Unified Dive Industry wants to change DEMA for the better!

[Dick Long]

First I want to be clear. Al and I most often are advasaries. So I am going to restrain my comments some. The voting structure almost garentees PADI a board seat. My view has always been we are there to act in the best intrest of diving and divers and the Ocean. The problem is not that Some act in their best interest and not that of diving, it is that the rest of us alow it because we don't exercise our responsibility. Some have felt they were elected to exersize their judgement alone while others of us felt we were there to represent those who elected us and do what our members wanted done. It is our falt things are the way they are, not theirs. We as a group, do not take part in the planing nor do we ask questions. My experence has been that if you ask questions you won't get stright answers.
How ever that is now come to an end as you can see from the support of the petition. The real question now is what do we do to make Dema more represenative and efective for the industry. Personaly I believe if we make things better for the Ocean, better for Diving and better for Divers in that order we will make it better for the industry as a byproduct. When we do that every one will share in the rewards. I hope this helps. Please read my first posting. Thank you.
Dick

 

[gcbryan]

I think dive magazines about diving would be interesting as opposed to dive magazines as ads for gear and resort destinations.

I think upping the standards and not appealing to those who aren't going to stay with diving would be appealing. You do this by not making diving sound like something that requires no skill or abilities.

You also just need to realize that even those who became proficient divers may not stay with it forever. Who stays with flying forever?

I think the key is just "keeping it real". Marketing is ok but why not market diving as it really is rather than as a mindless pastime in between drinking around the bar at your hotel?

I think there is a big disconnect between frequent proficient divers and the whole industry. It's more of an embarrassment really.

 

[The Chairman]

I just got this in my e-mail from Tom Ingram, and he asked that I post his open letter:

[FONT=&quot]Dear Pete:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I would appreciate very much if you could post this memo on Scuba Board within the discussion about DEMA , the Bylaws Amendment from 2008, and the petition currently being circulated.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Thanks very much for your help.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
TO: Whom It May Concern

FROM: Tom Ingram, Executive Director, Diving Equipment and Marketing Association

DATE: Sunday, October 25, 2009

RE: DEMA BYLAWS AMENDMENT ENACTED 2008

Over the course of the last few days there have been some on-line forum discussions, emails and other forms of communication regarding the DEMA Bylaws Amendment adopted by the DEMA Membership in October, 2008.

Unfortunately, much of this information is false; this is creating confusion in the diving industry. In particular, the following claims being circulated are erroneous:

Claim:"Re: TERM LIMITS-This needs to be presented to the membership again with full disclosure as to the pros and cons. This was not done."

FACT:
The pros, cons and a full disclosure of the rationale for the proposed Bylaws Amendment were presented to the DEMA membership on THREE (3) different occasions: July 9, 2008, July 16, 2008 and July 23, 2008. See the link here:

http://www.dema.org/associations/1017/files/E-mailBlast223913.pdf

Claim:"... recent decisions made by DEMA's Board of Directors (are) contrary to the stated wishes of the membership."

FACT:In addition to soliciting commentary from the DEMA membership, DEMA conducted a special election to conclusively determine the wishes of the membership. The Bylaws Amendment was duly passed by a vote of the DEMA membership, following the procedure outlined in the DEMA Bylaws and CA Corp. Code §5034. The outcome of the election was determined by a third party administrator, and reviewed by DEMA's counsel. To access the October, 2008: Bylaws Special Election Results: http://www.dema.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=59.

Claim:A change in the DEMA voting system to one-company, one-vote would have resulted in a different outcome for the Bylaws Amendment balloting.
FACT:Although not required for the balloting tally, it may serve to know that 235 companies voted in the following manner:
In favor of the amendment: 125 companies
Not in favor of the amendment: 110 companies

Claim:Insufficient notification was provided to the DEMA membership to properly vote on the Bylaws Amendment

FACT:The ballot measure was provided to the DEMA membership via email and hard copy postal notification on FIVE (5) different occasions for a period of 30 days, exceeding the Bylaws notification requirement of 20 days. In addition, notification was also posted on the DEMA website during the entire 30-day duration of the election.

Claim:A meeting was requested of DEMA to discuss dissatisfaction with the Amendment and DEMA refused.

