Cleaning out QEX magazines
 

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

Cleaning out QEX magazines
 

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

Cleaning out QEX magazines
 

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

Cleaning out QEX magazines
 

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.

Cleaning out QEX magazines
 

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

Cleaning out QEX magazines
 

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".

Cleaning out QEX magazines
 

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.

Cleaning out QEX magazines
 

On 04/15/2011 08:31 PM, Joe from Kokomo wrote:

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.
All of you are also forgetting that the ARRL (for better or worse) is
now the 'back bone' of the system that handles testing for ham licenses.
Without them it would be almost impossible to find where you can
locally take the test to apply for or upgrade your ham ticket. The ARRL
also publishes most of the test guide material (though I would be
surprised if it wasn't also available on line). Finally they have a
good line of excellent technical publications on radio and electronics
technology.

Also they DO offer membership without QST, for additional members of a
family. Maybe the price of that will give you an idea of what they
think the membership itself is worth.

Cleaning out QEX magazines
 

On 4/15/2011 7:40 PM, Kenneth Scharf wrote:
On 04/15/2011 08:31 PM, Joe from Kokomo wrote:

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.
All of you are also forgetting that the ARRL (for better or worse) is
now the 'back bone' of the system that handles testing for ham licenses.
Without them it would be almost impossible to find where you can locally
take the test to apply for or upgrade your ham ticket. The ARRL also
publishes most of the test guide material (though I would be surprised
if it wasn't also available on line). Finally they have a good line of
excellent technical publications on radio and electronics technology.

Also they DO offer membership without QST, for additional members of a
family. Maybe the price of that will give you an idea of what they think
the membership itself is worth.

Yes, and the blind can get a membership without QST for $8, same as a
family member without QST. That was where I got my number from in
another post in this thread.

Again, I am not suggesting anyone give up their membership in the ARRL.

Cleaning out QEX magazines
 

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