Let The revolution Begin!

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

MikeFerrara:
We know exactly who created it. Don't we?

I think Cronin had good intentions, trying to standardize a basic standard of performance. Then the AOW course is supposed to be actively marketed, so if the 4-dive one-weekend graduates sign up for AOW, that gives them 4 more dives for a total of 8.

The real proof is in the pudding, with insurance rates. Last year some agencies' rates climbed to $600 or more per year while other agencies' stayed lower. The actuaries will always get you if you don't watch out.
 
deepbluetech:
I don't see how you get to pre-educate the newbie so they can make an intelligent choice-really sad thing about it is that people spend $100's of dollars without a thought on golf and tennis lessons but will nickel and dime about a scuba lesson,

I don't know, I see a lot of deals for new golfers for "low priced introductory lessons" and reduced rentals and greens fees for new golfers. Same on the slopes for snow skiing.

Most leisure sports offer inexpensive ways to get into a potentially expensive sport. For diving that happens to be the inexpensive OW certs. Maybe it shouldn't be -- but it is.

The way you educate a new diver is to train them, show them how fun diving is, and expose them to how much they still have to learn. Golf and Snow skiing actually have this figured out -- but the golf and ski shop industrys aren't a heck of a lot more healthy than the dive shop industry -- guess what, they also blame the internet -- but that is a different thread... LOL.

MikeFerrara:
Good point. What you say mirrors my experience and what I see exactly.

The market for DIRF is also a good example. The masses want a $99 class but they'll pay $300 plus instructor expenses and books for 4 dives and some lecture to find out how it should be done. These are the divers who realize the value and that's who you have to market to
--clip--
I think there's room in that market for one more.,

Thanks Mike -- I really appreciate the positive feedback. I think that the patch collecting hoards are proof that there are plenty of divers out there that keep taking classes hoping that the next one will be the one that actually teach them the skills to feel comfortable and safe in the water.

RJ
 
There are some important points missing in this discussion specifically related to economics, marketing, and legal liability. If (and this is what I’m assuming from what Genesis has indicated in earlier posts) . . . if someone is considering setting up an alternative certifying agency one of whose courses would be basic training to the equivalent of BOW + AOW + Nitrox + Drysuit and all of whose courses would be taught only by instructors who meet high, verified standards of performance, my guess is that it would likely fail (or at best be a very marginal player), especially if these issues are not considered.

First – channel of distribution. There are essentially two models for sale of dive education products: shop-based and the independent instructor model. IMHO, the latter will never work for basic diving education as I would guess GUE is finding. Without going into this too much, the independent instructor will have a hard time securing the facilities and equipment needed to service a basic course and has essentially no effective mechanisms for marketing their services. I think there’s no way of getting around having a shop for basic training. Follow-on training is more susceptible to the independent model but is still inherently disadvantaged compared to shop-based and will continue to exist only on the margins of the diving market. With regard to shop-based, the agency sale is to the shop. PADI is successful because its shop support, ease of doing business, and framework of revenue-producing offerings gives it the highest perceived value in the business – to shop owners that is. SSI’s relatively unique requirement that instructors be tied to the shop has appeal to many shop owners, but I don’t seem them overtaking PADI. Some may argue that a hybrid model could work – like GUE courses being taught through a shop – but most shop owners aren’t fools and they know they need to have a low-priced basic course to get people in the door. Some shops are successful with a high entry price model, but not very many are – the core of advanced divers required to support this strategy is not available everywhere. IMHO, a successful agency will have to hit PADI’s value points, only better.

Second – value proposition. Genesis and others have addressed this point, but much of the discussion has been off the mark IMHO. What must be considered is whether or not perceived value exceeds perceived switching costs. The primary problem in this market is customer ignorance (used descriptively, not pejoratively). Ignorance about differences between agencies, ignorance about training standards, and most importantly, ignorance about the need for further training (“I just need the basic course – how hard can diving be?” a typical neophyte might think). In such a market environment, a loss leader is essential. PADI certainly has it right in this case – you keep the cost of entry low and push the follow-on sale. This is a commoditized market and the advantage goes to those with the most successful distribution strategy and cost structure. The only way to proactively combat this ignorance is education, but education on the scale required to elevate value perceptions sufficiently for the general public would (my guess) require more money than the entire dive industry makes. Short of a large number of deaths and accompanying high-profile news coverage, I think there’s no chance that customer perceptions and ignorance will change. IMHO, a successful agency must offer a low-priced entry-level course.

