Scuba
Contributor
Yes, as was the case until recently before web commerce. However, from my perspective this is the solution to the problem of what is increasingly becoming an inefficient business model in todays more competitive market environment.
Sorry to hear about the loss of a store you liked. A basic fact of business is that the business "climate" is always changing requiring adaptation. There's only a handful of American companies over 100 years old. Most or all are probably unrecognizable from their original form. Seperation of equipment sales and instruction would produce greater competition in these two distinctly different areas. Consumers would reap some benefits.
This brings up an excellent point. Given the fact of discounted online sales today and how most LDS's appear unable to compete in equipment sales. Is a manufacturer that prevents its dealers from competing in price - actually helping them and itself?
Halcyon, for example, can claim they will not sell to discounters or allow price competition between dealers on their products, so you won't find their merchandise at online discounters for less, or anywhere for that matter. This will cost them sales in two ways: against other manufacturer's products and against other dealers.
As more co.'s see the changing reality of the marketplace, (specially those interested in maximizing their full income potential) they will come to realize the need to sell to specialized equipment merchants in order to increase sales. As some begin exploiting this new outlet for sales, and if it becomes increasingly perceived as an advantage, others will be force to adopt this practice or they will fall behind the competition if this model becomes successful. Even if these sales come at the expense of their established dealers. A dealer with greater sales that maintains product integrity with good customer service is preferable to one which sells less product. Manufacturer dealer agreements are designed to be mutually beneficial. Both are always looking for better oportunity. These are generalizations.
Halcyon is probably perceived by most DIR influenced divers as a brand of superior products. However, success is a two edge sword. With the success of DIR and the gear associated with it, the competition for this increasing number of customers has begun to heat up. Which I suspect is a significant reason for Jarrods post and the attempt to trademark DIR by Halcyon, not GUE.
Others are starting to market and adopt products and training for the growing number of DIR customers. The new Oxycheq wing is off to a great start. If companies can make products that are perceived as good or perhaps even better than Halcyon's by DIR influenced customers, who I suspect are the bulk or at least a significant number of its customer base. Then, Halcyon and its dealers will be increasingly competing not only amongst each other, but with other dealers and products. Dealers will have to decide if its in their interest to promote what may be the more profitable Halcyon product per item, or another product with a lower profit per item, but greater number of item sales which could easily add up to greater profits. The inability of dealers to compete in price can easily compound any competitive problems, since it is one by its very nature. In addition, any misstep in quaility can prove very costly.
The successfuly created DIR mantra will insure it of at least a hard core loyal following as a small niche player in the near future.
Every company must choose its strategy.
