- "An increasing number of charter operators are requiring AOW cards to go to the "cool" places (e.g. the SG) and if you actually would like to spend some time there, you need the Nitrox card as well."
What planet is this on? Last week, at the dock, after diving the Eagle, some kid asks me "What was the time on the first dive?" I tell him the time of day we went in the water, and he says, no, the bottom time. I asked him why he wanted MY bottom time, since he was already out of his wetsuit when I hit the ladder, and he said "for my log" I asked what his computer said, and he said he had none, and no timer either. He just followed the DM, and somehow knew he had been to 106fsw. Upon questioning, he had NO CLUE why he might want to know his own actual bottom time for a 106 foot dive. The boat crew and DM didn't know he had no computer or timer, or that didn't know why he should have one; he'd presented some sort of C-card, and that was it. I see this ALL THE TIME. The PRACTICED industry standard is an OW card to dive, and maybe, sometimes, a Nitrox card to get a mix fill. (I've never been asked for a card to get a Nitrox fill.)
Genesis - "This is why bundling those things is important. The Dry Suit is important because if you want to dive any of the charters north of Florida, you will want one and again, without the card nobody will rent you one."
I guess you weren't at Gilboa 1 June 2003. HUNDREDS being lent drysuits with NO credentials. It's simple, the OW card is the gateway. Give me an OW card, and I can finagle almost any kind of diving access. BTW, I've dove the NC, Ohio quarries, and Lake Erie in a 3mm wetsuit, and know many others who have.
GDI wrote that quality will outsell quantity.
I suggest he consider the following two quotes:
"How do we make money in America? Volume, volume, volume"
-David Letterman
"No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence
of the buying public" - P.T. Barnum
Remember, GDI, the high Nielsen ratings record for a series is still held by "Laverne & Shirley," although the trashy reality shows have come close. People, on the whole, gravitate to the
least common denominator, unless carefully enticed or coerced otherwise. For those who persist in the naive notion that most consumers act in their own best interest, I submit the profits of the tobacco industry. Sturgeon's law applies to consumers, too.
Biscuit7 claims the standards are fine, but that the instruction can be crappy. The primary purpose of the standards is to prevent crappy instruction - the standards are the 'floor' for instructors, the level of crappiness they cannot exceed. Therefore, the existence of crappy instruction without widespread stansards violations is prima facie evidence that the standards are NOT adequate.
Diverbrian makes the point that his military experience taught him that the best instructor isn't the one who gives the student/customer what he wants. People in the military put up with mean but thorough instructors because they
don't have a choice. Again, most people will not accept instruction that doesn't meet their desire for immediate, no effort gratification unless they are forced to by making it a barrier to entry.
Mike Ferrara says "I would never want to compete with PADI for the portion of the market that is suited to their training. I can tell you that most people want a quick ticket to see the reefs and I don't even want them for students. That's a huge part of the reason I closed my shop. I'm not saying that they shouldn't be allowed to do it." Aw, Mike, you're the last person I expected to be so PC. I'll say it - they shouldn't be allowed. If someone whose life is defined by learned helplessness, who is unwilling to learn to take responsibility for themselves, doesn't get to dive, Oh boo hoo. It's NOT the equivalent of mass genocide that hyper-egalitarians make it out to be.
Airraider1 asks "Does someone REALLY need to have all these skills before they are allowed to enjoy the reefs?" The answer is, not as long as you can guarantee that Murphy's Law will take a vacation when they do. Sure, you can tell someone, put this in your mouth, don't hold your breath, and follow me. The rest of it is preparation for dealing with something going wrong. Is that necessary? Let's put it this way - a seatbelt is useless if you never crash.
By the way, Airraider1, I could maintain neutral buoyancy when first certified, and so could everyone in my class of 20+ people, because we had to practice so much in the course. Yes, I had the skills I advocate before being OW certified, and my OW course was FUN, not burdensome. People often balk at being required to do something to get what they want, then, once they're actually doing it, wonder what they were so put off about. The problem is, the decision is made BEFORE they've been able to experience it and realize it's not an ordeal, so you have to make a pretty big reward contingent on them making the effort.
Biscuit7 spoke of flight school - flight schools can be more rigorous because they have the FAA standing behind them, with the full power of the federal government, ready to play the bad cop and throw your hide in jail if you fly without meeting the requirements. What does a SCUBA agency have? Maybe 20% of the charter operators will bar you from maybe 20% of their dive sites, and not even that if you know how to fling the cattle feces fluently. Bottom line, if you want to raise the bar, any bar, you have to have a big carrot and a big stick, and virtual monopolistic control of that carrot and stick, meaning another entity won't offer the same access for less effort. The trend to dumb down training will continue until a tipping point is reached where there's a spike in fatalities, forcing the govt. to step in. There was a time when driving a car or flying a plane was unregulated, but there's nothing good in this world that can't be ruined by being 'discovered' by the mainstream.
Yeah, that's a bleak outlook. You want optimism, go watch Barney.
