Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
"Dee Flint" wrote:
Yet the net number is far more meaningful. It is what tells us if we have growth or not. Many (but not all) proponents said that this would bring growth and, at least so far, it has not. Admittedly the time frame is as yet too short. However, it's also too short to see if this change in new Technicians is sustained or is a momentary blip in the curve. As I see it, the time frame is too short to draw any conclusions of any sort. Imagine that we were discussing a change to the tax laws that was intended to increase reinvestment. How many YEARS would you have to wait before you could say that you had conclusive proof that the policy had succeeded or failed? I still believe that the vast majority of persons who have an interest in electronics, computers, radio and related fields; the demographic segment from which one would reasonably expect to attract new hams, knows nothing whatever about any of this. While they probably read technical publications of some sort, most of them probably read no publications that are explicitly about amateur radio. I have seen virtually nothing on this topic in any other media. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
"xxx" wrote in message ... "Dee Flint" wrote: Yet the net number is far more meaningful. It is what tells us if we have growth or not. Many (but not all) proponents said that this would bring growth and, at least so far, it has not. Admittedly the time frame is as yet too short. However, it's also too short to see if this change in new Technicians is sustained or is a momentary blip in the curve. As I see it, the time frame is too short to draw any conclusions of any sort. Imagine that we were discussing a change to the tax laws that was intended to increase reinvestment. How many YEARS would you have to wait before you could say that you had conclusive proof that the policy had succeeded or failed? I still believe that the vast majority of persons who have an interest in electronics, computers, radio and related fields; the demographic segment from which one would reasonably expect to attract new hams, knows nothing whatever about any of this. While they probably read technical publications of some sort, most of them probably read no publications that are explicitly about amateur radio. I have seen virtually nothing on this topic in any other media. Which is precisely my point. Changes in requirements don't have any effect when the potential recruits have no idea that the hobby even exists. Dee, N8UZE |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
On Apr 9, 8:22 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote:
Changes in requirements don't have any effect when the potential recruits have no idea that the hobby even exists. I don't believe that there is any significant percentage of the general population of the USA who has never heard of ham radio. I don't believe the "changes in requirements" were intended to grow ham radio. I don't even care if ham radio grows or doesn't grow. There are millions of hams on planet Earth, more than enough to fill my logs on any mode I choose through at least the next four sunspot cycles. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
wrote in message oups.com... On Apr 9, 8:22 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote: Changes in requirements don't have any effect when the potential recruits have no idea that the hobby even exists. I don't believe that there is any significant percentage of the general population of the USA who has never heard of ham radio. Well I certainly run into a lot of people who don't know about it. They ask me what my antennas are for and I tell them ham radio. The next question out of their mouths is "Ham radio, what's that?" I don't believe the "changes in requirements" were intended to grow ham radio. I don't know if that was the intent or not but some people tried to convince the rest of us that it was absolutely necessary for amateur radio to grow. I don't even care if ham radio grows or doesn't grow. There are millions of hams on planet Earth, more than enough to fill my logs on any mode I choose through at least the next four sunspot cycles. 73, de Hans, K0HB Personally I think there will be ups and downs. Dee, N8UZE |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
"Michael Coslo" wrote in message ... wrote: On Apr 9, 8:22 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote: Changes in requirements don't have any effect when the potential recruits have no idea that the hobby even exists. I don't believe that there is any significant percentage of the general population of the USA who has never heard of ham radio. I don't believe the "changes in requirements" were intended to grow ham radio. I don't even care if ham radio grows or doesn't grow. There are millions of hams on planet Earth, more than enough to fill my logs on any mode I choose through at least the next four sunspot cycles. I believe that Hans' percentage numbers are indeed relevant. However, they need to be looked at in context. Just looking solely at the new licenses and upgrades does not give a complete picture. In a dynamic area such as ARS license numbers, there is a need to look beyond raw numbers and to determine exactly why the numbers that you are comparing look as they do. Which was precisely the point I attempted to make. [snip] One minor disagreement with Hans, though. I don't care if we get some kind of huge growth, in fact, that would be lots of problems to deal with. We need a steady influx of new people to keep the hobby interesting, and to replace the fact that everyone is terminated to ground eventually. 1 percent growth would be desirable in that context, I think. - 73 de Mike KB3EIA - I would like to see it stay at about the same percentage of the general population as it is now. As the population grows or shrinks, I would expect our numbers to do the same. However, as you said, we do need the new recruits as none of us are immortal. Dee, N8UZE |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
On Apr 10, 2:00�pm, Michael Coslo wrote:
