Major Industry Change re: Online Scuba Sales....

[RJP]

Actually yes. Food, clothing and shelter take precedent over dive gear (Unfortunately) any day.

Actually yes. Food, clothing and shelter take precedent over dive gear (Unfortunately) any day.

Then by definition food, clothing, and shelter are NOT competition - because they are not part of the customer's consideration set.

The customer's "consideration set" is that set of products or services that solve a specific problem or fulfill a specific need.

Scuba diving doesn't solve the same problem that food does, nor does it fulfill the same need that shelter does. Therefore, not competition. But scuba diving MIGHT fulfill the same need as...

Buying a Harley Davidson for a 60yr old lawyer - recapturing lost sense of youthful adventure

Building a home theater system for a 40yr old father of three - free time alone with gadgets I can fiddle with

On-line dating service for a 30yr old divorcee - a fun way to meet new people

Cooking classes for a newly married couple - learning something new they can do together

Etc, etc, etc...

 

[RJP]

Look, the point is that Starbuck's is also in a niche market - I don't drink coffee, so I have never been in one; and I have been to a McD and an IHOP in the last year.

So...

As far as Oceanic..., I own Oceanic, Scubapro, and Zeagle regulators and use them all...

Well, I'm not sure that "people other than daniel f aleman" qualifies as a niche market.



But the fact of the matter is that more people in the US bought a cup of coffee from Starbucks in the last 30 days than have EVER bought regulators from Oceanic, Scubapro, and Zeagle combined. I would submit that getting people to pay $400 for a regulator is no harder than getting people to pay $4 for a cup of coffee.

The difference is that Starbucks realized early on that they DON'T sell coffee. Starbucks charges $4 for the "Starbucks experience" and every day at every starbucks in the world there's a line out the door of people willing to pay $4 for it. And most of these people did NOT buy coffee at Dunkin Donuts or McDonalds before Starbucks opened. Starbucks didn't steal customers from Dunkin Donuts, they created demand from a whole new customer set.

It's time for the SCUBA industry - manufacturer, e-tailer, LDS, etc - to realize that the don't sell scuba gear. The first ones to figure that out will create demand for their products from a whole new customer set, instead of merely stealing a piddling few marketshare points from their perceived competitors.

 

[RJP]

I agree with the Dumpster. Diving as a sport may end up shrinking. My observation is that the average age of people getting into diving is going up. The average age of people I see diving is a lot older than it used to be. A rich man's sport is an old man's sport. Participants will have a limited number of years to participate.

A famous bank-robber way back when was asked "Why do you rob banks?"

His reply "That's where the money is."

The population of the US is getting older, and that's where the money is. Fact of the matter is the empty-nest and retiring baby-boomer age are the fastest growing segments of the population. And they have the two most important attributes of a desirable target market for scuba diving - disposable income and free time!

 

[Tienuts]

Then he wasn't a very good architect. Architects don't sell "blueprints" they sell "ideas." If he was truly "promising" then his ideas could be represented on the back of a napkin, and someone ELSE could render them in CAD. Not saying he should have resisted learning and working on the computer, but the computer is merely a medium. I doubt Frank Lloyd Wright ever rendered plans on a computer. Further, there hasn't been an explosion of super-talented architects since the advent of CAD. If anything the technology has allowed lesser talents to go further than they should have.

My bad, he was a drafstman, not an arhitech. The point was he resisted the changing times, and was left out.

 

[cerich]

I agree with the Dumpster. Diving as a sport may end up shrinking. My observation is that the average age of people getting into diving is going up. The average age of people I see diving is a lot older than it used to be. A rich man's sport is an old man's sport. Participants will have a limited number of years to participate.

A famous bank-robber way back when was asked "Why do you rob banks?"

His reply "That's where the money is."

The population of the US is getting older, and that's where the money is. Fact of the matter is the empty-nest and retiring baby-boomer age are the fastest growing segments of the population. And they have the two most important attributes of a desirable target market for scuba diving - disposable income and free time!

While you can look at anything that requires people to spend money away from diving as our competition, some like shelter, food, clothing and basic transportation aren't worthwhile to try and devise a strategy to draw money away from into scuba.

Your point on age demographics is spot on and dare I mention it but race is a wide open opportunity field in diving. No matter what "spin" or our unwillingness to discuss it, diving is very much a "white bread" activity. With growing populations of minorities and a shrinking middle class, minorities are a super bright spot being the one area where the middle class is experiencing good growth.

 

[daniel f aleman]

I agree that Starbucks is selling cache in addition to coffee, but, the admisson is still 4 bucks. REI, Patagonia, Orvis, and similar are also selling cache along with clothing, tents, and ropes.

In the 1970s adventure sports and cardio sports became popular with the newly-wealthy Baby Boomers: jogging, tennis, golf, bicycling, mountaineering, scuba, etc. But, the Bommers are turning 60 - and participation in all sports has gone down, or are growth static.

The thing is though, specifically, diving is being immersed underwater, and the price of doing that is thousands of dollars, mucho time investment, and specialized training. Can't get around that, no matter the distribution channels.

 

[OkieDiver]

Then by definition food, clothing, and shelter are NOT competition - because they are not part of the customer's consideration set. ...................

Etc, etc, etc...

I would have to respectfully disagree. If a person shops for food or clothing at the neighborhood Walmart then they will have more money to spend on scuba than if they went to ABC Exclusive food store or XYZ Fancy clothes store for clothing. Shelter would be the same way. Living in a modest apartment or house versus an upscale apartment or high class home would save money. So in this scenario food, clothing and shelter ARE competition.

 

[RJP]

I would have to respectfully disagree. If a person shops for food or clothing at the neighborhood Walmart then they will have more money to spend on scuba than if they went to ABC Exclusive food store or XYZ Fancy clothes store for clothing. Shelter would be the same way. Living in a modest apartment or house versus an upscale apartment or high class home would save money. So in this scenario food, clothing and shelter ARE competition.

You can't disagree. It's a fact. Same as you telling me you don't agree that 2+2=4.



You're relying on the "post hoc ergo propter hoc" falacy on the Walmart analogy. ("after this, therefore because of this" - the mistaken notion that because one thing happens after another, the first event caused the second event.)

Mathematically, for two people with a specific level of income, someone who buys clothes at Walmart will have more money left over than someone who shops at Neiman-Marcus and, sure that money could be spent on diving. But that logic flies in the face of the reallity that where you shop does not determine how much money you have. Rather how much money you have determines where you shop.

The people who shop at Neiman-Marcus have more disposable income - both absolutely and in terms of percentage - than the person who shops at Walmart. Same is true of the people who live in the big houses, or drive expensive cars, etc, etc.

You may not like that. You may wish it weren't true. But you can't disagree.

 

[fire_diver]

I would have to respectfully disagree. If a person shops for food or clothing at the neighborhood Walmart then they will have more money to spend on scuba than if they went to ABC Exclusive food store or XYZ Fancy clothes store for clothing. Shelter would be the same way. Living in a modest apartment or house versus an upscale apartment or high class home would save money. So in this scenario food, clothing and shelter ARE competition.

Well, I must disagree with you. The people who shop at ABC, and XYZ, and live in an upscale house have more disposable income to spend on things like scuba. Most people live and buy cheap, do so because they have to. These people usually don't partake in activitees such as ours.

FD

 

[RJP]

With growing populations of minorities and a shrinking middle class, minorities are a super bright spot being the one area where the middle class is experiencing good growth.

You ain't kidding! The first generation of African-American millionaires is about to start retiring. And I can tell you that no-one has thought about it beyond the financial services industry. Tell Oceanic marketing folks to get on it!