non-profit stuff that is better than for-profit stuff

[SNOWBALL]

[ QUOTE ]

Your logic is fundamentally flawed. If the majority of consumers in this market wanted the same thing you want, then the classes offered by the for-profit schools would reflect that.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just like the majority of consumers of used cars want to buy lemons, right?

I can 100% swear to you that the people in these McDojos are mainly interested in self-defense, and if they knew that the training they received didn't work, they wouldn't go there.

The key thing to realize here is that there is no legitimate transaction taking place. If I say I will sell you an insurance policy on your home, and it's not worth the paper it's printed on, what *exactlty* have I sold you. Surely, it's not what you "demanded"

People are being sold an insurance policy on getting attacked. Usually, they're not gonna get attacked, and they're think "oh my training is GREAT!" and no harm will be done to them. Similarly, usually your house won't be destroyed in a hurricane, and in that case, I'm not really harming you am I?

The utter lack of market dynamics in this field is astounding. If people were getting attacked on the street all the time, or AT LEAST if they classes had real sparring or did competitions, THEN you could argue that the students were getting what they demanded.

[ QUOTE ]

It's not yours or anyone else's responsibility to force people to take certain kinds of martial arts classes just because you think it would be better for them.



[/ QUOTE ]

Who is talking about forcing anyone to do anything? This thread isn't about the state. DIDN'T YOU READ THE VERY FIRST SENTENCE IN MY POST? If there were a ballot measure to ban fantasy martial arts schools, I would vote against it.

[tomdemaine]

Snowball,

Surely there's a free market solution here. Have the good martial arts school people print up posters, fliers. t-shirts etc claiming that the bad martial arts school people are only doing fantasy self defense and if they get uppity challenge them to a self defense off. If what people really want is self defense then when the real group proves themselves as the best they'll start to get the most customers. Of course if you do all this and people are still indifferent you have to accept that people don't care about self defense and are just doing it to look cool or some other reason.

[GoodCallYouWin]

"
conclusion: sometimes the profit motive sucks.
"

Non profit organizations cannot survive without the good will of others; so yes, while that good will exists no profit organizations are fine but what if that good will goes away? So anything non profit organizations do is great but not neccessary going to be around; profit organizations are self sustaining.

[Nielsio]

I only scanned this thread, but to me the conclusion is obviously:

Voluntary >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> involuntary.


Non-profit (if that's what it really is, unlike state sponsored and regulated stuff), and profit is the same class. It's voluntary trade. Sometimes people trade with money and goods, sometimes they trade goods and goods, sometimes they give to others and get karma in return, it's all voluntary.

[Ron Burgundy]

Ok, for the sake of argument, I'll go along with your observation that most consumers in this market want the same product you want.

The reason why you get the real deal and most people get an imitation, is not because the producer has failed, it's because of the stupidity of the consumer. The consumers have failed to demand the right product, and they have no one to blame but themselves. The for-profit martial arts schools are doing exactly what they're supposed to do, and that system is not flawed in this market.

This market looks like it could benefit from a Consumer Reports type of service to educate the consumer about how to get what they really want. I smell a good business opportunity for you...

[ QUOTE ]
Who is talking about forcing anyone to do anything?

[/ QUOTE ]

No one. I just threw that in there to get a rise out of you. That's what you're supposed to do in this forum right?

[GoodCallYouWin]

Also, I'm not really sure you can classify the judo classes as 'non profit' in the same way say Goodwill is nonprofit. Is Scientology really a non profit institution? They function in a very similiar manner as your judo class, just on a much larger scale.

[bkholdem]

I think any place that people volunteer their time, energy, and resources there is going to be an edge when compated to for profit charge for time, energy, and resources.

In the Judo class you have several 'volunteer' instructors who are giving their time, energy, and skills to the others for free. The location of the judo 'club' may very well be funded partly by donations (recources given for free).

When comparing where to be a recipient of goods and services, all other things being equal, one will get better value from the places that are giving them away for free.

There is an underlying principle at work in the judo club that is not present to nearly the same degree in the other places, social reciprocity. I would encourage you to explore the genesis of the judo club and the other 2 clubs.

In the judo club it likely started out with a volunteer component whereby the instructor was activly choosing to not get top $ for his services and the initial students likely knew this. In other words the club and/or the initial instructor(s) were extending a FAVOR to the initial students. This is a primary way that humans form social bonds. One human extends a courtesy to another human. Relationships of significant emotional value are formed this way. In turn the students continue the tradition and pass on the courtesy by helping the newer students and they are choosing to do it freely under the dynamic of social reciprocity.

(businesses try to use this powerful human force to 'trick' people into engaging in business with them because how powerful it is, there are books devoted to it and you can read up on it in the psychology field NLP. I am certain sales training techniques teach this concept and teach sales trainee's how to utilize it, albeit probably under different nomenclature).

Now how did the other places start? Likely a for profit minded person rented a space from another for profit minded person and then began to offer contractual services and found others who entered into a business-customer relationship. There may be social reciprocity undertones to some degree but the primary relationships in the latter 2 places are business relationships.

