Socorro islands

[Augustus]

I was aboard the infamous Baha Agressor trip that sat in the harbor for two days unable to go to Socorro.

Given my experience, I will never book a trip on the Solomar and recommend anyone else to think twice about it. The dive community relies on quality operators. We travel the world, often on tightly coordinated and expensive itineraries to pursue our destinations. To think that one operator would sabotage another in the hopes of reducing competition is not only bad behavior, but bad business. The more people go to Socorro, the more it's reputation grows and the more dive business gets generated. With a limited number of boats and long waiting lists to book, the less business.

To each his own. I have done various trips on the Solmar and have nothing but praise for the operation. Any boat that has most of the same crew working on it year after year is doing something right. I also REALLY don't want to see too many boats diving the Islas since there are limited world class dive sites out there and if you have a number of dive boats say at San B or Roca then the quality of the dives suffers for all. I think there are 5 or more boats doing the trip now and its going to be confusing at times if they all want to dive the same site on the same day.

 

[Joe Burns]

Bonnie - you are clearly passionate about diving and your expereinces on the Solomar. I'm glad those have been good experiences for you.

I'm curious about your what your sources are in claiming that the Aggressor was attempting to operate without a permit, or "illegally" as you put it. Were you there that week reviewing the documents as we were? I know that the word on the docks was that the Aggressor had no permit. But you can't always believe what you hear. Especially there.

Thank you for your analysis of my priorities. I will agree to disagree with you on those points.

 

[TheUWPhotographer.com]

It's up to the Mexican authorities to patrol what goes on out there and it sounds like they were just doing their job. The details of the permits apparently had not been worked out to their satisfaction, or the Aggressor would have been allowed to make the trip.

What I find so impertinent in your two posts is the dock talk, hearsay, speculation, using words like "sabotage", and "pulling some $trings" and even going so far as to quote people, when you have no idea what was really said or if anything was said at all.

Yes, I am passionate about diving there and I want to know that this area will stay protected and open to divers for many years to come. Our ability to visit these islands is a real privilege. I know that all the boats have to jump through hoops to please the authorities, not just the Aggressor. They all have to follow the same set of rules.

References added for those who haven't seen both posts:
http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/5786624-post23.html
http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/5786532-post49.html

 

[merxlin]

Joe, I'm glad to hear you got a free trip out of it. You certainly had it coming, but it seems to me you've got your priorities a bit screwed up.

1. The Baja Aggressor did NOT have the permits required to go to this destination, otherwise the boat would have left as scheduled.
2. They took your money and led you to believe you were going to Socorro, knowing full well they may not be able to go because they did not obtain the proper permits to dive there.
3. Now you are trying to blame the dive operators who DO abide by the law and call this "sabotage".

As a diver who's been to Socorro many times, I truly hope that we can continue to go there for years to come. I very much appreciate any operators who do pay the fees and jump through the government hoops to obtain the proper permits that allow us to go there. We are very privileged to get to dive there at all.

I don't have a whole lot of respect for those who think they are above the law, pretend they have their business in order, lie to their customers, and now try to blame the competition. If even one piece of what you wrote is true, then I say THANK YOU to the Solmar V or any other operator who pushed the Baja Aggressor to operate legally in these waters we love so much.

Now you're asking people to think twice about which boat to book: the boat who is operating with the proper permits in place, or the one who is not? That choice seems pretty obvious to me.

For the record I have friends who have had many great trips on the Solmar V, and have heard nothing but good things about the operation. You obviously have an axe to grind, and are welcome to do so.

If you read Joe's post, I do not see where he ever says the Aggressor personnel made any of these statements, so don't blame them. Unless you have some inside information about the permit process and what was in fact happening, your representation of the Agressor as

above the law, pretend they have their business in order, lie to their customers, and now try to blame the competition.

is unfounded and out of line as far as I am concerned. They have their permits (and had been in the process of obtaining them well before this trip), they operate there now. I very seriously doubt they would jeopardize being able to operate in this location by trying to "sneak in" and dive without the paperwork needed. Anyone who has dealt with any government agency can tell you that sometimes things happen, expected due dates get changed, and you have to adapt. Aggressor did that for these divers, and has satisfied them.

 

[TheUWPhotographer.com]

The permit thing is really quite simple. If you have the permits, you get to go diving. You may recall that the Baja Aggressor also had permit problems when going to Guadalupe Island and got sent back to port by the Mexican authorities.

For the record I'm not anti-Aggressor. I've chartered one of their boats and would again at some destinations. I have no axe to grind with them.

Joe made some pretty horrendous accusations in his post, using words like "sabotage", and "pulling some $trings" and even going so far as to quote people, when he have no idea what was really said or if anything was said at all. I am challenging those accusations and statements.

 

[divengolf]

Just the facts please.

1. It clear that the Baja Aggressor took reservations and money for a trip for which AT THAT TIME it did not have proper permits.

2. It also appears to be true that the fact that it did not have the permts was never disclosed to the customers until they had traveled to Cabo.

3. So the customers spent their money (including air fare) in anticipation of a Sorocco trip that did not happen for whatever reason excluding acts of God.

If it were me, I'd be real pissed. Although I have done a number of Aggressor trips, based on this misrepresentation by the Aggressor franchisee, I would never consider using them now or in the future. In business, loss of reputation is difficult to recover from. I am speaking specifically of the Baja Aggressor operation, not the entire Aggressor operation, which I generally hold in high regard.