FACT:
A letter was received from one of the petition-signers claiming to represent 'certain clients' and demanding a meeting with the Board. Such a meeting was agreed to by the Board, and was scheduled as a formal Member Meeting/Board Listening Session, open to all DEMA members. DEMA's attorney also responded to the member requesting such a meeting indicating the time and place of the meeting. The membership was notified on October 6, 2008 by email and post regarding all four meetings, including the Board Listening Session conducted by DEMA during or before DEMA Show. A copy of the member notification may be seen here:

http://dema.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=521

Bylaws Admendment Process:
To access a recitation of the Bylaws Amendment process, including the pertinent documents for this instance, as well as a review of the member vote regarding the Bylaws Amendment click on the link below. This should serve to clarify and substantiate the stated wishes of the membership as well as the steps taken by the DEMA Board of Directors.

[FONT=&quot]http://dema.org/associations/1017/files/2009-10-25-BylawsAmendmentProcessOutline-Final3.pdf

[/FONT]

 

[Wookie]

I guess if Tom had written to me, my response might have gone something like this:

Dear Mr. Ingram:

Thank you for the explanation of how the DEMA Bylaws Amendment adopted by the DEMA Membership in October, 2008 voting took place in the official record. There are a lot of alternate stories out there on the street, and it is sure nice to hear your side of the story.

I'm not too sure you are quite understanding the level of frustration currently felt in the SCUBA industry at this time. Many dive retailers, resorts, charter boats, magazines, and others who make up the bulk of the industry are having a hard time in this recession, and are in danger of going out of business, or have already closed their doors. In this environment of struggle and fear, we are getting the same message from DEMA that we have essentially heard for the past 10 years, that is "make new divers, boys, we're going to teach the world to dive". I'm not too sure that in the changing economy and work and leisure time, that that message is still relevant.

The old standard of the Local Dive Shop providing all of a diver's needs may not be the way of the future. If you read some of the recent threads on chat boards, ScubaBoard in particular, you might see that divers seem to be evenly split between the "support your LDS" and "buy cheap off the internet" camps. Although I am surprised at the split, watching the growing movement of the "buy cheap off the internet" camp has made me re-think the way I do business. I do see many LDS's that operate very happily under the old standard, and I think to myself "more power to them. They are still making money the old fashioned way".

One of the problems of the old standard is that in our rush to make new divers, we seem to be ignoring the folks that have been supporting our industry for the past number of years. Specifically, divers that become disillusioned with their dive shop, or favorite charter boat, or resort, or whatever are allowed to wander away from the sport, perhaps never to dive again. Very little effort (from my point of view) is expended to retain these divers. There is an old adage, which I'm sure you've heard, that it costs 10 times the effort to make a new customer than to retain an old one. So one of my questions to you is, "why are we letting the customers we have already got fall by the wayside?" Why are we letting certified divers go and placing all of our efforts in making new divers?

Another place that I see DEMA could improve their own customer service is in applying the business model to the dive industry. Many retailers, charter boat owners, manufacturers, etc. get into the dive industry because of their love of diving. That makes us all laugh, of course, because those of us that have been here for a few years know that the fastest way to learn to hate diving is to get into the business. Maybe DEMA could take a proactive stance in the industry and help these small businesspeople become business people. The training agencies do it for their member businesses, why can't DEMA perform the same function for it's members that don't happen to be associated with a training agency? How about DEMA sponsoring a mentoring program? Some of the "old guys" that have been in the business since it's inception could hold seminars so that the rest of us could learn from their mistakes and profit from the wisdom that they've gleaned over the years. Hey, I know, we could have those seminars at the yearly gathering of the industry held every year. I think you know which one.

I'm sure that others in the industry have many more ideas and thoughts that they would like to pass on. We're a smart bunch of folks, but right now we're wrapped around the axle trying to figure out how to stay in business, how long to stay in business, whether or not the business will be viable for the next year, or how to escape from the business. You might ask some of us how we feel. Maybe if we were busy responding to your concerns for us, we would have been too busy to respond to the call to sign the Unified Dive Industry petition.

Thanks for listening,

Sincerely,


Captain Frank Wasson
Spree Expeditions, Inc.

Unfortunately, Tom didn't write to me, so he might never know how I feel on the subject.

Frank

 

[Leadking]

DEMA should take this as an opportunity! If the "United Dive Industry" can get organized and focused on an agenda, it will be just what we (they) need. The wallowing around unfocused approach has gotten us no where. Focus, people, focus.

 

[The Chairman]

Unfortunately, Tom didn't write to me, so he might never know how I feel on the subject.

