Why aren't more people taking up scuba diving?

[drrich2]

Snorkeling certainly occurs prior to scuba diving for the vast majority of divers. But the fact of the matter is... the vast majority of snorkelers never become divers.

That's true. But, is it not also true that the big majority of most any group you direct marketing efforts toward won't become scuba divers? As long as you get a sufficient return on your investment, the ones who can't be moved to pursue it don't matter, only the ones who do. If snorkeling, free diving & scuba were viewed as on a continuum, with the same agency covering training in all, it might provide a gateway to more divers.

Richard.

 

[descent]

However golf has a marketing machine...

Well put.

DEMA and the agencies could and should do some product placement.

When I was a wee buckaroo, I was certainly influenced by Cousteau pointing at fishes, but it would be difficult to overstate how rabid I became for diving after I watched films like Thunderball and The Deep.

 

[Octopusprime]

I never snorkeled before I dove... We do a lot of group discover scuba boy Boy Scouts, sports teams, can be promoted as team building... You get 20 people in discover scuba you will fill a ow course

 

[RJP]

However, if you look at things like scubaboard, leasurepro, scubatoys PADI etc are the big marketing tools. The Independant instructor can not put on adds on tv but PADI could and should. We need to let the big dogs promote scuba diving and we promote ourselves as service providers.

PADI is probably the only organization that comes close to making sense to running some sort of broad-reach "market growth" campaign - in the US anyway; here they have roughly a 75% marketshare of OW certs. There is not one other organization that could or should run a national campaign.

However, TV is a tough play. The problem is that the ideal media target for scuba is affluent. The affluent are very hard to reach via television... other than national TV, which is crazy expensive and wasteful from a reach standpoint. Local TV is easily targetable geographically... but hard to target to the affluent demographic. Plus, it's often as expensive - or more so - to do lots of local TV vs national. Also, TV does not work in a vacuum. In order to work well, TV requires broad collateral efforts (print, online, out-of-home, radio, mail, retail etc) to tell the story and pull it through. That can't happen with a PADI TV campaign because it would require the LDS to run the - very expensive and expertise-demanding - collateral campaigns locally.

---------- Post added December 24th, 2014 at 09:33 AM ----------

That's true. But, is it not also true that the big majority of most any group you direct marketing efforts toward won't become scuba divers?

Only if the person conducting the marketing efforts doesn't have a brain.

The way marketing is done - with a brain - is by doing the research to determine who has the greatest likelihood to be motivated (psychologically, not demographically), developing a campaign that speaks directly to them, and then targeting the execution of that campaign directly to them, with a specific, direct call to action to try your product. Doing all this increase your conversion rate at each step in the process

A broad, non-targeted campaign with an oblique message to try something else - that is NOT your product - in the hope-against-all-logic hope that a handful of the people that may respond to THAT campaign will eventually go on to try your product aferwards is foolish.

Before buying a car most people have ridden a bike, right? Should GM promote cycling in order to drive car purchases?

Beer drinkers drank soft drinks prior to drinking beer, no? So Budweiser should promote soda?

However, that's not to say that snorkeling is not a good indicator of scuba interest. If there were a "Snorkeling Illustrated" magazine that would be a great place to advertise diving. But it would make little sense for DEMA to run "Try Snorkeling" ads in "Sports Illustrated" in the hopes that some of those people took up diving someday.

---------- Post added December 24th, 2014 at 09:52 AM ----------

However golf has a marketing machine... TV tournaments, sponsorships, celebrities etc. Golf equipment in every sporting goods store. All of that promotes the sport as a whole.

Where this breaks down for scuba is that golf's marketing machine does not promote golf. The machine promotes golf spectatorship... that's the product that the PGA sells. TV broadcast of golf is a multi-billion dollar business. But the dirty little secret about golf is that the marketing machine is NOT selling golf.

Look at who the BIG golf sponsors are. Advertising around golf is designed to drive CEOs to hire Acenture, millionaires to fly NetJets, affluent people to buy Rolex, business owners to offer Aflac insurance to their employees, upper-middle class people to believe that Buick is a luxury brand, get more MasterCard's in your wallet, drink Michelob, buy your wife a Tiffany bracelet, etc.

In fact, if you look at the PGA Marketing Partners listing you'll notice something very interesting...

Sales, Marketing, Partners

There's not A SINGLE company involved in the business of GOLF listed as a marketing partner!

