Al Klein wrote:

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 11:36:06 -0500, "H. Adam Stevens, NQ5H"
wrote:


This isn't about creating the best operators, it's about selling the most
junk and having the most votes.


But "the hobby will die" and "we need qualified operators" sounds so
much nicer than "the manufacturers need more money".

Listen!

"THE MANUFACTURERS NEED MORE MONEY."

"THE MANUFACTURERS NEED BIGGER MARKETS."

"THE MANUFACTURERS NEED MORE ..."

Design and manufacture of any electronics item requires a market to recover
design costs, to recover manufacturing tooling costs, to cover distribution
costs, to provide a return on investment, to provide a return on equity, to
provide net profits to cover medical insurance, to provide net profits for
stock retirement plans, to feed the engine of the economy.

The cost of a single DSP chip that operates at high i.f. frequencies has to be
recovered or the chip designer goes BANKRUPT. How many radios must be sold to
recover a million dollar investment in a single chip?

"THE MANUFACTURERS NEED BIGGER MARKETS."

Follow the money. Understand our hobby/public service!

Finally then, the question becomes not whether we are appliance operators [most
of us are], but do we wish to advance the radio art? "How do we advance the
radio art?" is a complex question with many answers.

Is preserving historic skills part of the art? Is operating AM, when most HF is
SSB, part of the art? Is ragchewing part of the art? Is EME part of the art? Is
old fashioned RTTY part of the art? Is current digital communication part of the
art [most of today's digital is actually ancient]? I say NO!

But, taking the time, using the energy to learn, investing our money in
technology and learning that technology is contributing to the art. Or, is it?

/s/ DD W1MCE