REQUEST FOR COMMENT: Petition text -- READ THIS!!!! --

[Genesis]

Please see:

http://www.politics-fax.org/petitions/petition-scuba-1-online.htm

This petition will be aimed at Scuba Manufacturers and Distributors in the United States.

If you support this, please sound off. If there are changes that need to be made, in your mind, for it to be acceptable, let's discuss it. If you think I'm a blooming idgit, well, I'll be polite

Please note that this is a DRAFT and will NOT execute if you attempt to sign it! Once comments have been made, considered, suggestions incorporated and some kind of consensus is reached, I will post AGAIN when it is available for ACTUAL signature.

I operate a site called "politics-fax.org" that handles political advocacy on various issues. This petition, once activated, will use that technology to forward to the manufacturers copies of petition signatories.

If we can develop a consensus and demonstrate that there are indeed large numbers of divers who are tired of the existing system, we CAN make a difference.

Of significant note is that ScubaPro's President, in a phone call with me today, stated that he had never heard from any diver that they had a problem with the price controlled environment in the local dive shops.

Never, asked I?

Never. That's what he said.

Is he right?

 

[ScubaScott]

Genesis - In the signature area of that petition, are folks from other countries going to be able to fill in the whole form?

SS

 

[Genesis]

The signature block is a "prototype" - as I indicated, the back end support isn't "turned on" for it as of yet. It just has to be there for the system to be willing to accept the file, so I grabbed one off another petition for now.

I do think this is limited to North Ameirca though, since Europe is already pretty free of this nonsense with the EU's more-enlightened view of actually prosecuting people for restraining trade

 

[djhall]

Genesis,

This looks great and covers most of my issues. A few comments:

Failure to curtail online selling may lead to the collapse of many local dive shops, as their dependance on unrealistically-supported "retail" equipment prices has not only driven their customer base online but further has led them to price other items and services they sell unrealistically, thereby making it impossible for them to survive as a larger and larger percentage of their potential sales shift online.

At first glance, this seems to be an argument IN FAVOR of curtailing online selling and cracking down on firms like LP. Perhaps re-wording it would help?

Divers who are trained at the "open water" or "BOW" level, and sold a set of gear at that time, and later discover that the online marketplace is available and offers pricing roughly half that of the local shop are very likely to feel taken advantage of. This is likely to contribute to diver drop-out, which is a known phenomena. You cannot sell anything diving-related to someone who no longer participates in the sport!

What about diver drop-out from people like me? I was certified ten years ago, but I never dove until this year becasue I could not afford equipment until eBay and LP became available. There have to be just as many who never buy gear and just rent on vacation. Lost opportunities for sales of gear AND advanced training from the LDS.

Many dive shops treat divers who do purchase online or from other shops with disdain and even attempt to tax them for their decision, treating them poorly when service concerns or other matters arise.

Tax? This makes me think of charging a "didn't purchase here fee". Wouldn't a word like penalize be more appropriate to cover ALL the various forms of harrassment divers experience?

That all forms of price restraint be immediately rescinded. The imposition of "MAP" (minimum advertised prices) is acceptable to us, however, any dealer who wishes to sell at any price they desire must be permitted to do so without threat or loss of their dealership or other penalty, even if the customer is required to call or visit the shop to learn the current selling price.

How would this affect online shops? Would companies like LeisurePro be required to place "call or email for price" on their website in order to sell below the MAP? Wouldn't that make online shopping rather difficult, especially considering the massive number of price inquiries someone like LP is likely to get?

Thanks for the work you have put into this. It is really great to see the angst many of us feel toward LDS and manufacturer's policies directed toward productive change rather than endless bickering among ourselves.

Along the lines of supporting those with favorable policies and not patronizing those who penalize us, someone offered to start a website listing the manufacturer's policies so we could see who we wanted to support. Could we request a written response from the companies to our petition for this purpose? This would be useful for learning what the manufacturer's reactions are and for letting them know that we intend to watch this long after we sign our names.

 

[Comenius]

Amen!

Count me in!!

 

[Genesis]

Some comments...

At first glance, this seems to be an argument IN FAVOR of curtailing online selling and cracking down on firms like LP. Perhaps re-wording it would help?

Yes. But they can't, you see. The EU connection will NEVER be stopped, as the EU prohibits the kind of garbage that is done over here. In fact, it was strongly hinted at that most of the SP product at LP is coming from the EU (and I believe it.)

It never hurts to point out what someone CANNOT accomplish, and that you understand they can't accomplish it - but that failure to address the issue might lead to some undesirable results!

What about diver drop-out from people like me? I was certified ten years ago, but I never dove until this year becasue I could not afford equipment until eBay and LP became available. There have to be just as many who never buy gear and just rent on vacation. Lost opportunities for sales of gear AND advanced training from the LDS.

Good point. Will see how to add that.

Tax? This makes me think of charging a "didn't purchase here fee". Wouldn't a word like penalize be more appropriate to cover ALL the various forms of harrassment divers experience?

Noted and changed. I like the word "tax", but I agree the connotation might not be appropriate.

How would this affect online shops? Would companies like LeisurePro be required to place "call or email for price" on their website in order to sell below the MAP?

Only if you HAVE such an agreement. I can't imagine LP would be an "authorized" dealer. But if they were, then yes, they would need to support the MAP policies.

BTW, they already do. There are items they carry that you must "request a price" on their web site; they email it to you. It can be done automatically and without human intervention without violating the MAP rules.

The petition already requests a written - or published - response. I'm sure they'll get the point when they get a 40 page fax - 2 pages of text, and 38 pages with ~50 signatures on each page - twice a week for a while. An individual response in such a case is impractical, which is why the petition asks for a public policy statement.

Thanks...

 

[SMKChef]

Genesis, this could actually work in favor of the LDS' if LP is made into an "authorized dealership" then the playing field would be more equal.

Everyone plays by the same rules.

Everyone uses MAP online and if they please, can sell at whatever margin they feel necessary to stay in business.

 

[Genesis]

LP will have a volume (and thus dealer pricing) advantage.

The LDS will have a customer service advantage.

But the differential will not be NEARLY what it is today. So instead of the regulator from the LDS being $550, and from LP $300, instead the difference in price might be $50.

That's a difference where MANY divers will buy from the LDS, especially if they actually get some service to go with their reg.

(I suspect LP won't like this petition one little bit!)

 

[djhall]

Of course an individual respone would be entirely impractical. I went back and re-read the end of the petition, and I see now where you specifically ask for a public response. I guess my question should have been, how, exactly, do we expect them to respond to this? Do we just monitor their websites for some form of published response? Should we ask them to send a copy of their public response somewhere so it can be published on this board and made available to the petitioners? Without a request like that, how could we link specific responses from the manufactures to our petition, unless they specifically say something like, "In response to massive customer petitioning, we have changed our policies to the following...?"

 

[Genesis]

is allowing the other side to save face if they are asked to change a long-held and fervently-believed position.

As such I get REAL careful about demanding that a company eat crow publically, as it can often just harden positions rather than work to get them changed. The change is enough. Quite frankly, those who sign will know they did, so when the announcement comes out and the drastic price changes start you'll know why it happened.

Its not necessary, nor productive, to ask a company to grovel. It may be satisfying, but it makes a satisfactory resolution a LOT tougher to achieve, as it adds personal crow-eating to the mix and that never goes over well.

What has to be remembered is that SOMEONE authored that policy at these manufacturers, and they are (or were!) a high-ranking executive. Someone is going to have to change their tune, and being able to do that "in response to a changing market" is far easier, and more likely to succeed, than to demand that they do so "in response to a threatened boycott"......