Third – legal liability. Like it or not, PADI standards are the dive industry’s standards. No other agency provides better legal support for its instructors and shops and no agency is more vigorous in legally defending its standards in court than PADI. This has two effects: it significantly enhances PADI’s value to shop owners (remember, this is their channel of distribution) and it provides a substantial economic shelter to other agencies. This latter point is the more interesting and explains several things including the near-universality of requirements for BOW training among agencies (my guess is that in a candid moment the heads of all other agencies would thank PADI for running interference for them) and the emphasis on skill performance in the PADI curriculum. While I would agree that the PADI system limits instructor input and flexibility, any agency that proposes to follow an alternate system should be prepared to shoulder substantial legal exposure. IMHO, if one of your concerns is (and if you want to run an agency it should be) defending your curriculum in court, you will need as much objectivity as you can get and the easiest way to address this is to do as PADI does – (a) determine the minimum skills required for safe diving, (b) verify that each diver who passes your course has demonstrated these skills, and (c) be prepared to defend (a) and (b) in court.

In the end, it is possible to create the perfect agency, but doing so comes at a cost. If you want to go where the fat part of the market is, you’ll have to compete based on your cost structure. In the end, you’ll end up looking and acting like PADI. If you want to go any other way, you end up, at best, on the margin and more likely in the great trash bin of diving businesses.

Just my oh-too.
 
deepbluetech:
I was having a discussion with a friend pretty much about the status of dive retail operations accross the board, whoever is to blame whether it is the agencies or the shops who started the price wars and now can only offer the $99 dollar specials to get students, well they created the monster and now they are stuck with it and that is both unfortunate and sad for the student and the store owners.

I have never owned dive shop, but I assume that for most their primary competitor for certs is the destination resort certs. So I think it is unfair to say that the dive shops created the problem. This is an international business, and I don't think that the average dive shop in podunkville can really determine the elasticity of the pricing model for OW instruction.

johna -- I just read your comments, and I believe you nailed it.

