On 4/13/2011 11:16 PM, Scott wrote:

I re-joined ARRL a few years back after having let my membership lapse
because of what I considered a lack of technical articles in QST. I was
primarily a member to get QST. After my membership expired again, I got
boatloads of mailings from ARRL, begging me to come back and even
offering a choice of a book to get me to come back. I mailed back their
letters with a hand written note saying I wasn't interested. They asked
me why. I said QST isn't nearly technical enough for me anymore. They
suggested I get QEX. So I made a "counter-offer"...I asked them to
substitute QEX for QST. They basically laughed and said they couldn't do
that. Seems it would have saved them some money as QEX only comes out 6
timers per year versus 12 for QST. So, now they get NO money from me...

N0EDV

I would respectfully suggest that you are missing the big picture. It's
not just the magazine(s).

Like them or not, the ARRL is the ONLY organization that supports ham
radio on a national level, going to bat for us before Congress and the FCC.

73,
Joe

On 4-14-2011 12:51, Joe from Kokomo wrote:
On 4/13/2011 11:16 PM, Scott wrote:

I re-joined ARRL a few years back after having let my membership lapse
because of what I considered a lack of technical articles in QST. I was
primarily a member to get QST. After my membership expired again, I got
boatloads of mailings from ARRL, begging me to come back and even
offering a choice of a book to get me to come back. I mailed back their
letters with a hand written note saying I wasn't interested. They asked
me why. I said QST isn't nearly technical enough for me anymore. They
suggested I get QEX. So I made a "counter-offer"...I asked them to
substitute QEX for QST. They basically laughed and said they couldn't do
that. Seems it would have saved them some money as QEX only comes out 6
timers per year versus 12 for QST. So, now they get NO money from me...

N0EDV

I would respectfully suggest that you are missing the big picture. It's
not just the magazine(s).

Like them or not, the ARRL is the ONLY organization that supports ham
radio on a national level, going to bat for us before Congress and the FCC.

73,
Joe


Yes, I understand that very well. However, they should have more money
to spend to fight for ham radio if they would let me substitute the 6
issues per year of QEX versus the 12 issues of QST.

N0EDV

Scott wrote:
On 4-14-2011 12:51, Joe from Kokomo wrote:
On 4/13/2011 11:16 PM, Scott wrote:

I re-joined ARRL a few years back after having let my membership lapse
because of what I considered a lack of technical articles in QST. I was
primarily a member to get QST. After my membership expired again, I got
boatloads of mailings from ARRL, begging me to come back and even
offering a choice of a book to get me to come back. I mailed back their
letters with a hand written note saying I wasn't interested. They asked
me why. I said QST isn't nearly technical enough for me anymore. They
suggested I get QEX. So I made a "counter-offer"...I asked them to
substitute QEX for QST. They basically laughed and said they couldn't do
that. Seems it would have saved them some money as QEX only comes out 6
timers per year versus 12 for QST. So, now they get NO money from me...

N0EDV

I would respectfully suggest that you are missing the big picture. It's
not just the magazine(s).

Like them or not, the ARRL is the ONLY organization that supports ham
radio on a national level, going to bat for us before Congress and the
FCC.

73,
Joe


Yes, I understand that very well. However, they should have more money
to spend to fight for ham radio if they would let me substitute the 6
issues per year of QEX versus the 12 issues of QST.

N0EDV


Not necessarily..

Advertising runs as "cost per thousand" (aka CPM) based on the
circulation of the magazine. The CPM for QST and QEX is probably pretty
close (same target market and all that).. You could probably find it on
the rate card which is on the ARRL website somewhere.

Let's say the rate is $1/thousand..

So, for a given size ad, QST may have, say, 150,000 copies, and QEX may
have 1500. So ARRL would get $1.50 for an ad in QEX, and $150 for the
same ad in QST.

Printing costs are pretty much the same, per copy, per page. However,
the other production costs (editing, copy, pre-press) are fixed,
regardless of how many copies you print. So for QST, the "per page per
copy" cost is a lot less.

QST is probably MUCH more profitable than QEX.. lower cost to print a
copy, more revenue to collect per copy.


For reference, the QEX ad rates are $155 for 1/6th page up to $733 full
page. NCJ is 412/page, 78/sixth

I couldn't find circulation numbers for any of them, and no published
rate card for QST. (I assume QST has lots of "multipage discounts", for
instance).

