"Dee Flint" wrote in
:

The individual reporting from Manitoc, WI (?) gave similar results,
heavy on upgraders and very light on new licensees. We'll have to
wait and see what the future brings but "early returns" would suggest
simply a change in upgrading patterns and no change in new licensees.

Do you think that you can make a valid conclusion after less than 24
hours?

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
36...
"Dee Flint" wrote in
:

The individual reporting from Manitoc, WI (?) gave similar results,
heavy on upgraders and very light on new licensees. We'll have to
wait and see what the future brings but "early returns" would suggest
simply a change in upgrading patterns and no change in new licensees.

Do you think that you can make a valid conclusion after less than 24
hours?

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

No I do not. It's like elections, it isn't complete until all the returns
are in. It's also why I have a "guessing game" pool on the percent change
in licensed hams at the one year mark. Would you like to add a guess to the
pool?

Dee, N8UZE

Dee, N8UZE

Dee Flint wrote:

...
No I do not. It's like elections, it isn't complete until all the returns
are in. It's also why I have a "guessing game" pool on the percent change
in licensed hams at the one year mark. Would you like to add a guess to the
pool?

Dee, N8UZE

Dee, N8UZE



That is good. After decades of insanity, may take a decade just to sit
things on a so-so course ...

JS

On Feb 24, 9:57 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...

snipped

Unfortunately with such a large group and limited time for use of the
facility, there was no time for chit chat. We administered 27 written tests
in addition to those who were just doing paper upgrades.

.. . . overload time eh. . . ?

I do know that one
of the three was a former ham (Tech+) as he mentioned it when he
pre-registered. He is one of the individuals who passed both Element 2 and
3, thereby earning his General ticket.

Good.

2 failed on the upgrade exam
1 failed on new license exam

2 achieved General as their 1st license by passing both elements 2 and 3
at this session.
14 upgraded to General from Tech via test or CSCE
5 upgraded to Extra from Tech via test and/or CSCEs

Dee, N8UZE

w3rv

The individual reporting from Manitoc, WI (?) gave similar results, heavy on
upgraders and very light on new licensees. We'll have to wait and see what
the future brings but "early returns" would suggest simply a change in
upgrading patterns and no change in new licensees.

No surprises there at all, it's just one more example of history
repeating itself.

My contention is that while they're few in numbers the newbies are a
good if not the best source for finding out what actually drives folk
toward ham radio. The way I see it we're not mining the VE sessions
for the hard data which could be used to more rationally target the
efforts currently underway to bring folk into the hobby. Which strike
me as a collection of committee-designed hipshots in the dark which
would never in this world fly out in commercial reality.

Given my druthers I'd cobble together some sort of questionnaire to be
passed out to the newbies at VE sessions which asks the pointed
questions which I think need to be answered. Over a period of say a
couple years of compiling their inputs we'd have some of the hard data
we don't have now. Shouldn't be much additional workload involved at
the VE sessions. Pass out the questionnaires at the registration desk,
collect 'em on the newbie's way out and forward 'em to The Committee
for analysis and the reality checks they need.

Dee, N8UZE

w3rv

On Feb 24, 11:27 pm, Mike Coslo wrote:
wrote groups.com:

On Feb 24, 11:40 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
Well I've had a chance to tally the test results for my Feb 23rd
session in Oak Park, MI

24 candidates total. 21 for upgrades, 3 for new licenses

Dee ~ These three are the meat & potatoes of the matter, the 21
upgraders being no-counters as far as the growth or shrinkage of the
hobby is concerned. Supposedly the idea behind the elimination of the
code tests is to draw new blood into the hobby, folk who would
otherwise not bother with becoming licensed yes?

Increased numbers were not the reason for eliminating the Code
test, IIRC.

Tell that to the NCTA/NCI crowd which has been claiming for eons that
the path to growth is eliminating the code tests.

Carl R. Stevenson NCI honcho grande, 31 Jan '07 11:03AM this NG
sayeth: "It appears that no-code WILL result in significant growth.
(as I predicted)"

And I certainly won't draw any conclusions about how many "new"
hams will be drawn in after one day. Indeed I would expect almost all
upgrades for the first few months.

'Way to go Mike . .

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

w3rv

"Dee Flint" wrote:

The 3 testing for new licenses is, for all intents and purposes, what I
have had at test sessions before the rules changed. Although one datum is
not sufficient to really draw any conclusions, this does not bode well for
growth.

There is a saying we teach statistics students: "one observation does not
equal a trend".

I believe that in the "what effect will this have on licensing numbers"
thread, I stated we would see a 0 to -1% growth as a result of these
changes.

