Banned from Pro Dive

[AggieDiver]

I apparently came in after the dust settled and the posts were gone. In the other threads on these topics I have adequately pointed out that we agree on the litigation portion and the inadvisability of it. I think in strict legal terms, most LDSs are not monopolies, but in rural areas, and in terms of the tactics they are forced to use with regard to classes and equipment selection, many of them walk a fine line.

Mike, I understand that the LDS's are obviously being squeezed on many fronts and that the class costs versus prices charged are out of line with reality. What I will say is that it is not up to the customers to support a business model that has been severely impacted by mail-order and online availability of gear to the point that it is flawed and no longer realistic in some cases. If we want to have the services and convenience of a LDS available, we need to accept the fact that we will have to pay for it. However, if you want to justify that price, we can't be treated the way these two threads have demonstrated. If it means raising the prices of training and airfills, and demanding (as an industry) from the manufacturers the right to competitively price the gear you sell to match local demand, then that is the business of the LDS owners. Simply demanding loyalty or else because LDS owners as a group can't get together and force needed changes on themselves and the equipment manufacturers will definately not result in the desired recovery of business at the LDS's.

AggieDiver

 

[Genesis]

Mike, I understand that the LDS's are obviously being squeezed on many fronts and that the class costs versus prices charged are out of line with reality. What I will say is that it is not up to the customers to support a business model that has been severely impacted by mail-order and online availability of gear to the point that it is flawed and no longer realistic in some cases.

Call a few of them up and ask. I have.

The fact is that the LDS have created this monster, and now are complaining about the natural, free-market consequences that came about as a result of their desires and demands.

Instead of changing their position, and embracing open competition, they are now turning to even more outrageous acts.

 

[Northeastwrecks]

AggieDiver once bubbled...
I apparently came in after the dust settled and the posts were gone. In the other threads on these topics I have adequately pointed out that we agree on the litigation portion and the inadvisability of it. I think in strict legal terms, most LDSs are not monopolies, but in rural areas, and in terms of the tactics they are forced to use with regard to classes and equipment selection, many of them walk a fine line.

No worries. You did ask a reasonable question.

I agree with you. Legally, there is nothing wrong with what the shop did. Anyone who says otherwise, to say nothing of organizing a petition about it, is ignorant and nothing more than a howling madman with no education and fewer brains.

From a business standpoint, it made far less sense. I can understand that a dive shop that is not actively promoting a DM program and simply want to keep itself supplied with certified assistants in exchange for some perks would want the DM's to showcase the gear. However, this shop sounds like it is one of the larger entities that promotes DM training. If so, this practice cannot be justified.

Regardless, the way they went about it is ridiculous.

 

[PhotoTJ]

Northeastwrecks once bubbled...



They need to be reminded constantly that no one cares about your opinion. What counts is the law and the application of law to a particular set of facts.

Wrong. They care about their opinion. More than likely, their friends care about their opinion, too. You have enough friends, you effect elections, then you have law-makers who care about your opinion.

Viola, new law. The student is now right.

Ain't America great?

 

[Northeastwrecks]

Unfortunately, their friends are not grading the course or sitting on the jury. Their friends are not instructing the jury on the law and won't be sitting on the appellate panel.

Accordingly, making that argument still wouldn't allow them to win a lawsuit.

I teach Legal Research and Appellate Advocacy. Taking such a position will also not allow them to pass the course.

Its true that laws can change through grass roots efforts. Howsever, in this case, I really don't see it as you must balance the rights of the consumer against the rights of the business owner.

I can picture the telephone call.

Caller: Mr. Senator, me and a bunch of my, like, friends, would
like you to make a law that businesses can't choose their,
like, customers. Me and my friends think that sucks.

Senator: Thank you for calling. We'll look into it.

In the meantime, their suit gets tossed.

I still believe that the manner in which the LDS conveyed their message was extremely inappropriate. Threatening to black list the candidate was also wrong. I would not have taken the course or ever set foot in there again.

I do not believe that telling a DM candidate that you expect them to use gear that the shop sells when working with students is inappropriate. Refusing to accept candidates who do not agree to those terms is not unlawful.

Besides, if you're going to be working for the shop and directing students to it for the purpose of purchasing gear, shouldn't you have enough confidence in the gear to use it yourself?

Regardless, what I think is irrelevant. The law provides that, in general, a business may choose its customers. That's not going to change. Moreover, it shouldn't change.

 

[MikeFerrara]

Genesis once bubbled...


Call a few of them up and ask. I have.

The fact is that the LDS have created this monster, and now are complaining about the natural, free-market consequences that came about as a result of their desires and demands.