On 4/14/2011 5:18 PM, Scott wrote:
On 4-14-2011 12:51, Joe from Kokomo wrote:

I would respectfully suggest that you are missing the big picture. It's
not just the magazine(s).

Like them or not, the ARRL is the ONLY organization that supports ham
radio on a national level, going to bat for us before Congress and the
FCC.

73,
Joe


Yes, I understand that very well. However, they should have more money
to spend to fight for ham radio if they would let me substitute the 6
issues per year of QEX versus the 12 issues of QST.

N0EDV

I'm basing this opinion on the ARRL budgets that were published in QST
about 20 years ago. They currently (still) claim they are there for
mainly 2 things, protecting our rights and privileges as operators and
adding new operators through education and other methods. Unless they
have gotten rid of all the bits they used to have that they didn't need,
they are still spending between 2 and 5% of the money they collect on
what's supposed to be the main goal.

Where does all the rest go? Read the budgets if they still make them
available.

Charlatans then, are they now? I don't know. And don't care. They
lost me.

tom
K0TAR

In article , news4792
@taring.org says...

I'm basing this opinion on the ARRL budgets that were published in QST
about 20 years ago. They currently (still) claim they are there for
mainly 2 things, protecting our rights and privileges as operators and
adding new operators through education and other methods. Unless they
have gotten rid of all the bits they used to have that they didn't need,
they are still spending between 2 and 5% of the money they collect on
what's supposed to be the main goal.

Where does all the rest go? Read the budgets if they still make them
available.

Charlatans then, are they now? I don't know. And don't care. They
lost me.

tom
K0TAR

Pretty well identical with the UK situation. The RSGB have lost many,
many members for these reasons - including me.

On 4/14/2011 5:18 PM, Scott wrote:
On 4-14-2011 12:51, Joe from Kokomo wrote:

I would respectfully suggest that you are missing the big picture. It's
not just the magazine(s).

Like them or not, the ARRL is the ONLY organization that supports ham
radio on a national level, going to bat for us before Congress and the
FCC.

73,
Joe


Yes, I understand that very well. However, they should have more money
to spend to fight for ham radio if they would let me substitute the 6
issues per year of QEX versus the 12 issues of QST.

N0EDV

On 4/14/2011 9:47 PM, tom wrote:

I'm basing this opinion on the ARRL budgets that were published in QST
about 20 years ago. They currently (still) claim they are there for
mainly 2 things, protecting our rights and privileges as operators and
adding new operators through education and other methods. Unless they
have gotten rid of all the bits they used to have that they didn't need,
they are still spending between 2 and 5% of the money they collect on
what's supposed to be the main goal.

Where does all the rest go? Read the budgets if they still make them
available.

Charlatans then, are they now? I don't know. And don't care. They lost me.

tom
K0TAR

tom, just my personal opinion, but too bad you left the ARRL and too bad
you don't care.

I don't know about your "2 to 5%" figure, but even if it is true, it's
exactly 2 to 5% more than any other organization is spending to go to
bat for ham radio...and IMHO, we NEED (and should support) a national
organization.

73,
Joe

On 4-15-2011 12:27, Joe from Kokomo wrote:


tom, just my personal opinion, but too bad you left the ARRL and too bad
you don't care.

I don't know about your "2 to 5%" figure, but even if it is true, it's
exactly 2 to 5% more than any other organization is spending to go to
bat for ham radio...and IMHO, we NEED (and should support) a national
organization.

73,
Joe

Why? If every ham just wrote to their elected officials (for the cost
of a stamp, or free by email), they would get the message just as well,
if not better than, if they got 1 letter or a personal visit from the
ARRL "lobbyist".

On 4-15-2011 12:27, Joe from Kokomo wrote:


tom, just my personal opinion, but too bad you left the ARRL and too bad
you don't care.

I don't know about your "2 to 5%" figure, but even if it is true, it's
exactly 2 to 5% more than any other organization is spending to go to
bat for ham radio...and IMHO, we NEED (and should support) a national
organization.