If these facts are incorrect, let's hear from the Baja Aggressor, not some third party with unsupported accusations.

BTW Merxlin-I do not have an axe to grind. Neither does UWPhotographer. Her postings are factual. There are too many misrepresentations in the liveaboard business and Baja Aggressor isn't helping the problem by their actions.

 

[merxlin]

I will agree that the Baja Aggressor should have communicated better with the customers about the situation, provided they knew what the situation was. The OP says he was part of a conversation discussing the "official seal" on the permits and if that was good. It is possible since no one has evidence to the contrary, that the Aggressor had what they thought were good permits, only to be held back by the Mexican bureaucracy. I am only taking issue with an opinion that somehow the Aggressor was being nefarious in trying to go out knowing they did not have the right documentation. I'd like to hear from someone in that circle too. But I doubt it will happen. Would you come out and publicly denounce the agency that controls your permits?

And had the aggressor said , "oh well, too bad, can't go" and left it there, I'd be all over them. But they have tried to make it right by their customers and the OP seems satisfied.

There are too many misrepresentations in the liveaboard business and Baja Aggressor isn't helping the problem by their actions.

I agree too, so lets not propagate that with speculation of "illegal" acts.

 

[Shasta_man]

The definition of a "fact" has become blurred with "deduction".

Seems like Joe is the only person actually on the ground there. Sounds like they had govt permits but that the police at the harbor was questioning the authenticity of those permits. Whether somebody "sicced" the police on them is another question. IMHO how well they handled a trip would give little insight into how they deal with fellow competitors. Scubaboard syndrome always creeps into any discussion regarding businesses.

Where's Wookie when we need his experienced comments?!

The Scubaboard syndrome = becoming ultra protective of businesses you've patronized successfully.

 

[Joe Burns]

Well I seemed to have kicked the bee's nest here...

Bonnie - the moral high ground of "valid permits = easy diving" is an easy statement to make, but in the 2nd and 3rd world where many of us dive, it is not a highground that you can maintain. The Authorities that oversee and intervene on these permits are a complex web of relationships. If you are proposing that it is as simple as applying for permits and paying a fee, then maybe you should start a charter ops, because clearly you are a better business person than many live aboard operators out there.

I will ask again, were you there looking at the Aggressor's permits to actually make the statement that the permits were not valid and that they attempted to operate illegally? Or are you repeating what you have heard from an organization that you have an affinity for? It is easy claim outrage that what I have to say is hearsay, but if you were not there how are your statements different from mine?

I was there. I know what I saw and heard. Until someone can show me the evidence that the permit the Aggressor had in hand was indeed invalid, I will stand by my conclusion that the "challenges" to the permit were manufactured by parties who have a vested interest in limiting competition in that market.

None of what I have said here is intended to take away any of the good expereinces anyone has had with the Solmar or anyone else. I'm simply sharing my experience and perspective on it as a first hand witness so that other divers can take that perspective into account.

And I will say again, the Aggressor is not blameless for my experience - they were still working the bugs out of a new boat, new crew and a new itinerary. However they have more than compensated for those faults, and completely redeemed their reputation in my eyes. They gave us a week of FREE diving in the Sea of Cortez where no other liveaboards currently operate -remote sea lion colonies, wrecks and areas where we saw 6 whale sharks in a single outing. There are liveaboard ops that charter solely for those expereinces at a premium. We enjoyed that diving, AND a trip to Soccorro for the price. They reacted to a bad situation with the satisfaction of their customers forefront in their mind. I am satisfied with the Aggressor Organization.

But I am disatisfied with a market in our industry where open honest business practices are not honored. This is purely my opinion, and hopefully my posts here have illustrated why I have drawn that conclusion.

 

[Wookie]

Where's Wookie when we need his experienced comments?!

As I stated in another thread once, It's the dive industry. It's very small, and there are lots of players watching this thread. When a customer comes out and makes a statement about an operator in a forum like this, it's to be considered a warning or an observation to other customers. When an operator comes out and makes a statement regarding other operators, especially if those statements disparage the other operators, the operator making the statements risks losing credibility within the entire industry, both with customers as well as other operators.

In this case, as I know (at least to speak with, and have a pleasant conversation with) and have worked with the owners of the Aggressor Fleet, Roccio del Mar, and Nautilus Explorer, It would be impolitic of me to respond to any allegations made in this thread.

I have turned down charters in Mexico (when I was allowed to go there) because of the back-handed politics that occur there. Key West is managed very much like a third world country, but at least the crooked politicians are honest. What I mean by that is that if you keep your head down, pay your fees, pay your graft on time, and keep your head down, things go as planned. In my experience, when you show up in Mexico (which I've done twice), the fuel depot is out of fuel, the customs agent isn't working today, and the health inspector want's a "fine" because your rat guards aren't quite correct. Never mind that other vessels are getting fuel, other boats are clearing in and out, and no-one else is using rat guards. I feel for anyone who is trying to do business in the "wilder" parts of Mexico. What's worse is you never know what the mordita is. They leave that up to you. If you offer too little, the fuel station doesn't open up. If you offer too much, you've just raised the bar for everyone else.

Colombia was much easier to operate in.