JohnF
Guest
I can think of many reasons for it, not necessarily the right ones:
1: The increase in popularity of the internet with divers may be leading to the demise of printed media as a source of dive information. One major publication has already fallen by the boards. Are others suffering declining readership and accordingly a reduction in product exposure? And beyond that, why spend big bux for print advertising when the products get so much free exposure on the net?
2: The company feels that the dealer network and reputation have grown to the point where print adverts are superfluous. By itself perhaps a short-sighted view.
3: With all the presure, at least on the internet, in support of product price-cutting, have the company's image builders decided that expensive print media ads will be seen as flaunting the "excessive" profits?
4: Is the bottom line, even for as big a name as SP, insufficient to warrant the current advertising budget? I've often wondered at the profitability potential for dive manufacturers. We're not exactly talking the same target consumer base as, say, General Motors or Ford. Lower production volumes generally means higher per unit relative costs.
5: Perhaps they only advertised because they were submitting their products for testing and had concerns about the influence their advt absence might have on the products. Not necessarily that theirs would get undue criticism, but more that the products of the advertisers might get a tad more favourable attention. This can happen even when the testers maintain absolute integrity. Suppose the advertising dept realizes that it's in their own best interests to give max exposure to the clients without charging extra dollars, and arrange to place the paid-for advertising in such a way as to enhance the product's appearance in the test report. It really isn't difficult. It's smart business strategy, and it has nothing to do with the objectivity of the testers. But the end result is that the advertised product ends up being more prominent in the test report. SP, by not allowing their products to be tested, don't have to worry about this, and they may be thinking along the same lines as what I suggested in 1 & 2. They're willing to let their products stand on their good reputation and strong dealer network, and pad up the bottom line at the same time. Risky stuff though.
Just a few pensive rambles. YMMV.
JohnF
rofile: 
