"Bob Brock" writes:

In response to "Dee Flint" :

Right. Radio Shack pimps the hot products for the moment. The way I see
it, them not even carrying license manuals speaks volumes about demand for
them. Now, when you walk into a Radio Shack and see loads of HF antennas,
HF rigs, and a shelf of study guides; then you can say that Ham radio is
back in demand.

Radio Shack cannot compete with big discount houses like HRO.

Several years ago Radio Shack used to sell computers as well as stereos and
TVs. Now those product lines are all but missing from their stores. Why?
Lack of demand?

Not really. They simply cannot compete with Circuit City, Best Buy, etc. for
those products. First they don't have the floor space necessary in the
average Radio Shack to properly carry those goods, nor do they have the
economies of scale that those other mega-retailers have.


So, to bring this back on topic. I wonder if the intent of the
average ham is to make ham radio grow or to maintain a stale status quo?
The way I see it, a steady increase in qualified hams is a good thing.
Ham radio needs a good infusion of new blood and the no-code tech license
as a good start. However, it was only the beginning.

Then, Addressed to KH6HZ:
That says a lot about the growth of ham radio doesn't it?

This is the decades-old "quantity over quality" argument which has been the
crux of ham radio's incentive licensing program for the past several
decades.

Sustained growth in amateur radio is simply an unrealistic expectation.
Today, there are 650k licensed amateurs (and decreasing) with a rough
population of 300 million people.

Amateur radio cannot maintain a sustained growth in terms of raw numbers of
licensed amateurs. It simply will not happen. Even if you gave the licenses
away with no test -- walk into Radio Shack and buy a radio and start
transmitting right away -- it wouldn't happen. How many people use CB radios
today compared to, say, 20 years ago? How is the FRS doing these days in
terms of raw numbers?


Some people, I believe miguidedly so, keep focusing on the number of
licensed hams as an indicator of ham radio's health.

I believe this is an incorrect focus to take. Instead, I think people should
focus on quality over quantity. I ask myself this question:

Which would I rather have:

a) 10 guys and their wives who passed their license exams, never learned
anything else, bought some gear at HRO, and now park on a 2 meter repeater
and ragchew and make 'honey do' calls, or
b) 3 hams who took their license exams, continue to experiment with new
antennas, participate in MARS or ARES, and during emergencies help erect
antennas and provide emergency communications.

Personally, I'd rather have the 3 hams. The 10 guys and their wives are
certainly welcome, but if I had a choice, I'd take the 3 over the 10 any
day. The 3, in my opinion, help further the goals of Part 97.1 moreso than
the other 10.


Frankly, people need to stop focusing on raw numbers. 1 million licensed
hams is meaningless if they never turn on their radios and actually use the
frequencies they are allocated.


Anyway, like I said, raw numbers are impossible to sustain anyway. Ham radio
has a significant barriers to entry. It simply isn't going to have the "mass
appeal" to the population as a whole. It is a technical hobby. Life's
demands these days make it such that not many people are going to take up
ham radio.

Focusing on raw numbers is a losing proposition. Sure, you can continue to
fiddle with the licensing system, removing more and more "barriers to entry"
(aka: licensing requirements), but what is the end result? What do you do
when there ARE no more "barriers to entry" (aka: licensing requirements) and
'growth' is still negative?

The value of the ARS to the US isn't raw numbers -- it is having a trained
pool of radio operators. IMO, a trained pool of radio operators doesn't mean
you simply study, pass a test, and then you've gotten your "graduation
certificate". "Ok, I passed, don't have to study any longer". What is the
long-term value of that person, other than upping the body count, to the
ARS?


I believe (and I've stated this years ago) the focus needs to be
redirected... The ARS should strive for Quality over Quantity.

The doesn't mean make the tests "harder". No, they shouldn't require an BSEE
to pass.


Many moons ago, a few people in this forum equated morse code with a buggy
whip. Unfortunately, in today's world, it isn't morse code that is the
equivalent of a buggy whip, it is amateur radio as a whole.

73
kh6hz