Social reciprocity creates and stustains friendships and loving relationships over the course of lifetimes. It is not a formal contractual system, people can accept the inital courtesy and turn tail and run and frequently they do (this is the way to counteract the salesman who is attempting to trick you into doing business with him when he extends a fake 'favor' or 'gift' under the guise of a genuine one, or you simply decline the gift outright. i.e. A salesman comes to your door and offers to let you try product X for a week 'for free' He is doing this not because the product is absolutely wonderful, he is doing it to create a sense of indebtedness. You either call him on it (unless he seems to be some poor schlub who was told to do this but seems to dim to understand what he is acutally doing), decline the free use which people mostly do (althought they do not consciously reason this is why they are declining, this IS why they are declining, to not get stuck in a reciprocity bind) or you accept the free stuff and refuse to allow yourself to feel any indebtedness (the discomfort feeling you have now anticipating the return of the saleman lol) and tell him matter of factly you took the stuff for free use with no intention of buying it because he tried to trick you a la the reciproctiy principle (if he seems savvy enough to realize he is using this) or simply thank him and decline the purchase and send him quickly on his way (knowing the company owner knows full well of the reciprocity principle and is using the salesman to dupe you into buying something you really dont' want and would not have otherwise purchased).

Powerful, powerful stuff.

[nietzreznor]

[ QUOTE ]
Please don't respond to this thread if you want to talk about why central planning is bad. This isn't about that at all.

Anyway, here goes.

I go to 3 different martial arts schools. Judo charges $20 per month for three 2 hour lessons per week. Jeet Kune Do charges $40 per month for one 2 hour class per week. The Third I'll call Jun Fan, and it charges $120 per month for two 90 minute classes per week.

Judo is nonprofit. It's run as a club/sports organization. I think I would rank Judo as the best training that I currently engage in. The class is VERY VERY hard. I frequently get injured. I often get thrown hard or submitted on the ground. Most people would hate to be in this class unless they were in reasonable shape.

The advantages of the judo class are that everything you learn is extremely practical, and you learn it in a way that teaches you how to apply it in a violent encounter against a strong, and capable fighter.
We spare for about an hour total every class. The other hour is warmup/instruction in techniques. There;s no such thing as having a false sense of self-confidence in Judo. You spar every class, including your first day, and there's almost always someone much better than you.


The 2nd best class I go to is the Jeet Kune Do class. I might rank it first, except it only meets once a week, and we don't do as much sparring. We learn very few techniques in this class. Everything is refinement, and it's refinement through hard work. All of the drills we do are very alive. You will sometimes get hit in the drills, because they are done at a high speed, and the attitude in the class is that getting hit is the price you pay for screwing up and it's the only way to learn. We spare for about 15 minutes at the end of class.
Everything is allowed in the sparring. We wear boxing gloves, and shin guards, and groin protectors, and use mouthguards, and we don't go full power out of courtesy, but we still go full speed and you still get hurt.

The third best class is the Jun Fan class. We learn new, and somewhat complicated techniques almost every class. There is zero sparring for many students, even those who have been there for 18 months or more. The drills are done in a slow manner, and your partner is there to basically assist you in completing your technique, instead of acting as a resistant opponent.

What's happening in the case of this third school is that the seller is able to give the consumer something that appears to be what the consumer wants, and he is able to do this for a long period of time without the student having the ability to tell the difference. Students come to learn how to defend themselves effectively, but instead they end up learning fantasy roleplaying techniques.

Most markets in capitalism seem to function in a very different way than this, because:

1. The consumer can tell beforehand if the product sucks

and at the very least

2. After the initial transaction ("small buy") the consumer can decide to continue to make that purchase, based on whether it satisfied a need or not.

In the case of nonprofit martial arts schools, like my Judo school, they really don't care very much if you join or not, and they're not there to make you feel good about yourself. They are there to teach you how to compete effectively so that you can do well in tournaments, and so you can continue the tradition of the school and help to teach other students later on.

conclusion: sometimes the profit motive sucks.

Ok, sorry if you think I'm being captain obvious here, but I mainly made this post in he hopes that some of you would share some other examples of when non-profit organizations might outperform for-profit organizations.

One I was thinking about, but I'm not sure about, is the practice of psychology.

[/ QUOTE ]

snowball,

I think you bring up good points about the desirability (in some cases) of non-profit stuff. This isn't to say I entirely agree with your analysis, but I think it's safe to say that both for-profit and non-profit have their advantages and disadvantages, and that an ideal society would probably have some of both, each doing what they do best.

Now, as for your specific example, as a fellow martial artist I think you are unfair to assume that everyone wants the same thing in a martial arts class--I'm sure everyone wants to learn some degree of basic self-defense, but many (myself included) want to learn other things beyond that. I know I wouldn't be happy at a school that focused solely on self-defense and sparring (at the expense of, say, forms), since I think the forms are beautiful and I love doing them.

[ianlippert]

[ QUOTE ]
People are being sold an insurance policy on getting attacked. Usually, they're not gonna get attacked, and they're think "oh my training is GREAT!" and no harm will be done to them. Similarly, usually your house won't be destroyed in a hurricane, and in that case, I'm not really harming you am I?


[/ QUOTE ]

There probably isnt a market for hard core martial arts courses because people in these areas arent constantly being attack by super ninjas on their way home from work.

The average joe is provided much more protection from random crime just by the fact that they drive everywhere and dont spend their free time around a bunch drunken hooligans. So its much more likely that these people prefer a form of exercise that is provided by a light form of martial arts. Martial arts as a sport can used as a fun past time without the expectation that you are going to use it to protect yourself double dragon style.

[ianlippert]

[ QUOTE ]
Who is talking about forcing anyone to do anything? This thread isn't about the state. DIDN'T YOU READ THE VERY FIRST SENTENCE IN MY POST? If there were a ballot measure to ban fantasy martial arts schools, I would vote against it.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is something that needs to be pointed out about this thread. You pointed out a minor 'market failure' without the need to expand that small example to complete government control. I think its possible that minor market failures can occur in a free market when the cost to the consumer of correcting them is fairly minor. Now when people start using lighthouses for justification of government control of the money supply, I think thats a little rediculous.