The $99 scuba course question
- Thread starter johnmckenzie
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
I would simply type "yes" but ScubaBoard requires a reply be at least five characters. Hopefully someone will come along and answer the question for you.
EDIT: I suppose I could have written "of course" as that's more than the five character minimum. Wish I had thought of it sooner. Oh well.
And people should also have complete scuba gear (including regs, tanks, and BC) before they sign up for OW class?
Maybe my expectations are naïve. If I want to become an amateur photographer and don't know anything about photography, I would expect that I could sign up for a Beginner Photography course so that I could learn about things like, for example, what kinds of cameras there are and what the pros and cons are of the different kinds, so that I could then make an informed decision on which one to buy.
Similar to starting with OW class. Learn the very basics first, then buy the equipment.
How on earth do you imagine you'd get anything out of a photography class without a camera? It wouldn't be a photography class... it'd be a camera buying class. And a short one at that.
Your analogy to scuba gear would hold up if there were places to rent a camera everywhere you might want to take photos.
Taking a photography class without a camera is the equivalent of taking a scuba class without a mask.
widget
Contributor
Yes, that was actually the reality of it, you needed the right product to learn how to use it, and the main reason I did the course was because I was a novice.
I hear your point, but see it from the other side as well, no one wants to waste their time trying to teach people who really dont have an interest in learning to dive, or just see it as a sort of "try out" because theres no profit in that.
For those who want to test the water as it were, there are specific "discover scuba" type courses designed for this, they can try out there, but signing on a full course just because its dirt cheap and you can just walk away if it doesn't suit you is grossly unfair to those giving up their time and energy to teach you.
Any instructor will tell you its so much more stimulating when the folk sitting there in front of you have an investment in learning, and they are getting fair remuneration for their time and experience, no body I know works for free and teaching a dive course IS work, surely there should be fair compensation?
I always think of the analogy of learning to fly and learning to dive, learning to fly an aircraft properly is important because if you dont get it right you could quite possibly die, much the same as diving, yet, I dont see the aviation industry cutting their tuition fees to 99 bucks and shortening their courses.
Now I know you took the course seriously and it worked out good for you, so please dont think I am been belligerent, thats not my intention at all and I do hear your point, but I dont believe the industry can survive, prosper and train competent divers on 99 buck courses.
I didn't say the course couldn't require a purchase early on in the class. I just said that I wouldn't expect a BEGINNER course to require you to have one just to sign up.
---------- Post added April 2nd, 2015 at 04:09 PM ----------
ps. I have taken a photography class. Like scuba and most everything else, it's more about the person than the specific piece of gear. A really good photographer will take much better pictures with their cell phone than many people will ever take, even with a $10K full SLR rig. Even more reason I would not expect a BEGINNER Photography class to require a camera to sign up. Or at least, anything more than something as basic as a reasonably modern cellphone camera or an uber simple, fully manual SLR.
Just like I wouldn't expect an OW class to require regs, BC, and tanks just to sign up.
The fact that retention rates has dropped when cheap curses started appearing doesn't shock me and it's not unreasonable that there is a connection. If the courses are expensive, people who take them are maybe more certain it's something they want. If they are cheap, some may just take them to try and see how it is, or to show a card to their friends...
I'd be more interested in the effect of cheap courses in the quality of instruction.
I'd be more interested in the effect of cheap courses in the quality of instruction.
If the course is expensive and only 2 people take it, but they stick with it, then retention is 100%.
If the exact same course becomes cheap and 20 people take it, but only 2 stick with it, then retention is only 10%. But does that really mean that something is suddenly wrong with the course?
It seems to me the latter scenario would be preferred. Costs do not go up linearly with the number of students. So, more students allows them a higher profit margin - or an equal profit, with higher revenues and lower prices. And more of the general public is scuba aware. Seems like a win-win. Why worry about people who aren't serious about scuba, take the course 'cause it's cheap, then drop out of scuba afterwards? Before answering, note my previous caveat that it's the exact same course, only cheaper.
If the exact same course becomes cheap and 20 people take it, but only 2 stick with it, then retention is only 10%. But does that really mean that something is suddenly wrong with the course?
It seems to me the latter scenario would be preferred. Costs do not go up linearly with the number of students. So, more students allows them a higher profit margin - or an equal profit, with higher revenues and lower prices. And more of the general public is scuba aware. Seems like a win-win. Why worry about people who aren't serious about scuba, take the course 'cause it's cheap, then drop out of scuba afterwards? Before answering, note my previous caveat that it's the exact same course, only cheaper.
Yeah... but the general public's "scuba-awareness" is now overwhelming coming from the 18 people who bailed on it. What do you think they are telling people "Scuba diving was so ****ing great that I had to stop doing it altogether!" Or are they telling people things like
"It wasn't as cool as I thought."
"The pool was crowded."
"The instructor seemed frazzled."
"It was $99... I suppose I got what I paid for."
From a marketing perception that is FAR from a win-win.
Plus, your assumption that demand jumps 1,000% (from 2 people to 20 people) is patently absurd.
Demand for scuba training is relatively price inelastic. Certainly on the low-end because there are a great many people who will never do it regardless of how low the price goes. (Demand limit.) It's actually an inverse response curve the closer you get to zero dollars because the pool of people remaining are less and less likely to be price-sensitive the lower and lower the price goes. (See second chart below.)
At some point, the demand for something like scuba training (D5 below) stops changing as price falls. Per below, even as the price drops from P5 to P6... the quantity (Q5) doesn't change. So lowering the price from P5 to P6 makes no sense at all. You're simply transferring profit to the customer.
Sorry for the extraneous lines on the chart above... it was from a larger presentation going through various price-elasticity-of-demand scenarios. I didn't feel like creating a new one on the fly. Just pretend the other lines aren't there.
Similar threads