Frank

Well Frank,

I sent him the link. We'll see what happens.

 

[scubamarketing]

Anybody that's bothered to read even a few of Thalassamania's posts would never assume he thinks "SCUBA diving is crap" it's silly to even suggest such a thing.

Making a few structural changes to DEMA that results in the same tired approach to the show and the same failed efforts to broaden the appeal of scuba is "Crap"

How do you propose to fund this "good marketing" if you don't first change the ossified politics of the current DEMA?

Tobin

I've read plenty of Thalassamania's posts and know that isn't what was meant.

I agree that doing the same-old same-old is crap, but at the same time I work with plenty of dive centers that have no interest in changing their ways. Entire stores that are happy to certify 50 poor quality students per year. When I was teaching full time (and when I return to it in 2010), I will be upset if I don't certify 100 very high quality divers BY MYSELF. It's a difference of personal values, and most people in this industry are happy with the status quo. Not me, which is why I too am trying to change things.

The thing about funding marketing is that we really don't need DEMA for it. Sure, if we all contribute to a single marketing message, we can get better distribution, but I am an advocate of diving locally and training divers to dive locally and selling gear to local divers. I can do that on my own with a little hard work and less than $100/month in an advertising budget. Again, most of the dive centers (at least in my area) could care less though. They want it, but they want it handed to them.

"Good Marketing" is what got the industry into the situation that it is in. Overselling scuba to people who really did not want to do it in the first place by dropping entry requirements (e.g., standards and course commitments) so that most people who tried it out either hated it or were so damned scared that they stopped doing it.

It's time for an end to marketing as we have know it. Remember, if someone has a bad experience with something they tell twice as many people about it than they do if they have a good experience. The diving industry is suffering from too many bad experiences and can't, long term, marketeer its way out of that corner, especially with ossified groups like PADI sitting on top of DEMA by buying votes and preventing real change, because that might threaten their current hegemony.

I would say you're right, in some instances. The program and LDS I was trained through may just be an anomaly, but we put out a lot of great divers and great dive professionals. In the programs I ran, I determined VERY quickly if someone was in the class for the wrong reasons and came up with face-saving ways for them to get out of it without fear of being chastised by friends, spouses or other family.

In my area, what is hurting the dive industry isn't marketing, it's simply boredom and a good ol' boys club mentality. The people I have talked to just aren't excited about diving and that has a lot to do with both comfortability in the water (which is 100% training) and awareness of local diving (which is a marketing issue).

So I would completely agree that we need better professionals out there, but how can you go back through certified professionals to determine who should keep their credentials and who should lose them?

I think upping the standards and not appealing to those who aren't going to stay with diving would be appealing. You do this by not making diving sound like something that requires no skill or abilities.

I think the key is just "keeping it real". Marketing is ok but why not market diving as it really is rather than as a mindless pastime in between drinking around the bar at your hotel?

I don't think we need to scare people away though. In the Pacific Northwest, diving isn't easy. It's cold, dark and rough (and I love it). I train people who do show mastery in these conditions, but I know they're never going to dive here again and that they will be warm water divers. As long as they do refreshers before diving and dive VERY conservatively when they do, I don't mind that.

One thing that bothers me reading this discussion is an apparent mentality of New Divers vs. Existing Divers. If we create New Divers (which DEMA encourages us to do), we can't properly serve our Existing Divers (supposedly). Why not? Hire another LDS employee. Get another DM for your boat. Create promotions (maybe some email marketing?) geared towards your existing divers while still training new blood. People will always drop out of activities, so we need new divers, but we can't alienate the existing ones.

 

[Thalassamania]

Good post. If you could tell every Pro and LDS how to increase his business on $100 a month of advertising you might just save the industry.

As far as: "So I would completely agree that we need better professionals out there, but how can you go back through certified professionals to determine who should keep their credentials and who should lose them?"

PADI already did that once in the late 70s or early 80s, so we know that it can be done, if you have the will and see the need.

 

[Leadking]

I wanted to know who Nick Bostic is and his background, so I found this
Nick Bostic - LinkedIn online

 

[cool_hardware52]

I've read plenty of Thalassamania's posts and know that isn't what was meant.

Then why suggest that it was?

The thing about funding marketing is that we really don't need DEMA for it.

Ending DEMA kinda changes the politics IMO, very possibly for the better.

DEMA as it stands now is a tax on the industry, without adequate representation, for the benefit of a few.


Tobin