I believe in that thread I stated I felt we would see a huge number of
increases from the lower licenses classes to the higher classes (i.e. lots
of techs upgrading to extra). I believe it was Jim (N2EY, but I may have the
attribution wrong) who stated for the first time in the past 15 years since
the creation of the no-code tech license, we might see an actual *DECREASE*
in the number of licensed hams in that license class.

Your data point supports both those points.

On Feb 25, 5:23�am, "KH6HZ" wrote:
"Dee Flint" wrote:
The 3 testing for new licenses is, for all intents and purposes, what I
have had at test sessions before the rules changed. *Although one datum is
not sufficient to really draw any conclusions, this does not bode well for
growth.

There is a saying we teach statistics students: "one observation does not
equal a trend".

I believe that in the "what effect will this have on licensing numbers"
thread, I stated we would see a 0 to -1% growth as a result of these
changes.

I believe in that thread I stated I felt we would see a huge number of
increases from the lower licenses classes to the higher classes (i.e. lots
of techs upgrading to extra).

The end result of the 2000 restructuring
was exactly that. A lot of existing hams
upgraded, and for a few years we saw
some growth. But the long term result has
been a decrease in the number of US
hams.

I believe it was Jim (N2EY, but I may have the
attribution wrong) who stated for the first time in the past 15 years since
the creation of the no-code tech license, we might see an actual *DECREASE*
in the number of licensed hams in that license class.

I don't remember writing anything like that. But I
could be mistaken about it.

I will say this: Simply looking at the number of
Technicians can lead to wrong conclusions.
Since 4/15/2000, FCC has been renewing all
Technician Pluses as Technicians. Also, a Novice
who passes Element 2 after 4/15/2000 gets a Technician, not a Tech
Plus. So the Technician totals actually include both code-tested and
non-code-tested hams. Assuming that all
hams listed as Technicians after 4/15/2000
are not code tested is/was just plain wrong.

In about three years there should be no more
Tech Pluses at all, as they will all have either
upgraded, expired, or been renewed as Technician.
Kinda like what happened to Conditionals 30 years
ago.

When you look at the total number of
Technicians and Tech Pluses combined,
there are fewer today than on May 14, 2000.

It should also be remembered that since 4/15/2000
all licensed hams who had ever passed a code test
could upgrade to Extra without any more code testing - just written
testing. Also, anyone who
could provide documents showing they had *ever*
held a Novice or code-tested Technician got credit
for Element 1, even of the license had expired
decades ago.

What all this boils down to is that we will soon see
how much of a "barrier to growth" Morse Code
testing actually was. If it were *really* a barrier,
we will see big jumps in both the number of new
hams and the number of upgraders. The ARS
License Numbers thread will tell the tale.

IMHO, the real "barrier to growth" wasn't the license
test requirements at all. Rather, it is simple lack of
publicity about amateur radio.

Amateur radio is fundamentally "radio for its own
sake". Radio as an end in itself, rather than a
means to some other end like avoiding long
distance telephone charges or the cost of a cell
phone.

Most people are simply not interested in "radio for
its own sake" no matter what the requirements. That's
been true since radio was invented.

But a small percentage of people *are* interested.
The challenge is to find them and inform them of
the existence of amateur radio - because many of
them don't even know it exists, or have a very
distorted idea of what amateur radio is.

IMHO

Consider this: When's the last time you saw
Amateur Radio portrayed in the movies or on
TV in a positive and accurate manner, and in
such a way that a nonham could understand that
amateur radio exists today and they could be a
ham if interested?

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:

I don't remember writing anything like that. But I
could be mistaken about it.

I tried to find the attribution on Google, but there is so much noise in
this group it made wading thru hundreds of messages impossible. Perhaps it
was Dee or another regular poster who alluded to the fact. I wasn't
attempting to put words in your mouth -- I remember someone making the
comment, but cannot find the post.


If it were *really* a barrier,
we will see big jumps in both the number of new
hams and the number of upgraders. The ARS
License Numbers thread will tell the tale.

Right. And my own anecdotal observations show me that the code test was
never a real barrier to entry. It isn't the code test that has turned people
away, it is simply that "radio" isn't "sexy".

This is why I predicted that the result from these changes will be 0 to -1%
growth. What the changes may do is tap a few new people into the ARS and
slow the rate of decline for a year -- but I really suspect what we'll see
over the next 6 months is a huge number of upgrades, and very little in the
way of "growth" in new hams (over the rate they're already added to the
ARS).


IMHO, the real "barrier to growth" wasn't the license
test requirements at all. Rather, it is simple lack of
publicity about amateur radio.

That could be be. Remember the explosion of CB radio after "Smokey and the
Bandit" and similar movies in the 70's?


Consider this: When's the last time you saw
Amateur Radio portrayed in the movies or on
TV in a positive and accurate manner, and in
such a way that a nonham could understand that
amateur radio exists today and they could be a
ham if interested?

