Is PADI non-profit?

[MikeFerrara]

Oh well. The day sumeone talls me that my speling is wurse than MikeFerrera's then I'll instell a spalling cheker.

R..

Leave me out of it. I'm not even in this thread. LOL

 

[SVDiveMaster]

I've heard
Put
Another
Dollar
In
But what about

P ay
A nd
D ive
I nstantly

I'm a PADI DM just tryin to put some humor in. I really think it all depends on the instructor and the student. You get out what you put in.

 

[drbill]

Is the Pope Jewish?

 

[Greg Di]

Profit is not a dirty word. Having said that, education does not always mix well with the profit motive. The reason being, teachers and educational institutions have a power over their subjects which can be in a conflict of interest situation when mixed up in a customer/supplier relationship. When is the product in the best interest of the student versus making a $.

Just like healthcare (IMHO).

Thank you. That was exactly the point of my original post. I don't necessarily care about the cost of courses or materials (for any agency), I just think that it is in the ultimate interest of the "student body" to know that their educational institution has their best interests (and safety) as its sole priority and not generating cash.

 

[nonameisgood]

I think the key is that to be 501(c)3, you have to do a couple of things, including:
- have never used the name with a for-profit enterprise
- maintain incredibly clean financial records (more than most corps)
That said, not-for-profit allows you to make a lot of money, but it must be handled in certain ways. PADI does have non-profits (ProjectAWARE, PADI Foundation), and being for-profit simply allows them to do whatever they want with the profits, including give them away [which is not the case for 501(c)3's.]

As to the original post, compare most public school systems to private schools. Would you rather get a better education for more money, or settle for less benefit for less cost? It is a choice anyone that can afford it can make. Seems to me, PADI does a good job of making instructors, with minimal educational experience, good instructors.

 

[DivePartner1]

I think the key is that to be 501(c)3, you have to do a couple of things, including:
- maintain incredibly clean financial records (more than most corps)

This claim couldn't possibly be more wrong. In 20 years I've never seen a less accountable group for financial shenanigans than non-profits.

A (c)(3) need do little more than that file a Form 990, and few are forthcoming in sharing these although required to do so my law. With tens of thousands of new non-profits of all colors every year, the tiny number of staff that the IRS assigns to 501(c)(3)'s cannot possibly hope to provide minimal accountabilty much less anything close to the financial integrity of a public traded company. If Sarbanes Oxley applied to non-profits--and Congress actually funded someone to police non-profits--the prisions would be full.

Many, many, many non-profits are fronts for personal enrichment, whether through $130,000 salaries than soak up much of the revenues of small charities to insider dealings or asset deals. The have been many hearings of varieties of "private enurement" (as it's called) and how the IRS lacks any weapons to stop it.

Still, a few groups are paying attention: the following rates non-profits under its own reletively mild rules of minimally accountable conduct; www.give.org

Plug in some names. You might be surprised.

 

[jonnythan]

BTW how many scuba agencies are non-profit?

Two that I know of.

 

[miketsp]

Come to think of it aren't there a lot of profit making medical schools? Surely a doctor's training is just as critical?
Would I trust my surgeon more or less if he had been trained by a non profit making organisation?
Don't even like to think about it.

 

[nonameisgood]

As far as non-profit status, I guess I was basing my observation on the rules, not the practice. My point was, that it is easier to follow the rules for a regular (profit) business than a non-profit. There may be less oversight is some respects, but I expect the PADI guys were in it for the long run and were planning to follow the applicable rules. As for DP1's examples, there is a lot of corruption out there, and a lot of people that don't follow though.

I'm for profit. Most of us wouldn't do things it there wasn't some payoff - monetary or otherwise. Profit motive is the reason we have a great many things, like semiconductors, cable modems and constantly improving scuba gear. I am all for constant evolution and development of better training techniques, even if it means we pay a higher price, which is really not that high anyway.

I'll sit down and shut up for a while.

 

[dweeb]

Agency bashing is not suitable here on SB.

Some forum! So the entities most responsible for the safety of the sport (or lack thereof), essentially those governing the industry, are now immune from criticism? You forgot to say "You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile."

I don't think it matters if an agency is non or for profit.

It matters very much. It goes to the basic motivation of all major decisions. If Microsoft was run like Greenpeace, we'd all be using Apples today.

BTW how many scuba agencies are non-profit?

All the certification agencies based in the USA are non-profits, except for one, PADI. PADI started out as a non-profit, but then their own board of directors bought out the agency and made it a for profit corporation, 15-20 years ago.