Scuba Schools of America/Rusty Berry

[Jim Lapenta]

About the only thing LP is not an authorized dealer for is Aqualung. Yet they still have what appears to be an unlimited supply of the product. And their warranty is as good or better than some mfg warranties. So that's a non issue.

 

[boulderjohn]

...

First there was NAUI (don’t get excited, I understand there was LA County and CMAS before that, but that isn’t relevant to this discussion). NAUI’s guiding principles, which are all in the diver’s best interest, are better promoted by the fact NAUI is a non-profit organization. With a non-profit philosophy, instructor members are more likely motivated by what is best for the student. With training materials that are second to none, NAUI students have a good chance of becoming decent divers – and hopefully get honest advice about the gear that they need.

Then there was PADI, the first FOR PROFIT training agency. Like another training agency that came along 30 years later, PADI gave out instructor cards like candy. Eventually, there were more PADI instructors than any other agency. Because PADI was focused on selling training, they dumbed down complete courses into many sub-courses, that required consumers to buy to many little courses to get what they were getting in less courses before. Through reducing standards and heavy marketing, everyone drank the kool-aide, and PADI became, “the way the world learns to dive.” Soon there were specialties for everything, like Boat Diver – purely designed to sell books and cards. And nothing seems to have changed.

...


NASDS / SSI recognized that many shop owners were divers with no business or sales training, so they developed a sales system to help their dealers make up for their inadequacies in business. They also recognized that divers who owned their own equipment often stayed involved in diving and became better and safer divers, so their sales system included selling gear, as well as courses.

NASDS started its existence before PADI and was originally a trade organisation called the National Association of Skin Diving Stores. It add instruction and changed the last word in its name to Schools when it realized that providing instruction helped sell gear.

9. continued: Require them to tell the students that as instructors, they have the freedom to buy anything, but they want the best. They therefore carefully selected every item they use while instructing because it is the best there is.

I think this is probably a bit of an exaggeration on John’s part, to make gear selling instructors look like liars. First of all, it is hard to say there is the best there is with any piece of scuba equipment. Like another poster (Flots Am) so aptly pointed out, at the recreational level, just about all the gear out there is good enough to be safe in. In most cases, the instructors product endorsement verbiage could reasonably be modified so that it still consistent with the store’s sales and safety message, and was not a lie on the instructor’s part.

(The only item on our required uniform list I would purchase and use for myself was the wet suit. I would have been required, for example, to say that I use a specific brand of alternate air source on the inflator hose because it's the best way to dive, even though I personally would never buy one if given the choice)

The real problem I see here for John is that he is a long hose / necklace / bp / wing guy – the problem being that is all he wants to sell.

Nothing true in here.

We were required to purchase specific gear from head to toe and tell students that the specific models we wore were selected because they were the best. We were told to tell our students that we instructed in the gear that we wore when we dived on our own, even if it was not true. I call that lying, and I think most people would agree. You apparently have a different definition of the term, just as the owner of the shop did. He said that the gear was a good quality, and saying that it was the best and that we used it ourselves when we didn't was not lying because the gear was good enough.

Before this happened and now that I work in another shop, I told/tell students the truth. I talk about different gear and tell them how they meet the needs of different divers. For example, I can point at split fins, tell why some people would prefer them, and explain why I personally am not one of them. I want divers to choose to wear what they want to wear for the diving they do. I do not want them to wear the gear that I do if it is not their choice. When I instruct today in pool sessions, I wear the jacket BCDs and traditional regulator sets that the shop uses for instruction, and I have no problem with that.

---------- Post added July 24th, 2014 at 08:43 AM ----------

One other point in correction of what was said above.

In the early 1960s, the Los Angeles County program realized that many divers were losing interest in diving and giving up the activity early on, and they sought a way to keep their interest. They therefore created the Advanced Diver program, which focused on introducing divers to a variety of different experiences in the hope it would spark their interest. NAUI followed suit. PADI joined in after that. PADI did not start it. You can find all of this in a history of NAUI written by Al Tillman, who was both the director of Los Angeles and NAUI.

 

[sigxbill]

NASDS started its existence before PADI and was originally a trade organisation called the National Association of Skin Diving Stores. It add instruction and changed the last word in its name to Schools when it realized that providing instruction helped sell gear.

The order and dates is NOT the point of my posts and from that perspective is inconsequential. Pointing out the fundamental differences between the major agencies, and relating those differences to how students might be more likely to benefit from those differences was. I was thinking of SSI's establishment date of 1970, although I was aware that NASDS started in 1961 (as opposed to padi 1966).

Nothing true in here.

another inaccurate blanket statement that seems to be common place for John ...

We were told to tell our students that we instructed in the gear that we wore when we dived on our own, even if it was not true. I call that lying, and I think most people would agree. You apparently have a different definition of the term

Again - putting words in my mouth and flat out defaming my character by name calling - good job moderator! For the record, I call that lying too, and would have a problem with it just like you did.

Your story has changed here though. In post #314 you lead us to believe that the agency said to lie:

A couple of years ago I sat through a week-long workshop on scuba marketing. It was part of the process the shop I worked for then used to convert to the agency represented by the presenter.

Then in the post above, you contradict yourself by writing it was the shop owner:

just as the owner of the shop did. He said that the gear was a good quality, and saying that it was the best and that we used it ourselves when we didn't was not lying because the gear was good enough.