Golf isn't a golf marketing machine... golf is a marketing machine to reach affluent customers for non-golf products. There's an incidental effect of promoting golf participation and gear sales. But you can rest assured that if golf relied on money from Titleist and Cleveland irons to promote the sport... there would be no machine.

 

[cerich]

Only if the person conducting the marketing efforts doesn't have a brain.

The way marketing is done - with a brain - is by doing the research to determine who has the greatest likelihood to be motivated (psychologically, not demographically), developing a campaign that speaks directly to them, and then targeting the execution of that campaign directly to them, with a specific, direct call to action to try your product. Doing all this increase your conversion rate at each step in the process

A broad, non-targeted campaign with an oblique message to try something else - that is NOT your product - in the hope-against-all-logic hope that a handful of the people that may respond to THAT campaign will eventually go on to try your product aferwards is foolish.

Before buying a car most people have ridden a bike, right? Should GM promote cycling in order to drive car purchases?

Beer drinkers drank soft drinks prior to drinking beer, no? So Budweiser should promote soda?

However, that's not to say that snorkeling is not a good indicator of scuba interest. If there were a "Snorkeling Illustrated" magazine that would be a great place to advertise diving. But it would make little sense for DEMA to run "Try Snorkeling" ads in "Sports Illustrated" in the hopes that some of those people took up diving someday.

---------- Post added December 24th, 2014 at 09:52 AM ----------



Where this breaks down for scuba is that golf's marketing machine does not promote golf. The machine promotes golf spectatorship... that's the product that the PGA sells. TV broadcast of golf is a multi-billion dollar business. But the dirty little secret about golf is that it's main business is NOT selling golf.

Look at who the BIG golf sponsors are. Advertising around golf is designed to drive CEOs to hire Acenture, millionaires to fly NetJets, affluent people to buy Rolex, business owners to offer Aflac insurance to their employees, upper-middle class people to believe that Buick is a luxury brand, get more MasterCard's in your wallet, drink Michelob, buy your wife a Tiffany bracelet, etc.

In fact, if you look at the PGA Marketing Partners listing you'll notice something very interesting...

Sales, Marketing, Partners

There's not A SINGLE company involved in the business of GOLF listed as a marketing partner!

Golf isn't a golf marketing machine... golf is a marketing machine to reach affluent customers for non-golf products. There's an incidental effect of promoting golf participation and gear sales. But you can rest assured that if golf relied on money from Titleist and Cleveland irons to promote the sport... there would be no machine.

Exactly...I have been amazed how many divers I have met over the years have many of the same interests and activities as I do. Just a WAG but people that fly(take flying lessons), photographers, camping, shooting, adventure travel, ride bikes (with and without engines) and a surprise to me and not a interest of mine horse riding. I have taught/met/dove with tons of people that do some or all of the above, and very few that have done none.

 

[boulderjohn]

If you understand the market, who is learning to dive and the limiting factors it is easy to see that other sports are the competition. Look at golf. Clubs start at $500 and you could spend $2000 or more. Plenty of accessories to buy for Father's Day... And ongoing costs once certified are similar to greens fees for entry and charters. But really it comes down to disposable income. If they do not have it they are not going to do either. However golf has a marketing machine... TV tournaments, sponsorships, celebrities etc. Golf equipment in every sporting goods store. All of that promotes the sport as a whole.
...So the short answer is people see Scuba as expensive or a nitch where it is no different than golf. A beginners golf lesson is about $300-600 similar to OW cert initial equipment about $500-2000 dames as scuba unit. Ongoing training, just like additional specialities. Scuba pros of all types need to educate, inform and promote scuba as a whole... Share any scuba event, drag friends and family to trade shows, whatever it takes.

If you think scuba participation is lagging, you should look at the statistics for golf. They are horrible. Golf courses are closing across the USA for lack of participants. Use Google to find a whole host of articles on it.

Golf CAN be as expensive as you say, but it does not have to be. When I started playing, I played for many years on cheap, used equipment without any professional instruction at all. You can get a set of pretty decent used clubs for next to nothing. Many courses offer introductory group lessons at a very attractive price in the hope of getting more people playing. Course fees vary tremendously from outrageously expensive to pretty darn affordable.

I recently took my grandson golfing a few times. I bought him a set of junior clubs at a garage sale for practically nothing. I took him to a park and gave him a lesson on how to hit the ball. We then went to a par 3 course and played for a very small fee. He had a blast. I also certified him as a scuba diver. You can bet your booties that was a far, far, far more expensive proposition.