wrote: On Apr 9, 8:22 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote: Changes in requirements don't have any effect when the potential recruits have no idea that the hobby even exists. I don't believe that there is any significant percentage of the general population of the USA who has never heard of ham radio. In my experience, non-hams' knowledge of the existence of amateur radio is all over the map, from "never heard of it" to "what do you want to know?" Most people may have heard of it, but that doesn't mean they really understand it. For example, I have met people who thought amateur radio disappeared years ago. Others think that it requires an elaborate station and the knowledge of an EE just to get started. Etc. With significantly less than 1% of US residents holding amateur radio licenses, it's not unreasonable that lots of people today would not have heard of amateur radio. I don't believe the "changes in requirements" were intended to grow ham radio. "Growth" has consistently been one of the main reasons given for changing the license requirements, by those who wanted them changed. I don't even care if ham radio grows or doesn't grow. *There are millions of hams on planet Earth, more than enough to fill my logs on any mode I choose through at least the next four sunspot cycles. I think growth is a good thing, as long as it does not come at the price of quality. I believe that Hans' percentage numbers are indeed relevant. In a dynamic area such as ARS license numbers, there is a need to look beyond raw numbers and to determine exactly why the numbers that you are comparing look as they do. Agreed. * * * * Looking at the numbers in one way, we may wonder at an apparent drop-off. A lot of technicians went way. We need to speculate on why. It would be a basic assumption that they decided that Ham radio was not for them. That assumption is incomplete, however. Some may have decided ham radio was not for them. Others may have had to put aside ham radio for a time, because of other responsibilities. A considerable number may have either died or become incapacitated enough that amateur radio is no longer an option for them. Why? Some have speculated that the majority of that drop-off was a change in communication habits, ie. Hams who got their licenses for purposes of "calling home" to check in, or get a grocery list, or the like. Some call that flavor of Ham a "honeydo" Ham. These people are served by Cell phones now. I know many hams who got licenses in the late 1970s, 1980s and 1990s for just that reason. Some of them became interested in other facets of amateur radio, some did not. Some replaced amateur radio with a cell phone, some did not. I don't know if those who replaced amateur radio with a cell phone make up a majority of those who left, or not. But I do know this: We're not getting very many new "honeydew" hams anymore. Not anywhere near what we were getting before 1995 or so. Others have speculated that the dropoff was due to poor treatment of new Hams. *I don't doubt that there may be examples of the second group, *I would surmise that there could be a little bit of both reasons, but am inclined to think it might be a 90/10 in favor of *the former. If not even more so. * * * * I have personally seen a surge of new Hams in our area. We've been having a 2 percent growth in our area since *before* the testing change, and assuming that tonights testing is successful, 2 new generals and a Technician will be added to the ranks this evening. Those new guys don't know a thing about what the Honeydo hams were doing ten years ago, and don't particularly care either. They have become interested in Ham radio, and we've encouraged them every step of the way. We've been selling the sizzle. Exactly! But by the same token, to get those 3 hams, you probably had to sell the sizzle to quite a large number of people. *One minor disagreement with Hans, though. I don't care if we get some kind of huge growth, in fact, that would be lots of problems to deal with. We need a steady influx of new people to keep the hobby interesting, and to replace the fact that everyone is terminated to ground eventually. 1 percent growth would be desirable in that context, I think. I think that if Amateur Radio is presented in a clear and positive manner, the growth will take care of itself. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
Michael Coslo wrote on Tue, 10 Apr 2007 14:00:46 EDT:
Subject: Before and After Cessation of Code Testing wrote: On Apr 9, 8:22 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote: Changes in requirements don't have any effect when the potential recruits have no idea that the hobby even exists. I don't believe that there is any significant percentage of the general population of the USA who has never heard of ham radio. I don't believe the "changes in requirements" were intended to grow ham radio. I don't even care if ham radio grows or doesn't grow. There are millions of hams on planet Earth, more than enough to fill my logs on any mode I choose through at least the next four sunspot cycles. I believe that Hans' percentage numbers are indeed relevant. In a dynamic area such as ARS license numbers, there is a need to look beyond raw numbers and to determine exactly why the numbers that you are comparing look as they do. In general I agree with you Mike. I've had some trouble getting to the website where Hans got his numbers; www.ncvec.org doesn't have any page with that information. Other than that, amateur radio licensee numbers MUST remain "up" in order to indicate to the government there is a "presence" of citizens in a sizeable number that deserves attention. There are many different radio services regulated by the FCC and amateur radio is a minority among those. The "why" of license changes can be determined by different raw database searching than what most "statistics" websites show. The information exists as to changes in class. Obviously there has been a large number of recent "upgrades" of Technician to General. None of us can find any reasons for licensees letting their licenses lapse, at least from the raw database. The FCC database may be publicly-downloadable but it is LARGE at, what, 80 to 90 Megabytes? One needs high-speed Internet service for reasonable downloading. File size of the database is not a problem in modern PCs, nor is it difficult to write a specific sorting routine to extract various categories' data. Many publicly-accessible websites already do some sorting. Why? Some have speculated that the majority of that drop-off was a change in communication habits, ie. Hams who got their licenses for purposes of "calling home" to check in, or get a grocery list, or the like. Some call that flavor of Ham a "honeydo" Ham. These people are served by Cell phones