The AOW minimums mean that the student did at least 1 dive to at least 61'. So, assuming more than that is just that - an assumption - and not justified, based on the PADI standards. Similar for assuming they have "some navigation skills". The requirements are that they did 1 U/W Nav dive. Assuming they have "some navigation skills" based on that seems a bit tenuous. Reading the first chapter of a Physics book doesn't mean a person knows "some physics." And I don't see any requirements of AOW to justify an assumption of functional buoyancy and trim.
You could get an AOW card by having 9 dives under your belt, where one dive is to 61', one dive has some U/W Nav component, and the other 3 are about coral reef conservation, fish identification, and being an underwater naturalist.
If you think seeing someone holding that card allows you to make ANY assumptions about the depth or breadth of that diver's knowledge or skills (beyond they did 1 dive to 61' and they saw a compass once), I think, well, that's pretty funny.
But, the funniest thing to me is if it's actually true that insurance companies give a hoot about whether divers have this card when they go out on a boat for a dive that "requires Advanced." If the insurance companies actually believe that having AOW somehow gives them (the insurance company) more protection against claims, I'd say PADI's Marketing Department should all get a bonus! More likely it's just a way for the insurance companies to get out of paying claims - i.e. a loophole they can exploit. "Sorry, Captain Bill. You didn't make sure the dead guy had an AOW card. It doesn't matter that he was a Tech diver with 2000 dives. He didn't have an AOW card, so we're not paying for the lawsuit from his family."
The longer this thread goes, the more I DO think PADI AOW is a joke. I'm not saying that every AOW course out there is a joke. I am SURE that there are instructors out there that actually really teach their AOW students a lot. But, that's beside the point. The point is that the AOW minimum standards are so, umm, "light" that just seeing the card doesn't really - to ME - mean anything more than that they have done at least 9 dives, total, counting their original 4 OW training dives. Ceding someone the title of "Advanced" based on meeting those standards does seem to be kind of a joke - to me.
In other words, if I were running a dive charter boat taking people on dives that I thought should require "Advanced", the credentials I would require would be more than just seeing an AOW card - as the AOW card by itself doesn't mean ANYTHING, in terms of whether someone is competent and capable of doing an "advanced" dive. Maybe they had a great class and ARE capable - but I would have no basis to ASSUME that just because they have the card.
Who here actually thinks a person with 9 dives, one of which was to 61' and all the others were less, one dive for U/W Nav, and 3 dives for coral reef conservation, fish identification, and underwater naturalism, should be ASSUMED to be competent to go out on a boat, in 5' seas in the Atlantic, and dive in a current, to a wreck that is 115' down?
As far as I can tell, that's how things actually are. The dive companies in the Outer Banks just say "requires Advanced" to do exactly what I just described. Go down there and get on a boat. IF they even ask, you can show them your AOW card and you're good to go.
And that is an example, to me, illustrating that AOW is a joke. Maybe even a deadly joke.