As someone who has participated in golf, skiing, and scuba avidly for quite a few years, I assure you that scuba is the most expensive.

However in scuba BIG anything is looked at as BAD! There are thousands of threads complaining about online retailers STEALING customers. However, if you look at things like scubaboard, leasurepro, scubatoys PADI etc are the big marketing tools. The Independant instructor can not put on adds on tv but PADI could and should. We need to let the big dogs promote scuba diving and we promote ourselves as service providers.

There are well over 100 scuba instructional agencies in the world. I am sure they would all be very grateful if PADI were to step up and spend millions and millions of dollars on a marketing campaign that will help their bottom lines.

 

[Eric Sedletzky]

Golf isn't a golf marketing machine... golf is a marketing machine to reach affluent customers for non-golf products. There's an incidental effect of promoting golf participation and gear sales. But you can rest assured that if golf relied on money from Titleist and Cleveland irons to promote the sport... there would be no machine.

The only sport I see on TV that promotes the actual implements to take part is bass fishing tournaments. They have ads for everything from the rods/reels/lures/boats/ and other stuff so you can be just like the pro's you're watching.

 

[RJP]

The only sport I see on TV that promotes the actual implements to take part is bass fishing tournaments. They have ads for everything from the rods/reels/lures/boats/ and other stuff so you can be just like the pro's you're watching.

Which is smart targeting... because it's certain that nearly 100% of people watching bass fishing tournaments are bass fisherman. You're not going to get too many CEO's or NetJet targets, relatively speaking. It's also very cost efficient because such tournaments are on fourth-tier (and lower) cable stations rather than one of the large "broadcast" networks or major cable networks. The cost to run an ad on one of those shows is pennies a serving.

Golf companies do advertise on golf tournaments, channels, etc... but that's not the focus and certainly not where the money is. Professional sports are essentially an elaborate media channel to reach a target audience. This is why networks pay billions for NFL rights, baseball playoffs, etc.

When millions of people start paying money to watch a handful of people scuba dive... we can use golf as an appropriate analogy. Until then, it's really not a good one.

---------- Post added December 24th, 2014 at 12:38 PM ----------

As someone who has participated in golf, skiing, and scuba avidly for quite a few years, I assure you that scuba is the most expensive.
There are well over 100 scuba instructional agencies in the world. I am sure they would all be very grateful if PADI were to step up and spend millions and millions of dollars on a marketing campaign that will help their bottom lines.

And PADI is OK with that strategically. The rule of thumb I've used to counsel clients is that if you've got more than a 30% share of a crowded market (many competitors) or a 60% share of a narrow market (a handful of competitors) then it MAY make sense to conduct market-development activities. With a 75% share... I wouldn't advise AGAINST it. But there's more to it than that.

PADI is doing some things - targeted national print, etc.

It just doesn't make financial - or logistical - sense to do much more than that.

 

[Octopusprime]

The only sport I see on TV that promotes the actual implements to take part is bass fishing tournaments. They have ads for everything from the rods/reels/lures/boats/ and other stuff so you can be just like the pro's you're watching.

This is one area I disagre. Golf on TV uses a traditional marketing tool endorsements. It is human nature to envy someone better than you. Golf players market everything from gear to cars. While watching golf on tv the players have a logo on everything.

Yes you can golf on the cheep it is called snorkeling or free diving. All you need is a mask and snorkel.

Some of the other posts mentioned that the target market is affluent. I would disagree, the target market is one with disposable income. Historically that was an affluent market. However today the a merging disposable income is the 20-30 something's they are not purchasing houses to be more mobile to get a job, because of this they are not house poor like most past generations.

---------- Post added December 26th, 2014 at 07:03 PM ----------

And PADI is OK with that strategically. The rule of thumb I've used to counsel clients is that if you've got more than a 30% share of a crowded market (many competitors) or a 60% share of a narrow market (a handful of competitors) then it MAY make sense to conduct market-development activities. With a 75% share... I wouldn't advise AGAINST it. But there's more to it than that.

PADI is doing some things - targeted national print, etc.

It just doesn't make financial - or logistical - sense to do much more than that.

PADI could easily do some targeted TV ads. If they were to promote PADI and learning to dive on 2nd or 3rd tier speciality channels like the travel channel. Also with cable and target zip goes were there are enough certified instructors to support the Advertising.

As a trade organization they should promote activities that support their members.

 

[Leadking]

They may not be house poor but they are student loan poor. Disposable income is down about $3k in the past few years and the job prospects for the younger generation is poor compared to previous generations.