Even if they did put it in a movie, what would it show? Someone talking to
another dude 1/2way across the world? Most people would say "what's the big
deal, I can do that too" as they pull their credit-card-sized cell phone out
of their shirt pocket.

73
kh6hz

On Feb 25, 8:13 am, wrote:
On Feb 25, 5:23?am, "KH6HZ" wrote:





"Dee Flint" wrote:
The 3 testing for new licenses is, for all intents and purposes, what I
have had at test sessions before the rules changed. ?Although one datum is
not sufficient to really draw any conclusions, this does not bode well for
growth.

There is a saying we teach statistics students: "one observation does not
equal a trend".

I believe that in the "what effect will this have on licensing numbers"
thread, I stated we would see a 0 to -1% growth as a result of these
changes.

I believe in that thread I stated I felt we would see a huge number of
increases from the lower licenses classes to the higher classes (i.e. lots
of techs upgrading to extra).

The end result of the 2000 restructuring
was exactly that. A lot of existing hams
upgraded, and for a few years we saw
some growth. But the long term result has
been a decrease in the number of US
hams.

I believe it was Jim (N2EY, but I may have the
attribution wrong) who stated for the first time in the past 15 years since
the creation of the no-code tech license, we might see an actual *DECREASE*
in the number of licensed hams in that license class.

I don't remember writing anything like that. But I
could be mistaken about it.

I will say this: Simply looking at the number of
Technicians can lead to wrong conclusions.
Since 4/15/2000, FCC has been renewing all
Technician Pluses as Technicians. Also, a Novice
who passes Element 2 after 4/15/2000 gets a Technician, not a Tech
Plus. So the Technician totals actually include both code-tested and
non-code-tested hams. Assuming that all
hams listed as Technicians after 4/15/2000
are not code tested is/was just plain wrong.

In about three years there should be no more
Tech Pluses at all, as they will all have either
upgraded, expired, or been renewed as Technician.
Kinda like what happened to Conditionals 30 years
ago.

When you look at the total number of
Technicians and Tech Pluses combined,
there are fewer today than on May 14, 2000.

It should also be remembered that since 4/15/2000
all licensed hams who had ever passed a code test
could upgrade to Extra without any more code testing - just written
testing. Also, anyone who
could provide documents showing they had *ever*
held a Novice or code-tested Technician got credit
for Element 1, even of the license had expired
decades ago.

What all this boils down to is that we will soon see
how much of a "barrier to growth" Morse Code
testing actually was. If it were *really* a barrier,
we will see big jumps in both the number of new
hams and the number of upgraders. The ARS
License Numbers thread will tell the tale.

Jim, you're severely neglecting the temporal aspects of the barrier.
Back when there was a lot of interest in amateur radio, there was a
lot of people turned off and/or turned away by the Morse Code
requirement.

Many of those people have moved on.

IMHO, the real "barrier to growth" wasn't the license
test requirements at all. Rather, it is simple lack of
publicity about amateur radio.

Do you have an ARRL "Hello" bumper sticker on your vehicle? "Hello"
was to be a campaign about inviting people into amateur radio.

Amateur radio is fundamentally "radio for its own
sake". Radio as an end in itself, rather than a
means to some other end like avoiding long
distance telephone charges or the cost of a cell
phone.

Cell phones and service are far cheaper...

Most people are simply not interested in "radio for
its own sake" no matter what the requirements. That's
been true since radio was invented.

But a small percentage of people *are* interested.
The challenge is to find them and inform them of
the existence of amateur radio - because many of
them don't even know it exists, or have a very
distorted idea of what amateur radio is.

IMHO

Consider this: When's the last time you saw
Amateur Radio portrayed in the movies or on
TV in a positive and accurate manner, and in
such a way that a nonham could understand that
amateur radio exists today and they could be a
ham if interested?

73 de Jim, N2EY

I don't watch much TV, Jim, so you tell me.

On Feb 25, 9:02 am, "KH6HZ" wrote:
wrote:

If it were *really* a barrier,
we will see big jumps in both the number of new
hams and the number of upgraders. The ARS
License Numbers thread will tell the tale.

Right.

I disagree. Extremely few people are interested in amateur radio
these days. Those who were and were turned off or turned away by the
Morse Code exam have found other interests satisfied by the web or
massive amounts of cable/satellite television.

Who's going to tell them to give it another try? The ARRLs "Hello"
campaign just ended.

And my own anecdotal observations show me that the code test was
never a real barrier to entry. It isn't the code test that has turned people
away, it is simply that "radio" isn't "sexy".

Mike, it turns people off and it turns people away. Besides, amateur
radio isn't sexy.