wrote:
From: "K0HB" on Mon 6 Jun 2005 03:14
wrote
4) Reducing the license test requirements has not brought sustained
growth to US amateur radio.
Does Amateur Radio need to grow?
If so, why?
1. In order to be at the same percentage as OTHER radio users;
the FCC regulates ALL civil radio in the USA and the
population of the USA is (keeping on) increasing. To be
competitive just to retain desired bands against all other
services requires a justification in citizen participants in
amateur radio...which means it must at least keep up with
the increasing population.
The total number of amateur radio licensees as a percentage of the
US population is only one factor in the regulatory process. Other
factors include the number of *active* licensees, the way the
allocated spectrum is used, compliance with FCC rules,
the needs and wants of the ARS vs. other services, new and old
technologies, to name but a few.
2. To retain a sizeable market for both equipment, components,
and publications aimed at radio amateurs. There are many,
many, many markets for electronics items today, much more
so than a half century ago.
Agreed. However, the variety of equipment available to radio
amateurs today far exceeds that of the past, and the cost in
constant dollars is far less.
Manufacturers of equipment,
components, and publications desire a large enough
market to enable profit; shrinking market numbers are
coincident with reduced profit and that be a no-no.
Yet even small companies serving niches in the amateur radio
market have demonstrated they can survive.
3. Actuarial tables will show that normal life span is going
to have a greater effect on an activity where the
participants are above the median population age...which
increases the probability of earlier attrition of numbers.
In other words, the older the population, the more of 'em are
going to die off sooner.
[regardless of egregious boasting or frequent, vociferous
denial, radio amateurs will NOT live forever]
Who boasted that?
Note:
amateur radio demographics indicate the participants are
older than the national population median age.
It would be interesting to see detailed statistics on that. Can you
provide them, Len?
Two caveats on median age comparisons:
1) There are relatively few radio amateurs younger
than about 10 years of age. So any comparison
to the general population should be adjusted to
compensate for the fact that the median age of the
US population can reasonably be expected to
be lower than that of an activity such as amateur
radio.
2) The source of amateur radio licensee age
statistics can be problematic. The FCC has
changed its policy on birthdate information
as part of the requirements, so some licensees
ages are known and others are unknown, making
the FCC database a problematic source of
licensee age information.
Surveys and polls may or may not be a
representative sample of the amateur radio
population.
A more illuminating statistic, IMHO, would be to compare
the distribution of the ages of amateur radio operators
to the distribution of the ages of the general population.
4. Amateur radio is basically a HOBBY.
For many if not most radio amateurs, that is true. But there
is a significant public service element to the amateur radio
service that is not a part of most other "hobby" activities.
There are many more
types and kinds of activity available to the population
today versus a half century ago and that is competition
for available free time for hobbyists.
There are also more hobbyists and more free time. More retirees
and semi-retirees. People are living longer and staying active longer.
Greater numbers
of amateur radio participants will increase exposure and
possible interest to the general public, demonstrate to
government agencies for favorable decisions in favor of
amateur radio participants.
That is true only if the "greater numbers" are active, visible, and
present a positive image to the general public and government
agencies.
Note: The ARRL membership
as of the end of 2004 was only 140 thousand while the
Academy of Model Aeronautics, the USA national membership
organization of model airplane flyers was 175 thousand
at that same time. [source: website statements of both
organizations]
An interesting statistic, but of itself tells little. Additional
information is
needed to understand the full meaning.
For example, what does it cost to be a member of the Academy of
Model Aeronautics? How long is a membership good for? What services
does the Academy offer its membership?
5. The no-code-test Technician Class license has only been
available for 14 years and (as of Sunday, 5 Jun 05) already
has 293,613 licensees out of a total of 722,452 individual
licenses in the USA.
The above numbers include expired-but-in-the-grace-period
licenses as well as current (unexpired) licenses. The number of
current licenses is significantly lower.
The term "no-code-test Technician Class" is not entirely accurate.
An unknown number of amateur whose license class is Technician
have passed a code test. These include:
- Former Novices who passed the Technician written test after April
15, 2000
- Former Technician Plus licensees who renewed their licenses after
April
15, 2000
- Technician licensees who passed the code test after April 1, 2000 but
who
have not upgraded to a higher license class.
Had that not been available, the
total number of amateur licenses would have SHRUNK by a
sizeable number.
This statement is an opinion, not a fact. There is no way to know for
sure
what would have happened.
However, it should be noted that, in the 9 years and two months from
February 14, 1991
to April 15, 2000, the overall growth in the number of FCC issued
amateur radio licenses
was less in both total number of licenses and percentage growth, than
the growth for an equal period of time before February 14, 1991. (That
date is when the Technician class license no longer required a code
test).
In addition, there has been a net loss of total FCC amateur radio
licenses held by individuals since the restructuring of April 2000.
Despite reductions in both code and written testing, and the reduction
of license classes open to newcomers, growth has
not occurred.
The exact amount of shrinkage is
unknown since it is impossible to accurately predict an
alternate future.
There is a logical contradiction here.
First Len claimed that a "shrinkage" (loss of total number of licenses)
would
have occurred if the Technician had retained its 5 wpm code test. Then,
he
admits that it is impossible to accurately predict an alternate future.
Both statements cannot be simultaneously true. One of them must be
incorrect.
That shrinkage could, at worst case,
reduced the Sunday totals to 428,839 total individual
licenses, a drop to 59.36 percent.
The preceding statement is incorrect.
The 293,613 Technician class licenses cited above are not all
"no-code-test" licenses. Therefore, had the Technician
retained its code test, at least some of those 293,613 would
still be licensed amateurs. An additional unknown number
would have earned licenses regardless of the code test.
