The Ethics of Full Disclosure on ScubaBoard

[cool_hardware52]

Tobin, I used to travel nationally selling a type of factory instrumentation, and took customers out for lunch. The customers gave ME free product: chips at Fritos Lay or case of coffee or whatever. This was considered relationship building and since all sales folks do it, it balances out influence. I still had to show my machine improved quality and profits, or no sale. I have to think this is true for most sales situations, or the customers are quickly out of business! For SCUBA, experienced dives can see through gimmicks and freebies to the good and improved equipment, would you agree?

That most do it makes it vulgar, not proper.

Tobin

 

[cool_hardware52]

Meh. We live in a capitalistic society. You can try to legislate it and they will find another way to market themselves..

When did I suggest there should be legislation? One cannot legislate morality.

I do think it worthwhile to point out the goal of most of these programs is the corruption of somebody.

That they are common and routinely successful is sad IMO, but true. It speaks of where we are as a society.

Tobin

 

[The Chairman]

When did I suggest there should be legislation?

Where did I suggest that you suggested this? Oh snap! I didn't. Don't be so frickin' testy all the time.

I do think it worthwhile to point out the goal of most of these programs is the corruption of somebody.

I doubt that the goal is to corrupt, but rather to sell. You don't like it and seem to be offended by it. I am not so worried about it. I doubt most people are. I know, I know: it speaks to where I'm at as a person within the society.

BTW, if I don't like how someone is marketing their stuff, I just don't buy from them. I am more worried about meanness than spiffs. Ergo, I try not to buy from or support mean people, no matter how much I like their products. I don't eviscerate them publicly either, I just try to find another source.

 

[cool_hardware52]

I doubt that the goal is to corrupt, but rather to sell.

Is it possible to rely on honest, non corrupting, marketing?

Asking anyone to choose between self interest and honest, fully transparent, full disclosure is an effort to corrupt.

One can try to defend it as an effective method to increase sales, or excuse it as common (i.e. vulgar), or acceptable *up to a point* Immoral behavior sadly has many defenders.

But the fact remains they are all efforts to corrupt.

Tobin

 

[drrich2]

Tobin, I think your sentiment is what's more often referred to as avoiding conflict of interest.

In some domains, like the medical profession, this is a huge issue and people often do try to legislate morality (e.g.: demand disclosure, etc...). In retail, it seems regarded more lightly.

Richard.

 

[Bubblesong]

Tobin, that broad definition of "corruption" is not going to fly. I am restraining myself from going "Yosemite Sam" on you for saying I am corrupting my customers, and they are, somehow, corrupting me!!! Sounds like we are going to Hell for enjoying gracious back and forth courtesies! Corruption is selling leaky BCD's rather than take a loss. It is kicking paying customers off a dive boat because a bigger spender pops in one morning. It means hurting people for a profit, when most businesses are sincerely trying to make the world a better place while earning a fair wage, including your good self! Spitting bullets here!!!

 

[cool_hardware52]

Tobin, I think your sentiment is what's more often referred to as avoiding conflict of interest.

In some domains, like the medical profession, this is a huge issue and people often do try to legislate morality (e.g.: demand disclosure, etc...). In retail, it seems regarded more lightly.

Richard.

Sure "Conflict of Interest" is the more polite term. The issue remains corruption. The method remains money (or goods or "free trips" ) offered by those seeking to corrupt.

It remains up to the individual to make the choice to be corrupted, for example the shipping manager being offered a "free vacation" could choose to ignore that offer, or disclose it to his employer, or he could remain silent and accept the "freebies"

The fact remains that if the freebies were not offered by the freight company the shipping manager would not face the moral dilemma. In short those offering the benefits are attempting to corrupt others.

Is it ever proper for companies to offer "bonuses" for increased sales? Of course.
1) Discounts for reaching a certain volume. That's a benefit that accrues to the company, and not to the shipping manager.
2) Disclose the "free trip" reward to the company, i.e. mail a notice, *not* have the local rep button hole the shipping manager. (I actually had that happen when the "rep" mistook me for an employee and not the owner.)
3) Require that those in a position to "earn" a commission for referrals disclose that fact.

It's really not that hard to behave ethically.

Legislate Morality? It's tried all the time. It almost never works as intended.

Legal, and moral are two vastly different things. I need only point to the EpiPen price increase as an example. Mylan broke no laws when they raised the price of EpiPens by 400%. Moral outrage, not new legislation, is what forced them to offer lower prices.

Tobin

 

[The Chairman]

Is it possible to rely on honest, non corrupting, marketing?

It can be argued that there is no such thing as "honest" marketing. Caveat emptor: Let the buyer beware. The best part about ScubaBoard is that divers get to share their experiences with their equipment. and the manufacturer can like or challenge those experiences. It's up to the reader to determine who's legit and who's not. Integrities are often challenged, but more often than not, it's just one guy trying to win an argument.

It's about respect. I respect the average ScubaBoarder and expect them to share their experiences honestly. Very, very few have an agenda and those that do are pretty obvious. We have even fewer POV warriors and most of them can't find any traction her or they cross the line so egregiously that they get banned. There are lots of ways to get your name out here on SB. If I remember rightly Tobin, you gave out a number of those rubber tank wedges when you first got here on SB. They were great!