73,
Joe

On 4/15/2011 6:41 PM, Scott wrote:

Why? If every ham just wrote to their elected officials (for the cost of
a stamp, or free by email), they would get the message just as well, if
not better than, if they got 1 letter or a personal visit from the ARRL
"lobbyist".

Just my personal opinion, but I believe it is quite naive to think that
if "every ham just wrote". Extremely unlikely...and oh, if not the ARRL,
just who do you think is going to tell the hams to write and what to
write about?

Finally, it's quite naive to think that a national lobbying organization
is not helpful -- just look at how successful the NRA is.

On 4/15/2011 7:27 AM, Joe from Kokomo wrote:

tom, just my personal opinion, but too bad you left the ARRL and too bad
you don't care.

I don't know about your "2 to 5%" figure, but even if it is true, it's
exactly 2 to 5% more than any other organization is spending to go to
bat for ham radio...and IMHO, we NEED (and should support) a national
organization.

73,
Joe

The ARRL seems to have little to do with the most important part of
getting new hams, licensing.

The National VEC page, http://www.ncvec.org, apparently doesn't even
acknowledge the ARRL.

You have to search the site and get to Question Pool 3 to find the first
hint of the ARRL, and it's an email address for WY1O, who seems quite
dedicated and appears several more times. And he's all there is.

So much for making new hams.

tom
K0TAR

On 4/15/2011 7:27 AM, Joe from Kokomo wrote:

tom, just my personal opinion, but too bad you left the ARRL and too bad
you don't care.

I don't know about your "2 to 5%" figure, but even if it is true, it's
exactly 2 to 5% more than any other organization is spending to go to
bat for ham radio...and IMHO, we NEED (and should support) a national
organization.

73,
Joe

On 4/15/2011 9:47 PM, tom wrote:

The ARRL seems to have little to do with the most important part of
getting new hams, licensing.

Huh? It's really not clear what you are saying. Have you visited the
ARRL web site?

Here are some of the sections they have listed relating to developing
new hams under the "Licensing, Education & Training" tab:


*FCC License Info & Forms

ARRL can provide helpful FCC information about licensing
requirements, forms, fees and regulations.


*Getting Licensed

Get the information you need to get started: find a class or
study materials and prepare for your licensing exam. Already licensed?
Take the next step and upgrade.

*Volunteer Examiner Coordinator

The ARRL Volunteer Examiner Coordinator (VEC) offers resources
for finding an exam session, becoming a volunteer examiner and VE Team
support.

*Volunteer Instructors/Mentors


*ARRL Courses & Training

ARRL training materials and online classes have been developed to
help you learn at your own pace.


*FCC License Info & Forms

ARRL can provide helpful FCC information about licensing
requirements, forms, fees and regulations.

*Get on the Air

You've got your license, now what? Find resources to help you set
up your first station, get on the air and have fun! Learn More

Volunteer opportunities, recruitment and unique ways to support
Amateur Radio advocacy.

o Amateur Radio in the Classroom

This sure seems like a lot of stuff for a group that you claim is not
supposed to be interested in beginners.

The National VEC page, http://www.ncvec.org, apparently doesn't even
acknowledge the ARRL.

Again, huh? This site is "unto themselves". They don't seem to
acknowledge ANY group except themselves. Sorry, but IMHO, a totally
bogus point.

So much for making new hams.

One more time...Huh?

They DO have a VE program (I AM one), they have an Educational program
to bring ham radio to kids in the class room, they set up space station
contacts for kids in classrooms, they have a Volunteer Instructor
program to teach people how to be instructors for training new hams,
they have volunteer mentors, almost every article in QST has a
"Hamspeak" section to explain unique ham terms to beginners.

Finally, what makes you think they don't want new hams? It would be in
their best interest and longevity to have more new hams. Why would they
shoot themselves in the foot by not wanting new hams?

The only thing that IS clear to me is that you have not read QST in a
long time, have not been to their web site in a long time and seem to
have a real grudge against them for whatever reason (certainly your
prerogative). But you DO demonstrably have your facts wrong about them
doing nothing to encourage new hams.

I would respectfully suggest that you visit their site, arrl.org, and at
the main page choose the "Licensing, Education and Training" tab to see
just how much they ARE doing to cultivate new hams. (Admittedly a tough
job in the Internet Age, but contrary to what you are saying, they ARE
trying).

73,
Joe