Why ‘everyone is responsible for their own risk-based decisions’ isn’t the right approach to take

[Kharon]

... Regulation also teaches people not to be responsible for themselves - because the government takes care of us. ...

+++++1

 

[sigxbill]

How come therefore that there is one service provider (PADI in this instance) that is such a world dominating force?

Surely in such an environment there should be a huge number of smaller providers each offering different ways to learn and entrepreneurial individuals designing innovative new training programs?

It's surprising you ask this question! The underlying premise of all my posts has been the answer to that question: that the distribution of certifications would likely be different if it weren't for the competition reducing regulatory effects of the RSTC! Look what it does to discussions here on Scubaboard. Any time someone even remotely suggests that one agency has an advantage over others provokes angst from those associated in some way with the agencies that don’t compare favorably. The justification most often quoted for such angst is, "It's the instructor, not the agency. All agencies, although not legally required to do so, follow the RSTC standards, so it doesn't matter which agency issues you your card - they are all the same." If the prevailing thought of most instructors is this, then instructor candidates won't and don't shop other agencies. And if this is the message that the majority of the industry is presenting, customers are not going to exert any more research effort into finding the best agency for them; they'll make buying decisions more quickly - which is great for the sales person standing in front of the customer right then. This is exactly what happens - despite the fact that you acknowledge that a number of smaller providers offer innovative new ways to learn in their training programs. In this scenario, what is thought of as regulation successfully reduced competition - even though there are sometimes very significant competitive differences available!

You asserted that competition was tried in the other industries and failed - which required government intervention to correct. I assert that there was always government intervention in those industries, which caused competition to fail - which some think even more government intervention could correct. For more debate about the market effects of socialism vs classic liberalism, feel free to pm me so as not to detract any more of this string from the topic of scuba.

cheers

 

[chrisch]

It's surprising you ask this question! The underlying premise of all my posts has been the answer to that question: that the distribution of certifications would likely be different if it weren't for the competition reducing regulatory effects of the RSTC! Look what it does to discussions here on Scubaboard.

That is a US view of things. We here have no RSTC and to be fair I know nothing about it. PADI is the world's largest training organisation in a world in which scuba is by and large an unregulated activity. Scuba training is regulated in some countries but even in those PADI has a major market share.

My point being that the regulation of training if and where it occurs is not the driver of competition nor the death of competition.

You asserted that competition was tried in the other industries and failed - which required government intervention to correct...

No. I certainly did not and if my some chance I have created that impression to you or anyone else I am sorry. I have no idea where you got that notion. Capitalism tends over time to reduce competition due to economies of scale. That is not industry failure. Government intervention is required in order to promote competition. (UK govt. dept. details here: Competition and Markets Authority - Wikipedia)

 

[KevinNM]

The World Recreational Scuba Training Council is an organization that virtually all scuba training organization are members.

GUE, BSAC, and CMAS appear to be the major exceptions.

 

[chrisch]

The World Recreational Scuba Training Council is an organization that virtually all scuba training organization are members.

GUE, BSAC, and CMAS appear to be the major exceptions.

CMAS would appear to be a competitor - (according to Wiki) it's membership is limited to national councils. Here in Europe it (WRSTC) is under the auspices of EUF.

Can't say any of it has ever crossed my path over the years, had to look it up. Thanks for posting - interesting.

 

[mainedvr]

Even at the bare minimum, OW classes teach students how to dive safely. If someone decides to dive beyond their training level they are to blame. If a DM or resort takes a group on a dive that is beyond your training it is up to you to pass on the dive.

Sooo true, that is one thing I tell all my students is that even though you have been trained to a certain depth does not mean that a few feet more does not matter, its the thought process that makes that decision that is in question. "I was trained to 60' so what's the big deal for 70'" that thinking while many will not think is a big deal it can be. I remember during my cavern course the instructor was going to take us to a different section of the cavern and was tying off a spool I waived him off and we just stayed in the area we were in. After the dive he asked me and I said wasn't sure if we should go in there cause of him needing to tie off the spool and he pointed out it was still in the cavern zone but that the attitude was right. (He was a very good instructor) And that is the attitude I try to instill in my students, but as much as I do I am probably never going to dive with them again unless they are local or they do continuing education, so all I can hope for is they make good choices.