Here's something that many businesses don't realize: While it's hard to gain a customer, it's incredibly easy to lose one. Sure, false claims and inferior products can damage a company's reputation, but more often customers are lost to indifference, neglect and sleights. Everyone expects gear to fail from time to time, but we don't know how we will be treated once it does. Tales from users having to deal with this tell us far more than anyone given a trinket to post good things. Great reviews are awesome, but negative reviews and how they are handled, are far more telling.

 

[cool_hardware52]

Tobin, that broad definition of "corruption" is not going to fly. I am restraining myself from going "Yosemite Sam" on you for saying I am corrupting my customers, and they are, somehow, corrupting me!!! Sounds like we are going to Hell for enjoying gracious back and forth courtesies! Corruption is selling leaky BCD's rather than take a loss. It is kicking paying customers off a dive boat because a bigger spender pops in one morning. It means hurting people for a profit, when most businesses are sincerely trying to make the world a better place while earning a fair wage, including your good self! Spitting bullets here!!!

Selling known defective goods is fraud.

Creating conflicts of interest is an attempt to corrupt.

All that is in question is at what price customers can be "bought" Some can be "bought" with a T shirt, some with a free lunch or dinner, and others a free trip to Hawaii, or a set of new tires......

I used to do a lot of construction work at a Navy Owned Facility operated by General Dynamics in Pomona California. As the physical plant was owned by the Navy the vast majority of the contracts were let via public bid, and were "hard money" fixed price contracts. That's done specifically to limit the opportunities for corruption, and entirely proper when dealing with taxpayer $$'s

Then General Dynamics decided to solicit bids for "force account" work, i.e. a price to furnish a carpenter or laborer or backhoe operator or painter etc by the hour. I won several of these contracts, and so did several of our usual competitors. Pretty soon almost all of the work on this huge facility was being done using these "force accounts" The claim was it was faster than preparing contract docs for a genuine bid. The "Plant Engineering" department requests X number of workers and they would furnish the materials if needed and the in house "inspector" would sign off that X number of workers had shown up. An invoice was prepared based on the form the "Inspector" had signed.

One night (we worked a lot of graveyard to avoid impacting the ongoing production in this munitions plant) the "Inspector" who I'd know for a couple years, and who I had a good working relationship with, keeps asking me where he could get a good deal on some new tires for his truck. I found this a bit odd, but I told him where I usually sourced tires for my various vehicles. We did buy a lot of tires having ~16 trucks + trailers and tractors, and air compressors etc. I offered to introduce him to the tire shop owner I typically used. I had no obligation to do so, but the inspector had always been a decent guy, and I happy to do him a favor. The next night he was back to complaining about the high cost of tires, and overtly wondering *how* he would ever be able to afford new tires. Could I pay for them and he could pay me back? Er, ah well no. It was getting really weird.

The next night the entire facility had a really very tense vib when I arrived. For good reason. Earlier that day most of Top Staff in the Plant Engineering dept had been arrested by Federal Marshals, and frogged marched out. In addition arrest warrants had been served at 2 other firms that had been furnishing "force account" labor. No Marshals showed up at my company. The head of Plant Engineering was eventually convicted of accepting kick backs from the other firms for OKing false invoices for "ghost" laborers. One of the contractors pleaded out and turned on the "The 3 fingered Man" (the head of PE was missing 2 fingers, no doubt from sticking them in some other cookie jar he shouldn't have) The other contractor arrested was never charged, I suspect because the evidence was weak. He wasn't my favorite guy, and I could easily picture him participating in a corrupt act, but I didn't have any evidence. I can add that this same guy had once approached me with an offer to essentially collude on a a bid at another facility.
The testimony at the trial was the 3 fingered Man had approached the contractors that were arrested. I believe this, mostly because the 3 fingered Man was a scumbag. Apparently this scumbag felt comfortable approaching the other two contractors, but *never* tried it with me.

The inspector on my project eventually confided in me that he had been told I was corrupt by the 3 fingered man, and he wanted to get hard evidence that he could provide to the investigators. That was the whole awkward "Gee I really need some tires" stunt. The classic, "Why yes we knew there was a problem here and we were running our very own sting operation" kinda misdirection one sees when corrupt public officials feel the walls closing in.

Only it didn't work, not even a set of tires, requested by a guy I had good reason to favor......

We all make choices. I'm content with mine.

Tobin

 

[cool_hardware52]

It can be argued that there is no such thing as "honest" marketing.

One can argue that there is no end to the ways to rationalize bad behavior too.

If I remember rightly Tobin, you gave out a number of those rubber tank wedges when you first got here on SB. They were great!

I've provided free samples, with zero strings attached, of most my new products.
How did I select *who* received the free samples?

Did I limit it to my "allies"? No.

Did I include a requirement that they commit to writing a positive review? No.

Did I require they commit to writing any sort of review? No.

I sent the goods to the first X number (usually 10 or so) with no strings attached.

Exactly how would such an action create a moral dilemma for anyone?

That's vastly different from offering to pay a commission for sales (or send additional free goods), in exchange for referrals to folks that fail to disclose that fact when reviewing goods.

Tobin