at 13.4 and you are right, neither is even half of that.

Roger that is the exact photo I was talking about. The one I posted is of the same fish but it does look a little larger than the fish on the cover of the Sept 2005 issue. Once again I agree. After reading about this for the past several years and also learning about the letters Perry wrote to Creek Chub trying to get free lures in exchange for a photo of the record that he never produced, I conclude that this guy was a scammer. I've never said before that he was a liar but now I am saying just that. Nostalgically its a great story but I'm convinced it is fake.

You ask, you get