Instead of changing their position, and embracing open competition, they are now turning to even more outrageous acts.

Lets see. You called the manufacturers to suggest that they should change the way they do business and they blamed some one else. You believed them? Manufacturers listening to shops is indeed funny.

25 or 30 years ago the only place to get scuba gear was at a dive shop. Well maybe a few mail order and sporting goods stores. The shop no doubt insisted the manufacturers keep the good brands out of non-dive shop stores. Thesame goes for price policies and service policies. This was a very long time ago, however. Requirements that a dealer be a full sevice shop ect. I'm also sure that there are some old timmers who are fighting any kind of change. For the manufacturers to claim that these people are the driving force behind their business decissions is a complete joke and I can't believe you swallowed it.

Just this year, every manufacturer we deal with has lifted their restrictions on mail order and online sales. So far they haven't budged on the price or service issues though. Pardon me but I think this small amount of progress is at the urging of the shops and of course market pressures requiring them to do something to allow shops to compete in the current market.

The next time you talk to a manufacturer...ask them what message their reb brings back from our shop. Ask them how they respond to out suggestions.

 

[kwesler]

I am NOT a lawyer, so perhaps I need to be set straight...

It seems to seem that while this LDS' practice is silly from a business point of view, as others have observed, there is ample precedent in other businesses...

If you work for many clothing stores, you must wear their clothes, at YOUR expense-my wife worked for The Limited-it is PRICEY! to adhere to that policy! Many other stores have dress codes as specific as uniforms, and as general as colors or appropriate clothing.

Students are often required to "show the colors" of the organization they are studying at-People to People required my son to buy and wear his People to People shirt...

IF the LDS required this studend to buy and wear a polo shirt from the shop, I doubt it would have caused this reaction, so therefore, this is about cost, not concept...

Again, I am COMPLETELY against this kind of behaviour, and have stopped patronizing one LDS for just this kind of thing (won't bore you with whole story-but LDS rented me BC with cracked inflator and bad tank and said they "would not come flying over the counter to help me" because I did not buy my regs from them!)

But bad behaviour and poor business practice are not illegal. Thank goodness-if yo think the courts are full NOW...

Ken

 

[Rick Murchison]

As a business owner in need of jettisoning a liability masquerading as a customer, there are ways to do it that don't "shoot yourself in the foot." The stories we hear here are all too frequently the tales of some poor clumsy LDS owner/manager finally getting fed up with losing money and doing something stupid. It is especially unwise to take your frustrations out on a new customer or on a customer for an act that is only one of many factors in the overall problem.
When I was in the computer business and identified one of these folks who were an expense rather than a profit, I would politely tell them that I was just as sorry as I could be, but that I just couldn't see how I could ever make them happy... but that I'd heard that my competitor could probably take care of 'em.
Example: Joe is an internet buyer who likes to do his research in my shop before he buys. Sam, my competitor, carries SUUNTO and I carry Oceanic. Instead of telling Joe that I'm sick and tired of his pumping me for information and then buying online, I help him out by telling him, "For you, Joe, that SUUNTO is a much better computer than what I carry, just look at these reviews in Rodales... and Sam has 'em."
Then, when someone asks Joe about me, instead of badmouthing me for throwing him out of my shop he'll say "That Rick really is a good guy... why he even recommended his competition when they had the better product for me."
Rick

 

[Genesis]

why there is a general reputation among the public that a businessman, like a politician, is lying whenever his lips are moving?

Gee, maybe its true far more often than not.....

 

[Northeastwrecks]

Rick Murchison once bubbled...
Sam, my competitor, carries SUUNTO and I carry Oceanic. Instead of telling Joe that I'm sick and tired of his pumping me for information and then buying online, I help him out by telling him, "For you, Joe, that SUUNTO is a much better computer than what I carry, just look at these reviews in Rodales... and Sam has 'em."
Then, when someone asks Joe about me, instead of badmouthing me for throwing him out of my shop he'll say "That Rick really is a good guy... why he even recommended his competition when they had the better product for me."
Rick

Rick,

I agree. There are polite ways of making sure that people leave with a good impression. The key word being "Leave".

The simple fact remains that hanging out a shingle doesn't mean that you need to cater to every bozo who walks through your door. You can pick and choose your customers.

How the business owner chooses to weed out the undesirables is their business; however, it needs to be done.

In this case, it would have been relatively simple to explain the rules. Explain to the candidate that the shop only teaches DM's who the shop desires to serve as DM's for that shop. Explain that the shop wants its DM's to use gear sold by the shop and that new gear purchases should come from the shop.

Then let the candidate decide.