[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Lloyd,
You seem like a real nice guy and a good, honest Marine. I hope I can add open-minded too. However, comments like these (accusing somebody of a 'blatant lie'), without having the facts, at least make you appear close-minded and openly hostile. I'll choose to assume that is not really the case.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think I'm a fairly nice guy, and I think I'm pretty open minded...
[ QUOTE ]
I have personally seen data that backs up the claim of 97% placement rate (no, Frank was not the one who showed it to me). When the claim of 98% is made, I am not that skeptical. Keep in mind these are CFI's who complete the program, to include instructing at the school. If you do not complete that 'phase', it stands to reason you would not be guaranteed an interview, and therefore not included in these results. If you would like to see numbers of enrollments to airline hires, join the club. I can guarantee they will not be published.
[/ QUOTE ]
See, there's the problem. If you don't know anything about the industry and you want to become an airline pilot, the 98% thing is misleading. I'll admit, maybe it isn't a blatant lie. However, it would lead one to believe that if you go there, get your training and (of course) pay them the money, you'll be an airline pilot!
Now, you and I can look and say "Well, everybody knows that you have to build the time...", or something to that effect. However, when you're 20 and graduating college, or 39 and retiring from the military - with no concept of the way this industry operates - it's misleading!
According to the dictionary, one of the definitions of lie is :
Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression.
I assure you that DCA doesn't publish the ratio of enrollees to airline pilots (whatever they call them) because they don't want you to know! If it was really 1/3, that would look pretty bad for the company. In fact, it would make DCA look just like every other school out there.
Wait, I think we're on to something....
When I said it was a blatent lie, I wasn't making a personal attack. I was, however, attacking the statement. If it's misleading, it's a lie. If it's meant from the beginning - by the person that made the utterance - to be misleading, it's a blatent lie. Advertisements are often, unfortunately, blatent lies. It's a fact of life.
Even in my old Marine Corps, 85% of the people were lied to during their enlistment. I'm not bitter about it - in fact, I understood that going in.
[ QUOTE ]
I knew the 97% couldn't be a placement/enrollment, and was never told so.
[/ QUOTE ]
Why weren't you ever told so? Have you ever questioned that?
[ QUOTE ]
That said, I don't know the first thing about professional marketing. Marketing the product in a positive light, while it may upset some, makes sense to me.
[/ QUOTE ]
So, if I make a pain relif drug, and 7 out of 10 users have internal bleeding, should I ignore that and talk about how good 3 out of 10 users feel?
[/ QUOTE ]