Currently (as of
Sunday, 5 Jun 05) the no-code-test Technician class
license represents 40.64 percent of the total individual
license grants.
The preceding statement does not recognize the fact that not
all licenses of the Technician class are "no code test". It is
therefore misleading to the point of possibly being incorrect.
As the FCC continues to renew all Technician Plus licenses
as Technician, the number of code-tested Technicians
continues to grow.
6. The availability of communications resources to the general
public has greatly expanded in the last half century.
As it did in the half-century preceding ...
As
of the end of 2003 there were 100 MILLION cellular telephone
subscriptions in the USA. [USA Census Bureau statement in
early 2004] One in five families in the USA has SOME
access to the Internet. [Census Bureau, same statement as
for cellular telephony] Self-service facsimile machines
are common in chain drugstores and office supply stores.
Every government agency and nearly all military units of
battalion size or equivalent have websites in the USA.
Direct-dial-telephone service is available to all telephone
subscribers in the USA from small towns to large urban
areas; that includes direct dialing to foreign telephone
subscribers.
None of these are radio services that require licensing by the user.
Indeed, most of them are not radio services at all.
The only real significance of these communications alternatives
to amateur radio growth is that they are additional choices for the
person whose primary interest is the message rather than the medium.
For the person who is more interested in "radio for its own sake",
they are not a substitute.
Consider the analogy of water transport. For millenia, watercraft were
propelled by wind, muscles (human or animal) and/or water currents.
Traveling by water meant those motive power sources and no others.
Then the invention of steam and internal-combustion engines created
a whole new set of alternatives. In less than a century, most water
transportation abandoned wind and muscle power entirely, in favor
of fossil-fueled and even nuclear-powered engines.
Yet sailboats, rowboats and canoes still exist. They are most used
by those for whom the journey is more than simply getting from
Point A to Point B.
The number of "eleven meter" CB transceivers
in use in the USA is roughly 5 MILLION (electronic industry
estimates several years ago);
There is no way to know for sure how many of these are actually
in use, because there is no license procedure for that radio
service. The number quoted is a decline from the boom
years of the "cb craze", about 30 years ago. Despite the low cost
of cb equipment, the lack of licensing and rules enforcement, and
the widespread availability, the cb service has been in decline from
its peak for a couple of decades now - while the population considers
to increase.
"CB" has existed for 47
years.
Citizens band allocations in the 27 MHz region were created 47 years
ago,
but the service goes back to 1948, when UHF allocations were created by
FCC. The current GMRS and FRS allocations are the direct descendants
of those 1948 allocations.
FRS and GMRS handheld, average 5-mile range, are
available in consumer electronics stores/departments for
less than $100 a pair (no license required for FRS radios).
Throughout the USA public safety agencies have some form
of non-amateur radio communications, as do utility,
transportation, highway maintenance industries; the business
and government radio market has long been established in
the USA and major countries in the world.
Yet in emergency situations, the amateur radio service continues to
perform public service.
As an adjunct to several items in competition for advertising
income necessary to sustain some publications, it should be
pointed out that the number of printed periodicals in the
USA has tripled (almost quadrupled) in the last half century.
Add to that the competiiton from the Internet ad markets since
the public release of the Internet in 1991 and the advertising
space purchasers are spread over a large number of venues.
In USA amateur radio periodicals, Ham Radio, Ham Radio Horizons,
73, and CQ VHF have all been forced to close due to insufficient
income from ad sales. [QEX and Communications Quarterly, a
attempt at some resumption of Ham Radio magazine content, were
joined, but with marginal success on ad space sales] Note:
HR, 73, CQ are all "independent" periodical publishers whose
operating income is dependent entirely on advertising space
sales.
The previous statement is obviously incorrect, since none of the
above mentioned are free publications. It is obvious that "operating
income" includes all income available for the production of a
publication - advertising, subscriptions, etc.
Some non-amateur-specific periodicals such as Popular
Communications have enjoyed an increase in readership and
drawing more ad space purchasers. Marketing follows trends and
interests generated through advertising and adjusts product
prices accordingly. Advertising, though irritating to some, is
a good barometer of the "product weather."
To sustain at least the status quo, U.S. amateur radio license
numbers must follow the population increase. To be competitive
for both attention and product pricing, as well as for favorable
regulations and new products, the license numbers must grow.
This may or may not be true. Simply increasing the number of
licenses may not result in a larger market for equipment or
publications, nor a more-favorable regulatory climate. The 27 MHz
cb example is not what amateur radio should emulate.
Individual radio amateurs have expressed an opinion that growth
should NOT happen.
Who would that be, Len? What did they say, exactly?
Those may be looking at their own activities
without regard for the overall national picture or advances in
overall communications capabilities. To them everything is
"comfortable" as it is.
Perhaps. It is important, however, to evaluate whether proposed
changes will actually bring growth, and also whether there will
be negative effects connected with the proposed changes that
will negate the positive effects of growth.
Greater quantity will not help the ARS if the quality suffers too
much.
Those same "comfortable as it is"
amateurs will begin to attrit in a decade or two and their
numbers will drop.
Who are you referring to, Len?
That will shrink the number of licensees
despite the recent increases due almost entirely to the no-code-
test licensees of the last 14 years.
In the past 5 years, the number of US hams has decreased, not
increased. The total
number of Technicians and Technician Pluses is lower now than 5 years
ago.
Shrinkage in numbers due
to old-timers leaving must be offset by more than just that "new"
no-code-test license class.
What solution do you propose?
|