Just me rambling again…. thanks for noticing...
RJ
 
rjens - "the resort 3-day wonder certifications....:
-- allowfolks to learn enough to enjoy warm shallow water diving while on vacation.
-- at a price that is affordable
-- this keeps enough folks entering the "sport" to make it a viable -- if not thriving internationally industry."
Three problems here. First, what, other than the interests of Club Med stockholders, creates a moral imperative for allowing any lazy idiot who wants to to enjoy shallow warm water diving while on vacation to do so? People are concerned about the reefs - such increased access is not good for the reefs. Please don't tell me how seeing them raises people's awareness - the roads through Yellowstone are clogged with Lincoln Navigators - shallow, lazy, non-thinking lemming types don't make the connection between their personal choices in other areas of life and destroying the beauty they see, and they never will.
Second, this price thing is a red herring. The shop I use is the only one in town not teaching a one-weekend learn to die course. Their course meets PADI, NAUI, and YMCA standards and offers PADI and NAUI certs. It runs 8 weeks, and includes task loading and stress drills, such as a single hose buddy breathing tank exchange with one buddy maskless (which must be repeated until neutral buoyancy is maintained throughout), bail outs, etc. and a couple cumulative hours of just practicing hovering. The final written exam is comparable to the PADI DM exam, AND THE PRICE IS COMPARABLE TO OTHERS IN TOWN. Furthermore, in 16 years of assisting in this course, I've never heard a complaint that it's too difficult, despite those passing it being 12-75 years old, from rocket scientists to janitors.
rjens - "I signed up for my OW class with one goal, to enjoy a few tropical reef dives with 5 kids (ages 13-20) while on vacation in Maui. Getting a C card was a bonus....It was perfect, and significantly exceeded my expectations.There is no way that I would have paid for a comprehensive OW course before going on vacation. I simply didn't understand the need for it at the time, it didn’t meet my goals."
This is one of the most shallow statements I've ever heard. I suggest you need to raise your expectations of yourself and those you obtain services from. Once again, there is no appreciable price difference between complete and quicky courses. If the commitment of time and effort would have put you off from diving, then what that says about how you make decisions is problematic, at best.
rjens - "I would have assumed it was just a suburban yuppie dive shop ripping off folks that didn’t know any better...I understand the desire to fix OW, but you would have better results if you aimed the course at the peoplen that wants help (like me). The majority of potential divers don’t understand the need for the additional effort"
Aren't you glad, if you ever need surgery, that your doctor didn't assume medical school was a suburban yuppie university ripping off folk who didn't know any better? Do you REALLY take this approach to evaluating education, especially in preparation for potentially life-threatening activities? Don't you ever stop, in life, and exercise a little skepticism when things seem too easy to be true? Don't you ever ask yourself, "What's the catch?" or "How will this shortcut impact me in the long run?" You do realize that people seeking shortcuts to benefit are what con artists look for in a 'mark', don't you? That most confidence games reel the victim in with the offer of an easier route to something desirable? "Yeah, that static line crap is just a scam - show me the ripcord and toss me out the hatch at 10,000 ft." Stop and think about the implications of this type of thinking - it will only hurt you in the long run.
samsp - "Agreed. This is what got me into diving"
Well, I'll just come out and say it - if access without a little effort and time to gain adequate skills is what it takes to get you into diving, I'd rather you didn't get into diving. You just told us, essentially, one of two things. Either you don't think diving is a rewarding experience, or you expect in life to reap the benefits of rewarding experiences without any real effort or sacrifice. This is the free lunch paradigm that has given us the entitlement society.
Maybe a little sharing of my perspective is in order. The first time I saw SCUBA diving, on "Flipper" as a six year old, I said to mother "I will do that someday." She told me it was very tough to learn, that I had to be an exceptional swimmer, etc. I didn't care - it looked neat enough to be worth it. If, when I got to college and signed up for an OW class, the instructor had outlined something like SEAL training, and that had been the only way I could dive, I would have simply said, "Others have done it, and their name wasn't Clark Kent, so I will do it as well." As it stood, I was surprised at how easy the course was; it was the easiest credit hour I ever earned. I have very little patience for the amount of learned helplessness in our society today, and the expectation that all good things are free for the asking.
Choosing your dive training based on how quick and easy it is, is like choosing a college based on how their football team did last year (when you don't play football.)
GDI- "And today Lexus, Porche and BMW are selling as much as GM, Ford and Mercedes owned Chyrsler...People want quality but they want to pay less for it...Maybe we can look at the Harley Davidson's vs the HOG wanna be's. American Quality made in Volume or a overpriced highly sought after toy?"
GDI, make no mistake, Lexus, Porsche, and BMW are not selling on their quality. They are selling on cachet value - perception over reality. To quote John Goodman in the movie "King Ralph" - "when the average Joe comes into the showroom, he wants the answer to one quesiton: will this car get me laid?" The new Cayenne can hardly get out of its own way, and people still line up to buy it. They readily pay $100K for a 911 that shares 80% of its parts with a $40K Boxster. Outside the US, Lexus, Infiniti, and Acura models are sold as Toyotas, Nissans, and Hondas, but here, these "quality manufacturers" know consumers here will pay a premium for a snob label. Dealers have waiting lists for Harleys that sport the best technology the 1940's had to offer. The model T was the Yugo of its day. The Japanese carmakers are learning all the dirty tricks of Detroit - look at the new Civic/RS models - Honda 86'd one of the most technically advanced suspensions in the world for a pair of struts. Why? Direct quote from their product planners -"We found the most common Civic buyer is a 22 year old named Jennifer, and Jennifer neither understands nor cares about the advantages of a double wishbone suspension." When Toyota unveiled the new Sienna minivan, they didn't tout Toyota reliability, they cited the number of cupholders. Rent a DVD of the movie "Ruthless People" and check out the scenes with Judge Reinhold selling stereos for a better illustration than I can ever make. In the marketplace, crap is what sells, and if you put the right label on it, it sells at a premium. Tucker did not spur Detroit to improve things; the government eventually mandated his safety improvements.
Yes, you may find enough students for yourself, but you're one small operator, and I doubt Robin Leach is going to showcase your digs anytime soon. As for your statements about what shops pay staff, most of the people I know who teach do it to get in the water on a regular basis and to pay for their own equipment and diving, not to make a living. I can tell you that the shop I mentioned with the 8 week course pays their instructors better than other shops, and is still price-competitive. Their course format is more conducive to joint offering of the course with a recreational facility (one night a week, usually after the pool is closed for general use), whereas doing the course over one weekend requires a level of pool access for which most pool owners would charge a hefty fee. Oh, and what you said about the cost range of college tuition being small - in Cleveland, last time I priced it out, CWRU's tuition was 900% higher than CSU's.
There's no escaping the fact that the marketplace rewards sleaze. Don't get me wrong, I'm a strict free market guy, but I fully acknowledge that the benefits of a free market economy come at a price. Unlike those who want to dive without complete training, I accept that all good things come with a cost.
 
