PADI getting sued over Insurance Program

[PuMpUi]

I think it's the name that has a lot of people fooled. We are too trusting and tend to take things at face value. Like Jim said, they are not a "newswire". They are essentially an advertising platform.

The first time I read the PADI announcement of its being sued, I did NOT think that it was anything other than a press release FROM PADI ABOUT PADI. It was written in the style of an "interview/report", but clearly it was FROM PADI ABOUT PADI.

The first time that I read the announcement FROM Lesser et al, I did NOT think that it was anything other a press release FROM Lesser etal ABOUT Lesser et al. It, too, was written in the style of an "interview/report", but clearly I understood where it came from.

I smiled after I re-read each press release ... both are VERY well written and VERY slick !!! IMHO.

Can anyone explain "why" PADI even "announced" that they were being sued on DiveNewsWire.com in the first place? Had they kept quiet about it, I doubt that any of this thread would even exist and nobody would have been the wiser !!!

Now ... everyone knows that there is going to be a presentation at DEMA about this whole thing ... good grief !!!

Just my opinion ... for what it's worth.

 

[Thalassamania]

Many of us would have know, and word would have gotten out. That's one of the things that ScubaBoard is really good at, getting the word out.

 

[PuMpUi]

On Day 1 Cerich posted and asked :

PADI getting sued over Insurance Program

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anybody have any details what this is about?

Reading between the lines it looks like "if" the allegations are true PADI may have run afoul of insurance laws...

My question was "Why?" would PADI even acknowledge the suit on DiveNewsWire.com and make it more public knowledge instead of just letting it remain "in-house" and being quiet about it all?

Just curious.

 

[cerich]

Because they knew it would get out and by doing the press release they are conduct a PR campaign. After all in many peoples mind the fact they acknowledge it and deny it settles the matter.

 

[Wookie]

The general public doesn't know or care who PADI is and probably >75% of the divers in the US don't know of this suit or care - IOW, a very small court.

More like a hired gun proclaiming he is going to add another scalp.

It doesn't matter what 75% of divers know, they don't buy insurance or pay dues. What matters is what 75% of dive shops and boat owners know. And, let me tell you, they know, and they are paying attention.

 

[Rhone Man]

My question was "Why?" would PADI even acknowledge the suit on DiveNewsWire.com and make it more public knowledge instead of just letting it remain "in-house" and being quiet about it all?

First rule of legal PR - retaliate first.

 

[Cave Diver]

---

---

A ScubaBoard Staff Message...

Some off topic sidetracks not related to the lawsuit have been deleted. If anyone is really interested in pursuing that rabbit trail, send me a PM and I'll consider splitting it to a separate discussion.

---

 

[cerich]

I have looked into Divernewswire for releases and announcements I wanted to make regarding some SEI things early on when we were still getting things going. They do not publish anything to my knowledge that is not paid for by somebody unless they have changed some of their policies. They masquerade as a "newswire". They are NOT the AP, Reuters, etc. What they really appear to be is a pay to say website. In fact there is more free news here and on other dive forums that never makes it on to the "newswire" that is much more interesting and relevant. Anyone ever remember seeing a bad review of a resort that advertises on there? And you never will.

One thing I do have to say about Divenewswire is that Scott is completely honest in his efforts, which are VERY similar to MANY more "mainline" PR news wire services. Now maybe calling it DivePRnewswire would have been more accurate but I still like the name he choose.

FYI, Divenewswire does run SCUBA RECALL notices for free, which is a great service to the community and one I am grateful to him for

 

[scubajcf]

Businesswire and PRNewswire are both pay for distribution services in the non-diving world. My understanding is DiveNewsWire has a similar model for the dive industry. PADI obviously had a message they wanted to get out. I wouldn't kill the messenger.

 

[ItsBruce]

I hate to admit to being wrong, but when I'm wrong, I'll admit it.

I previously posted that I liked the plaintiff's unjust enrichment theory. Like it or not, I was wrong about it being a good theory. The California Court of Appeal, today stated that under California law, there is no such thing as a cause of action for unjust enrichment. It did so in the context of a lawsuit against Blue Shield in which the plaintiff's basic grievance was that Blue Shield did not disclose that his premiums would have been substantially less if he had gotten a policy in which his wife was the primary insured and he was a secondary insured rather than the other way around.

All of a sudden, the lawsuit against PADI is not looking so good.