These are two very different entities, and I think it is important to get this point correct. If it was the agency presenter, please PM me his name - as I would like to follow up on this ...

When I instruct today in pool sessions, I wear the jacket BCDs and traditional regulator sets that the shop uses for instruction, and I have no problem with that.

Instructor uniform? ;-) Thanks for the clarification as to how you teach ...

 

[boulderjohn]

Your story has changed here though. In post #314 you lead us to believe that the agency said to lie:


Then in the post above, you contradict yourself by writing it was the shop owner:

These are two very different entities, and I think it is important to get this point correct. If it was the agency presenter, please PM me his name - as I would like to follow up on this ...

Try to follow this.

There was a presentation by a representative of the agency suggesting certain store policies. The owner adopted them. I protested that it constituted lying, and he said it was not lying for the reasons I stated. That is not changing my story at all. It is just more details about the process.

By the way, other readers in this thread obviously figured out easily who I was talking about--but I will send that PM.

Instructor uniform? ;-) Thanks for the clarification as to how you teach ..

Nope--big difference.

An "instructor uniform" is what I would have been ordered to purchase and wear at all times with students, telling them I had made the decision to purchase those items on my own. All the instructors were required to have exactly the same gear.

I was responding to your statement that I pushed back plate and with with a long hose. I was pointing out that I used shop rental gear when I worked with OW students in the pool. I am not required to do that--I just do it so that they are seeing me demonstrate skills in the same gear they are using. I show them my gear in the classroom and explain the difference. Other instructors in our shop use their own gear in the pool. Last weekend I taught a private OW class at the same time we had a huge group class going. There were not enough pool sets for me to use one, so I used my own personal gear--BP/W with long hose--to teach the private OW student. No problem. When I teach the open water parts of the course, I do wear my personal gear.

 

[redacted]

I'm not sure I really understand this disagreement. Are you guy arguing over who is the biggest lying bastard in retail scuba???

I think you are both right.

 

[oreocookie]

Personally, the only instructor "uniform" that I think is beneficial to everybody (and to some extent ethical) is more of an instructor dress-code than a uniform. At the shop I work for it's strongly encouraged for staff to wear gear we sell, though we don't necessarily have to keep it in stock... if certain items really are that good, the staff will effectively create their own uniform. Nobody has to lie about anything and the store makes money. Fwiw, I don't know what brand or models we make the most profit on (I could find out if I wanted to), but neither instructors nor store staff are told or expected to push any brand or model over another.

Sigxbill, you say John's trying to make you look bad, but I doubt he's the only one who has interpreted your posts the way he has.

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

Hey, I have a novel idea.
Why not blindfold workers and instructors at the dive shop then have them try out all sorts of different gear. When they find out which piece of gear REALLY works the best then the shop can sell that piece of gear. That way nobody's lying and the customer realy gets what works the best.
The customer will still buy whatever is recommended so no loss of business there. The only thing, some of the big players may not like it too much.

 

[scubamarketing]

Just for the record, leisurepro is NOT an authorized dealer for many products they sell, which among other things means their products don't come with a manufacturers warranty ...

About the only thing LP is not an authorized dealer for is Aqualung. Yet they still have what appears to be an unlimited supply of the product. And their warranty is as good or better than some mfg warranties. So that's a non issue.

Thanks Jim, you beat me to it. At this point, Aqualung is the only brand we carry that we aren't authorized dealers of and all of those products come with out matching in-house warranty.

I hadn't been reading this thread, but now I guess I need to start back 38 pages to understand the context of why we were even brought up...

 

[Jim Lapenta]

I see absolutely no need to make instructors and other staff use gear they normally would not. Unless the shop is going to provide that gear to them at no cost. And as long as the gear brand has a type of BC, reg, suit, fin, etc. that the instructor would use. If the instructor/staff is comfortable in a BPW and that is what they would normally use why would you want them in a poodle jacket? I don't care what gear my students are in. I'd like them to be in stuff I sell and those who come to me for advanced training that trained with other shops usually end up in that. But not because I push them into it. It's usually because they see they were sold gear that benefitted the shop's bottom line more than it did them. But if I don't have what is best for them I help them find it.

My GF is usually my DM when I need one. She has a reg that I sell and her drysuit is one I carry as well. But not her BC, mask, fins, and other accessories. Those all are another brand. And that's just fine because what she has works and she can do everything she needs to do in it.

If I wanted her or any assistant outfitted as much as possible in the gear I sell they would not have to pay one cent for it. I'd give it to them and consider it a gift to them for their service. Making staff buy gear, that I'd be willing to bet is not getting paid much if anything at all, is ethically wrong if they already have gear that works for them. You don't make people pay to be a billboard for you. That's just ignorant.

 

[scjoe]

Thanks Jim, you beat me to it. At this point, Aqualung is the only brand we carry that we aren't authorized dealers of and all of those products come with out matching in-house warranty.

I hadn't been reading this thread, but now I guess I need to start back 38 pages to understand the context of why we were even brought up...

Just start with post 308. All the prior posts dealt with a dive shop out here that a lot of experienced divers in SoCal know to avoid. The owner hustled a new diver into $8,000 worth of gear and Sigxbill decided to resurrect the thread for reasons known only to him and try and claim it was just about buyer's remorse. Characterizing his arguments as unpersuasive would be charitable.