rjens:
I don't know, I see a lot of deals for new golfers for "low priced introductory lessons" and reduced rentals and greens fees for new golfers. Same on the slopes for snow skiing.

Most leisure sports offer inexpensive ways to get into a potentially expensive sport. For diving that happens to be the inexpensive OW certs. Maybe it shouldn't be -- but it is.

The way you educate a new diver is to train them, show them how fun diving is, and expose them to how much they still have to learn. Golf and Snow skiing actually have this figured out -- but the golf and ski shop industrys aren't a heck of a lot more healthy than the dive shop industry -- guess what, they also blame the internet -- but that is a different thread... LOL.

RJ

Cronin & Co. are fond of saying the competition is mountain biking and skiing, neither of which require ANY training to start. Anyone can walk into a sporting goods store, buy ski equipment, go get a lift ticket, and teach themself, although training is available.

If they truly want to compete with that, then go for it. Eliminate the certification process altogether - make training
available on a purely voluntary basis. Oh, wait, if we do that, PADI has no way to make any money, and they cease to exist. That's what the industry doesn't seem to get - the industries Cronin wants to mimic have no equivalent to his organization.

Before anyone starts naming ski instruction organizations, none of them issue a credential that controls access.
 
dweeb:
Cronin & Co. are fond of saying the competition is mountain biking and skiing, neither of which require ANY training to start. Anyone can walk into a sporting goods store, buy ski equipment, go get a lift ticket, and teach themself, although training is available.

If they truly want to compete with that, then go for it. Eliminate the certification process altogether - make training
available on a purely voluntary basis. Oh, wait, if we do that, PADI has no way to make any money, and they cease to exist. That's what the industry doesn't seem to get - the industries Cronin wants to mimic have no equivalent to his organization.

Before anyone starts naming ski instruction organizations, none of them issue a credential that controls access.

That should be the way diving is done.

I'm convinced of it, after what I've seen.

Across the board.

Nobody stops me from going down a black diamond ski hill. Even if doing so might be suicidal at my skiing skill level.
 
I wonder how the death/serious injury rates compare between skiing and diving? I am sure that the minor injury rate is significantly higher with Skiing.

dweeb:
Eliminate the certification process altogether

The cert process actually isn't a deterent. Don't forget the low priced OW certs at resort locations. I paid $125 (+book&card) for my OW cert on Maui. That covered 6 ocean dives over three days (no pool dives, all dives were off Airport Beach). A portion of every dive was spent "practicing skills" by exploring the reef - I saw eels, turtles, frog fish, an octopus and thousands of schooling fish.

All told paid less about $35 a day for 6 dives and came away with an OW cert card. This is significantly less than 3 days of skiing, even with the deals offered to new skiers.

To bring these two points together... If the entry cost is similar, and the death/serious injury rate (is/may be) similar, and the variation in skill range is similar (take your pick -- compare an olympic skiier to your ave skiier or a cave/deco diver to a 3 day wonder -- bout the same comparison). Maybe Cronin and Co. have a point.

Or not, feel free to ignore the newbie...
 
I can tell you that when I was skiing actively (in high school) not one weekend went by that I didn't see SOMEONE being carted off the hill on a litter by the ski patrol.

I was witness to one confirmed death; skiier .vs. tree. The tree won.

There are no ski police at the top of the hills to "card" you before you go down a black diamond, and on many of them, there is no way to know what you're getting yourself into until AFTER you commit to the run.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/perdix-ai/

Back
Top Bottom