now. Based on my experience in southern California, I took the "honey-do" license reason as pure speculation on others' part. What I have seen here in the last decade is: (1). A rapid growth of cellular in its present compact HT form; (2). a growth of "technician" type VHF and UHF activity which had already begun well back before the year 2000 Restructuring. Caveat: I live in a large urban population area, not unlike the NYC-LI, Chicago, San Francisco ('Bay Area'), Seattle, etc. areas. VHF-UHF at LOS paths works well in such areas. But, there is another part of VHF-UHF radio activity that doesn't quite have the parallel of HF DX hunting, in-person get- togethers, spontaneous or planned. The BBS or Bulletin Board System had a tremendous growth from the early 1980s to the "ripening" of the Internet in the later 1990s. Quite a number of those BBSs featured in-person "gatherings" of a social nature where all could get to know one another better, not through the scarcity of few clues presented through a computer screen. That's not unlike the VHF-UHF large urban amateur situation where the participants can travel a short distance to some gathering. There's not the "DX Isolation" of hundreds or thousands of miles to another continent as is often the case on HF. There's more activity of radio amateurs above 30 MHz than what the "HF" amateurs think, especially in larger urban areas. Those who operate above 30 MHz should never be thought of or even considered as "second-class" amateurs of the "shack on a belt" category. I have personally seen a surge of new Hams in our area. We've been having a 2 percent growth in our area since *before* the testing change, and assuming that tonights testing is successful, 2 new generals and a Technician will be added to the ranks this evening. Those new guys don't know a thing about what the Honeydo hams were doing ten years ago, and don't particularly care either. They have become interested in Ham radio, and we've encouraged them every step of the way. We've been selling the sizzle. There's a problem with using anecdotal evidence: It is too limited to apply to the national scene. Changes in licensing patterns FOR the national area can only be derived from national licensing information. I can say my 91352 ZIP area has 78 hams with over 2/3 of those at Tech or Tech-Plus category but it means little for a national amateur radio condition. Yes, at my test session on 25 Feb 07 over half were there to get or to upgrade from Technician licenses. Doesn't mean much to looking at the overall national scene. One minor disagreement with Hans, though. I don't care if we get some kind of huge growth, in fact, that would be lots of problems to deal with. We need a steady influx of new people to keep the hobby interesting, and to replace the fact that everyone is terminated to ground eventually. 1 percent growth would be desirable in that context, I think. The national population keeps on growing. Amateur radio licensee numbers have not over the last four years. To keep a "presence" of the hobby requires that licensee numbers at least keep pace with the population increases. The FCC is aware of numbers and serves the national interest, not just amateurs. The FCC must try to accomodate all the radio services as best it can. In general, I see them as doing that. If the amateur radio licensee numbers are up or at least maintained, there will be a MARKET of suppliers of amateur radio goods. That's important, not just for ready-made super-deluxe do-everything rigs but also for supplies, of components, of accessories. If the market sees a decline in percentage of the population, then some will drop out or the prices of goods will increase. The amateur radio market has already dropped some. Advertising sales are down slightly. That was enough to force HR and 73 to quit their independent publications, for CQ to reduce its VHF specialty periodical. QST hangs in there on the basis of enormous support from the ARRL but it is folly to depend on it as the sole source of all US amateur radio information. Radio Shack is mainly a purveyor of consumer electronics goods. There are fewer and fewer "radio parts" stores across the country; most of the old "radio parts" aren't even made now, their makers into other, more profitable electronics goods areas. Without a "presence" in the marketplace, a decline in license numbers could continue a slow market drought. BTW, as to Dee Flint's other comment in this thread, the "pros" in electronics HAVE been informed of the code test elimination since December, 2006. EDN and Electronic Design, both industry trades of wide distribution, and SPECTRUM, the membership magazine of the IEEE had news of that prior to 23 Feb 07. There were brief mentions of it in various Pentron industry trade news, even the occasional newspaper "filler" story around the country. It wasn't known just to already-licensed radio amateurs but to a larger segment of the electronics-oriented public. 73, Len AF6AY |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
"AF6AY" wrote in message oups.com... [snip] BTW, as to Dee Flint's other comment in this thread, the "pros" in electronics HAVE been informed of the code test elimination since December, 2006. EDN and Electronic Design, both industry trades of wide distribution, and SPECTRUM, the membership magazine of the IEEE had news of that prior to 23 Feb 07. There were brief mentions of it in various Pentron industry trade news, even the occasional newspaper "filler" story around the country. It wasn't known just to already-licensed radio amateurs but to a larger segment of the electronics-oriented public. 73, Len AF6AY What percentage of the general populace read EDN, Electronic Design, and Spectrum? We can't rely on just one group of people (pros in electronics) to provide stability or even growth. Just because a person is an electronics pro doesn't necessarily mean that amateur radio will tickle their fancy. What percentage of the newspapers carried those fillers? Not many. Of those, what percentage of people actually read the fillers tucked in here and there in the newspaper? We need to get the word out among the general populace not just specialty groups. Dee, N8UZE |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
60 Days Since Code Test Cessation Compared | Policy | |||
what Code testing realy does to the ARS | Policy | |||
what Code testing realy does to the ARS | Antenna | |||
what Code testing realy does to the ARS | Swap |