Page 4 of 6 First 123456 Last
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    255
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    [toungeincheek]
    Jhemsley, I not expecting to cure you of your capitalist pig views, but blaming the consumer for being duped by the McDojo owner is rather unprincipled. If it's the consumers' fault why are you here?[/toungeincheek][/quote]

    Lol, if you aren't a capitalist pig, why are you here in America? I though McCarthy ran you guys off to the other side of the pond in the 50's? If you pinko commies are back, I think its time to reform the Un-American Activities commision. I'm sure there is a provision for it somewhere in the Patriot Act.

    To address the serious sentiment of the question, I'm here because the site was a great asset in finding a school to train, or rather, find schools not to train at. Consumer advocacy should center on consumers having the information to make a reasonable choice, and a climate with a lot of choices.

    Several posters have made the point you are an adult, you should be able to make you're own choices. Well, you're an adult, you should read the contract you sign. As long as a school isn't being fraudulent or obfuscating their policies, there is nothing wrong with asking for exclusivity since there are legitmate concerns the school may want to adddress with one (insurance concerns, lawsuit concerns, reputation concerns, competition concerns).

    Its fine not to like the policy. I agree its in the consumers interests not to have it. My objection is to the the treatment such a policy as a perfect indicator of poor quality instruction or cult like behavior, when it indicates neither in and of itself. I also find treating that kind of policy with the anger one would direct toward a 20 year old kid claiming to the the 11th Dan of Kung Jitsu Tudo silly.

    Its certainly a factor in deciding whether to shop there, but lets be accurate about what it does and doesn't tell you about a school.

    As a side note, I find it completely believable that an insurance policy resulted in the Krav Maga school and Karate tournaments requiring new branded equipment. I don't know if that was the actual motivation (profit seems more likely), but insurance companies reduce their risk in part with ambigously worded requirements that makes it easy for an insurance company to refuse to pay (see Katrinia with some of the insurance companies that called any water damage - even rain on a blown off roof - flood damange). The insurance company almost certainly didn't give them a list - but they might absolve themselves of liability if the school didn't use something to the effect of 'equipment in like new condition that meets or exceeds industry safety standards'. You see something like that in an insurance policy, you can bet a million dollars that the first time there is an accident, the insurance company is going to try call John's set of lucky gloves the he bought in '99 non-compliant equipment.

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    2,147
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Kickcatcher
    Well if you want to contribute to the thread you could try doing some research mate.

    Anyway, here's a screen shot of a martial arts insurance application from http://www.martialartsinsurance.com/Applications/

    It specifies a requirement for kit but does not mention "approved" or specifically branded kit:
    My instructor would be so uninsured if this was the only kind of insurance out there. Light contact to the head, foot pads..sure...
    "a martial art that has no rules is nothing but violence" - Kenji Tomiki

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Akron, Ohio
    Posts
    314
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by pittfrog
    Is it normal for an instructor to require you to buy all MA gear from him/her, and to require you to ask permission before training elsewhere or competing?
    Normal? Yeah, its pretty common.

    The question is, is it reasonable for someone providing a service to make the demand of someone paying for a service.

    What would you do if your plumber said you can only buy toilet paper thru him and you must ask his permission to use another plumber?

    Mark

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    2,147
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by juszczec
    Normal? Yeah, its pretty common.

    The question is, is it reasonable for someone providing a service to make the demand of someone paying for a service.

    What would you do if your plumber said you can only buy toilet paper thru him and you must ask his permission to use another plumber?

    Mark
    Well that would be unreasonable, but what if the plumber said "I offer a 1 year warentee on my work. But only if you are not serviced by another plumber and use X brand tolet paper?"

    I've seen a lot of guys say they can not teach you if you train at multiple clubs because of confusion between styles. Basically they are saying they can't guarentee you results because you won't dedicate yourself. If they had this beleif, then it is GOOD form for them to tell you to quit the club and leave if you want to crosstrain. However, most are simply not like this, but afraid of competiton. I personally believe that a beginer in any martial art should be exclusive to that art for a period of time. However, I do not think crosstraining should be banned. But I can understand some reasons to do so. (Limited class size, wants only dedicated students, newbies and confusion, etc).
    "a martial art that has no rules is nothing but violence" - Kenji Tomiki

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Akron, Ohio
    Posts
    314
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by FictionPimp
    Well that would be unreasonable, but what if the plumber said "I offer a 1 year warentee on my work. But only if you are not serviced by another plumber and use X brand tolet paper?"

    I've seen a lot of guys say they can not teach you if you train at multiple clubs because of confusion between styles.
    School owners can set whatever rules they want - after all, its their business. But the rules need to be stated up front AND explained. That way the customer gets to decide if they want to live with these rules.

    Basically they are saying they can't guarentee you results because you won't dedicate yourself.
    Run far away from any MA instructor that guaranetees results. You can't guarantee any results from training.

    I personally believe that a beginer in any martial art should be exclusive to that art for a period of time.
    I agree, but IMO, its up to the instructor to explain why.

    However, I do not think crosstraining should be banned.
    Me neither. In fact, I think it should be the norm.

    Mark

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Contracts suck! Period. Requiring the purchase of equipment from the school sucks, also.

  7. #37
    Judah Maccabee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    5,325
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by toejoe2k
    Contracts suck! Period. Requiring the purchase of equipment from the school sucks, also.
    Are you practicing for the bandwagon jumping? Don't forget - BJJ/Muay Thai are the best arts for MMA.

  8. #38
    Snake Plissken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    11,553
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    It is possible the school owner is selling the equiptment and getting a commission for it. While I don't agree with the "must buy from the school" statement, he's using at a revenue generating stream for cost of doing business.

    At our school there is loaner sparring gear. We were told we could buy our gear from anywhere, if we wanted to get it from the school we could but there was a minimum order so it might be kind of a hassle.

    It is also possible that some pin-headed underwriter at the insurance agency decided certain brands must be used. During an insurance audit, the topic of sparring could have been brought up in casual conversation. The agent could have mentioned it to an underwriter, who in turn investigated it themself (online perhaps) and made a determination of what he/she viewed to be "safe". This was told to the agent, who in turn told the school owner, "We'll cover you, but everyone has to use ****. And don't let them buy used stuff on E-Bay or something, because it might be faulty."

    Something relatively minor was turned into "law"

  9. #39
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    it's bull for sure - exclusive gear - exclusive instruction. It may be their right, but as a community we can excercise our right to not patronize such plaecs - decent instruction or no, there are too many good schools out there without such unnessessary polices (just because there are a few flimsy reasons that can be argued, does not by any stretch make any of it nessessary)

    open school>proprietary school

    /if they specify brand (and you havn't bailed yet), get the sanctioned brand elsewhere just to not play ball re: their revenue intentions

  10. #40
    Judah Maccabee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    5,325
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Uniform equipment policies are hardly a reason to avoid patronizing a school unless it causes undue financial burden on a student.

    If, for instance, a school charged $140 for a "branded" version of an Atama gi with school patches and logo vs. buying the same gi without school patches, I'm not going to make an argument on principle over $20.

    On the other hand, if that same school required a competition-level gi at $250 in order to train, that's a completely different story.

Page 4 of 6 First 123456 Last

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO