|
In article , N2EY
wrote: These are the number of unexpired FCC ARS licenses held by individuals on the dates listed: As of May 14, 2000: Novice - 49,329 Tech - 205,394 Tech Plus - 128,860 General - 112,677 Advanced - 99,782 Extra - 78,750 Total - 674,792 As of October 15, 2003: Novice - 32,977 (decrease of 16,352) Technician - 257,303 (increase of 51,909) Technician Plus - 64,686 (decrease of 64,174) General - 141,313 (increase of 28,636) Advanced - 82,589 (decrease of 17,193) Extra - 104,670 (increase of 25,920) Total - 683,538 (increase of 8,746) 73 de Jim, N2EY Jim, It looks like we are on the road to some deflation in the numbers. AE4FA has posted numbers gleaned from his research into the FCC database concerning renewals of the Technician class (no code variety) and has found that almost 97% of them are not renewing. There is only a small data window to draw from however, as the first people who held this license class are only starting to reach the end of the grace periods. He had a way to filter out licensees who had upgraded. I think there was 8 months of data when the finding were posted. This could be why we are about 4,000 licensees down from the peak you mentioned. 73 George K3UD -- remove NOSPAM from address |
"GMC" wrote in message ... In article , N2EY wrote: These are the number of unexpired FCC ARS licenses held by individuals on the dates listed: As of May 14, 2000: Novice - 49,329 Tech - 205,394 Tech Plus - 128,860 General - 112,677 Advanced - 99,782 Extra - 78,750 Total - 674,792 As of October 15, 2003: Novice - 32,977 (decrease of 16,352) Technician - 257,303 (increase of 51,909) Technician Plus - 64,686 (decrease of 64,174) General - 141,313 (increase of 28,636) Advanced - 82,589 (decrease of 17,193) Extra - 104,670 (increase of 25,920) Total - 683,538 (increase of 8,746) 73 de Jim, N2EY Jim, It looks like we are on the road to some deflation in the numbers. AE4FA has posted numbers gleaned from his research into the FCC database concerning renewals of the Technician class (no code variety) and has found that almost 97% of them are not renewing. There is only a small data window to draw from however, as the first people who held this license class are only starting to reach the end of the grace periods. He had a way to filter out licensees who had upgraded. I think there was 8 months of data when the finding were posted. This could be why we are about 4,000 licensees down from the peak you mentioned. 73 George K3UD -- remove NOSPAM from address Not a surprise really. All this happened before the cellphone craze got going. Why bother with a license, especially when they really didn't care for ham radio, when all they wanted to do was order a pizza and check up on the wife/husband. Dan/W4NTI |
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message link.net...
"Brian" wrote in message m... "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message ink.net... How Come with all these 'new' Ektra class tickets they STILL ain't covering the HF bands? Perhaps they can't figure out how to cut that dipole, eh? Dan/W4NTI So you're saying that HF HASN'T been ruined by hordes of unwashed CBers? No, Brian....I'm saying that they are too ignorant to get a signal on HF. Dan/W4NTI Bruce, thanks. Brian |
Dan/W4NTI wrote:
"GMC" wrote in message ... In article , N2EY wrote: These are the number of unexpired FCC ARS licenses held by individuals on the dates listed: As of May 14, 2000: Novice - 49,329 Tech - 205,394 Tech Plus - 128,860 General - 112,677 Advanced - 99,782 Extra - 78,750 Total - 674,792 As of October 15, 2003: Novice - 32,977 (decrease of 16,352) Technician - 257,303 (increase of 51,909) Technician Plus - 64,686 (decrease of 64,174) General - 141,313 (increase of 28,636) Advanced - 82,589 (decrease of 17,193) Extra - 104,670 (increase of 25,920) Total - 683,538 (increase of 8,746) 73 de Jim, N2EY Jim, It looks like we are on the road to some deflation in the numbers. AE4FA has posted numbers gleaned from his research into the FCC database concerning renewals of the Technician class (no code variety) and has found that almost 97% of them are not renewing. There is only a small data window to draw from however, as the first people who held this license class are only starting to reach the end of the grace periods. He had a way to filter out licensees who had upgraded. I think there was 8 months of data when the finding were posted. This could be why we are about 4,000 licensees down from the peak you mentioned. 73 George K3UD -- remove NOSPAM from address Not a surprise really. All this happened before the cellphone craze got going. Why bother with a license, especially when they really didn't care for ham radio, when all they wanted to do was order a pizza and check up on the wife/husband. If this really is the case, then what happened to the technically astute technicians who just refused on principle to learn Morse code? Are they the remaining 3 percent? Could be a No-code myth here? - Mike KB3EIA - |
If this really is the case, then what happened to the technically
astute technicians who just refused on principle to learn Morse code? Are they the remaining 3 percent? Could be a No-code myth here? - Mike KB3EIA - Its always been a myth by the No-Code Crowd. |
In article , GMC writes:
It looks like we are on the road to some deflation in the numbers. Perhaps. There are lots of factors influencing the numbers right now. For example, a new Tech Q&A pool was put in place July 15, and since then the number of new Techs has plummeted. AE4FA has posted numbers gleaned from his research into the FCC database concerning renewals of the Technician class (no code variety) and has found that almost 97% of them are not renewing. I question his methods. There is only a small data window to draw from however, as the first people who held this license class are only starting to reach the end of the grace periods. He had a way to filter out licensees who had upgraded. Before I'd accept such a low renewal rate, I'd like to see how the data was processed. There are all sorts of procedural pitfalls in trying to figure out renewal rates. For example, people change their names and addresses frequently, making tracking difficult. The 1994 changes to the vanity callsign rules resulted in a lot of Techs getting vanity calls - which carry with them a renewal. I think there was 8 months of data when the finding were posted. And how many were issued in that time? This could be why we are about 4,000 licensees down from the peak you mentioned. Perhaps. OTOH, look at how many Techs are renewed in a given year, then figure what 10% of the current Tech-Tech Plus population is. You'll get a much higher renewal rate than 3% 73 de Jim, N2EY |
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message . net... Dan/W4NTI wrote: "GMC" wrote in message ... In article , N2EY wrote: These are the number of unexpired FCC ARS licenses held by individuals on the dates listed: As of May 14, 2000: Novice - 49,329 Tech - 205,394 Tech Plus - 128,860 General - 112,677 Advanced - 99,782 Extra - 78,750 Total - 674,792 As of October 15, 2003: Novice - 32,977 (decrease of 16,352) Technician - 257,303 (increase of 51,909) Technician Plus - 64,686 (decrease of 64,174) General - 141,313 (increase of 28,636) Advanced - 82,589 (decrease of 17,193) Extra - 104,670 (increase of 25,920) Total - 683,538 (increase of 8,746) 73 de Jim, N2EY Jim, It looks like we are on the road to some deflation in the numbers. AE4FA has posted numbers gleaned from his research into the FCC database concerning renewals of the Technician class (no code variety) and has found that almost 97% of them are not renewing. There is only a small data window to draw from however, as the first people who held this license class are only starting to reach the end of the grace periods. He had a way to filter out licensees who had upgraded. I think there was 8 months of data when the finding were posted. This could be why we are about 4,000 licensees down from the peak you mentioned. 73 George K3UD -- remove NOSPAM from address Not a surprise really. All this happened before the cellphone craze got going. Why bother with a license, especially when they really didn't care for ham radio, when all they wanted to do was order a pizza and check up on the wife/husband. If this really is the case, then what happened to the technically astute technicians who just refused on principle to learn Morse code? Are they the remaining 3 percent? Could be a No-code myth here? - Mike KB3EIA - Of course. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
"N2EY" wrote in message ... In article , GMC writes: It looks like we are on the road to some deflation in the numbers. Perhaps. There are lots of factors influencing the numbers right now. For example, a new Tech Q&A pool was put in place July 15, and since then the number of new Techs has plummeted. AE4FA has posted numbers gleaned from his research into the FCC database concerning renewals of the Technician class (no code variety) and has found that almost 97% of them are not renewing. I question his methods. There is only a small data window to draw from however, as the first people who held this license class are only starting to reach the end of the grace periods. He had a way to filter out licensees who had upgraded. Before I'd accept such a low renewal rate, I'd like to see how the data was processed. There are all sorts of procedural pitfalls in trying to figure out renewal rates. For example, people change their names and addresses frequently, making tracking difficult. The 1994 changes to the vanity callsign rules resulted in a lot of Techs getting vanity calls - which carry with them a renewal. I did some exploring around in the FCC database and it appears that there is a way to determine these things. When a person changes call signs or upgrades and so on, the old one is marked as "terminated" not "expired". The term "expired" appears to be used only when a person has neither renewed nor upgraded. This is based on checking the call signs of persons that I know upgraded. Changing a name or address does not result in either an "expired" or "terminated" on the call sign. So if one uses the the feature so search on the Amateur Radio Service rather than the basic search and types in dates and checks "expired" and specifies the license class, you should get those and only those that were not renewed. The numbers are indeed rather large. Note however, it isn't marked as "expired" until the two year grace period has elapsed from what I can determine by exploring the data base. So using the time period 10/18/2000 through 10/18/2001, here are the number of expired licenses that pop up. Novice - 5645 expired in that one year time frame Tech - 3811 expirations Tech+ - 3687 expirations This is a total loss of 13,143 of licensees in the year from 10/18/2000 to 10/18/2001. On the other hand it does not appear possible to determine the actual number of truly new licenses from the data base as far as I can tell at this time. You can select "Grant date" but that gives you all newly issued licenses and updated licenses (i.e. renewals, adress changes, etc). Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
N2EY wrote:
In article , GMC writes: It looks like we are on the road to some deflation in the numbers. Perhaps. There are lots of factors influencing the numbers right now. For example, a new Tech Q&A pool was put in place July 15, and since then the number of new Techs has plummeted. I might have posted this before, but if I was a prospective ham at this juncture, I would probably wait and go for the biggist bang for the buck - that is to wait and just go for the General ticket after the Morse code test is gone. Then again, maybe I wouldn't myself, because I personally think its going to be four years til things get wrapped up in this area (dropping the CW test). But others think it will only be a few months. And that is my take on the drop. Similar situation is my son bought a copy of Finale software. He was surprised that it offered a free upgrade to the new version, which is due out in a few months. I asked him if he knew that there was a new version out in two month, would he have bought this one? Of course the answer was no for such expensive software. He would have waited, and Finale's producers would be in a real sales doldrum right now - no one would be buying. - Mike KB3EIA - |
What's a myth, your stupidity?
The correct definition for Studity is. No-Code CBplussers. |
You couldn't find your ass with both hands dannyboy.
I see the Homos are back Dan. |
"Brian" wrote in message om... "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message link.net... "Brian" wrote in message m... "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message ink.net... How Come with all these 'new' Ektra class tickets they STILL ain't covering the HF bands? Perhaps they can't figure out how to cut that dipole, eh? Dan/W4NTI So you're saying that HF HASN'T been ruined by hordes of unwashed CBers? No, Brian....I'm saying that they are too ignorant to get a signal on HF. Dan/W4NTI Bruce, thanks. Brian As usual, Brian opens mouth, and inserts foot. If you are trying to infer that Bruce, WA8ULX, is not able to put up a antenna for HF, you are wrong. I talked to him on 14.275 a month ago. Get over it. Dan/W4NTI |
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message . net... Dan/W4NTI wrote: "GMC" wrote in message ... In article , N2EY wrote: These are the number of unexpired FCC ARS licenses held by individuals on the dates listed: As of May 14, 2000: Novice - 49,329 Tech - 205,394 Tech Plus - 128,860 General - 112,677 Advanced - 99,782 Extra - 78,750 Total - 674,792 As of October 15, 2003: Novice - 32,977 (decrease of 16,352) Technician - 257,303 (increase of 51,909) Technician Plus - 64,686 (decrease of 64,174) General - 141,313 (increase of 28,636) Advanced - 82,589 (decrease of 17,193) Extra - 104,670 (increase of 25,920) Total - 683,538 (increase of 8,746) 73 de Jim, N2EY Jim, It looks like we are on the road to some deflation in the numbers. AE4FA has posted numbers gleaned from his research into the FCC database concerning renewals of the Technician class (no code variety) and has found that almost 97% of them are not renewing. There is only a small data window to draw from however, as the first people who held this license class are only starting to reach the end of the grace periods. He had a way to filter out licensees who had upgraded. I think there was 8 months of data when the finding were posted. This could be why we are about 4,000 licensees down from the peak you mentioned. 73 George K3UD -- remove NOSPAM from address Not a surprise really. All this happened before the cellphone craze got going. Why bother with a license, especially when they really didn't care for ham radio, when all they wanted to do was order a pizza and check up on the wife/husband. If this really is the case, then what happened to the technically astute technicians who just refused on principle to learn Morse code? Are they the remaining 3 percent? Could be a No-code myth here? - Mike KB3EIA - Learning the code was a excuse to explain why they didn't upgrade. Dan/W4NTI |
Your right. I've tried several times and I kept grabbing your tongue.
Dan/W4NTI "N8WWM" wrote in message ... You couldn't find your ass with both hands dannyboy. In article . net, Dan/W4NTI says... "Brian" wrote in message om... "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message link.net... "N2EY" wrote in message om... These are the number of unexpired FCC ARS licenses held by individuals on the dates listed: As of May 14, 2000: Novice - 49,329 Tech - 205,394 Tech Plus - 128,860 General - 112,677 Advanced - 99,782 Extra - 78,750 Total - 674,792 As of October 15, 2003: Novice - 32,977 (decrease of 16,352) Technician - 257,303 (increase of 51,909) Technician Plus - 64,686 (decrease of 64,174) General - 141,313 (increase of 28,636) Advanced - 82,589 (decrease of 17,193) Extra - 104,670 (increase of 25,920) Total - 683,538 (increase of 8,746) 73 de Jim, N2EY How Come with all these 'new' Ektra class tickets they STILL ain't covering the HF bands? Perhaps they can't figure out how to cut that dipole, eh? Dan/W4NTI So you're saying that HF HASN'T been ruined by hordes of unwashed CBers? No, Brian....I'm saying that they are too ignorant to get a signal on HF. Dan/W4NTI You ask wh |
"WA8ULX" wrote in message ... You couldn't find your ass with both hands dannyboy. I see the Homos are back Dan. Sure got a lot of them around, lately. Wonder if that has anything to do with NCI? Dan/W4NTI |
In article , Mike Coslo
writes: N2EY wrote: In article , GMC writes: It looks like we are on the road to some deflation in the numbers. Perhaps. There are lots of factors influencing the numbers right now. For example, a new Tech Q&A pool was put in place July 15, and since then the number of new Techs has plummeted. I might have posted this before, but if I was a prospective ham at this juncture, I would probably wait and go for the biggist bang for the buck - that is to wait and just go for the General ticket after the Morse code test is gone. Perhaps - but that means no ham radio at all until the changes take place. Which could be years. How interested is somebody who will wait that long? Also, if FCC does just dump Element 1, newbies will still need to pass the Tech written. Then again, maybe I wouldn't myself, because I personally think its going to be four years til things get wrapped up in this area (dropping the CW test). But others think it will only be a few months. ARRL's guess was two years, which means July 2005. I used to think that was way too long, but every day it looks more reasonable. The way things look, now, with all those petitions out there and ARRL not yet weighed in on anything, it could be next spring before an NPRM shows up. Note how long ago some petitions were filed (like that 'refarm the Novice bands' idea) that are still hanging fire.* And if 98-143 is any guide, such an NPRM will have a long comment period and...well, you get the idea. Then ya got NCVEC talking about a whole series of petitions if/when the code test goes, which to me sounds like doubling the hill.* You watch, Mike - if/when the code test is dropped, we'll have a surge of upgrades and new hams for a while - then things will settle back to about where they were before restructuring. 73 de Jim, N2EY * special bonus trivia section - how did the phrases "hanging fire" and "doubling the hill" originate? And that is my take on the drop. Similar situation is my son bought a copy of Finale software. He was surprised that it offered a free upgrade to the new version, which is due out in a few months. I asked him if he knew that there was a new version out in two month, would he have bought this one? Of course the answer was no for such expensive software. He would have waited, and Finale's producers would be in a real sales doldrum right now - no one would be buying. |
Sure got a lot of them around, lately. Wonder if that has anything to do
with NCI? Dan/W4NTI Rumor has it there are a bunch of NCI members that are lite in there loafers. |
"WA8ULX" wrote in message ... Sure got a lot of them around, lately. Wonder if that has anything to do with NCI? Dan/W4NTI Rumor has it there are a bunch of NCI members that are lite in there loafers. Help me out here...how does being anti-morse code equate to being 'that way' ?? Dan/W4NTI |
Help me out here...how does being anti-morse code equate to being 'that way'
?? Dan/W4NTI Dan I have tried to figure it out, with no luck, maybe it is just part of being lieeeberal. |
In article , "Dee D. Flint"
writes: I did some exploring around in the FCC database and it appears that there is a way to determine these things. When a person changes call signs or upgrades and so on, the old one is marked as "terminated" not "expired". Is this really the case? I thought an upgrade is considered a modification. It's my understanding that an upgrade does not extend the license term, but a vanity call does (to avoid having to prorate the vanity fee). The term "expired" appears to be used only when a person has neither renewed nor upgraded. This is based on checking the call signs of persons that I know upgraded. Changing a name or address does not result in either an "expired" or "terminated" on the call sign. So if one uses the the feature so search on the Amateur Radio Service rather than the basic search and types in dates and checks "expired" and specifies the license class, you should get those and only those that were not renewed. The numbers are indeed rather large. Note however, it isn't marked as "expired" until the two year grace period has elapsed from what I can determine by exploring the data base. Interesting stuff, Dee! I wonder how much of this was done by the "97%" folks. So using the time period 10/18/2000 through 10/18/2001, here are the number of expired licenses that pop up. Novice - 5645 expired in that one year time frame Tech - 3811 expirations Tech+ - 3687 expirations This is a total loss of 13,143 of licensees in the year from 10/18/2000 to 10/18/2001. In those three license classes, anyway. But this info raises a question: If your method only counts licenses which have reached the end of the grace period without a renewal, then the expirations listed above are those for licenses issued or renewed during the period 10/18/1998 to 10/18/1999. But that time period is before the Tech/Tech Plus split! On the other hand it does not appear possible to determine the actual number of truly new licenses from the data base as far as I can tell at this time. You can select "Grant date" but that gives you all newly issued licenses and updated licenses (i.e. renewals, adress changes, etc). I think FCC makes that info available another way, because the AH0A site carries a "new license" category. But it's based on current data, not historic stuff. Perhaps the best indicator is to watch how the total number of each license class, and the combined Tech/Techplus total, rise and fall. For instance, notice how slowly (percentagewise) the number of Advanceds is dropping, compared to how fast the number of Novices is dropping. The number of Tech Pluses is dropping fast too, but that's aided by the fact that FCC is renewing all Tech Pluses as Techs. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo Then ya got NCVEC talking about a whole series of petitions if/when the code test goes, which to me sounds like doubling the hill.* You watch, Mike - if/when the code test is dropped, we'll have a surge of upgrades and new hams for a while - then things will settle back to about where they were before restructuring. 73 de Jim, N2EY * special bonus trivia section - how did the phrases "hanging fire" and "doubling the hill" originate? I don't have a clue here! - Mike KB3EIA - |
"N2EY" wrote in message ... In article , "Dee D. Flint" writes: I did some exploring around in the FCC database and it appears that there is a way to determine these things. When a person changes call signs or upgrades and so on, the old one is marked as "terminated" not "expired". Is this really the case? I thought an upgrade is considered a modification. It's my understanding that an upgrade does not extend the license term, but a vanity call does (to avoid having to prorate the vanity fee). I'm talking about when they actually change call signs, the old call sign is marked as terminated. The person's license is modified with the new call sign but that is listed as a new grant date. I believe an upgrade does extend the license but a change of address does not. The term "expired" appears to be used only when a person has neither renewed nor upgraded. This is based on checking the call signs of persons that I know upgraded. Changing a name or address does not result in either an "expired" or "terminated" on the call sign. So if one uses the the feature so search on the Amateur Radio Service rather than the basic search and types in dates and checks "expired" and specifies the license class, you should get those and only those that were not renewed. The numbers are indeed rather large. Note however, it isn't marked as "expired" until the two year grace period has elapsed from what I can determine by exploring the data base. Interesting stuff, Dee! I wonder how much of this was done by the "97%" folks. So using the time period 10/18/2000 through 10/18/2001, here are the number of expired licenses that pop up. Novice - 5645 expired in that one year time frame Tech - 3811 expirations Tech+ - 3687 expirations This is a total loss of 13,143 of licensees in the year from 10/18/2000 to 10/18/2001. In those three license classes, anyway. But this info raises a question: If your method only counts licenses which have reached the end of the grace period without a renewal, then the expirations listed above are those for licenses issued or renewed during the period 10/18/1998 to 10/18/1999. But that time period is before the Tech/Tech Plus split! I was indeed focusing on the various entry level licenses as the debate has been over how many people stuck with it. These figures would be for licenses issued between 10/18/1990 and 10/18/1991. Their grace period expired 10/18/2003 and that is when they show up in the database as expired. That is to say the expiration date listed in the database is 10 years from the grant date although it won't show as expired in the database until the two year grace period has elapsed. For example, if I enter an expired date range covering the past year, it shows NO expired licenses. That's because they are still in the grace period and will not be listed as such until that grace period is up. I hope I've explained it clearly. If not let me know and I will try again. On the other hand it does not appear possible to determine the actual number of truly new licenses from the data base as far as I can tell at this time. You can select "Grant date" but that gives you all newly issued licenses and updated licenses (i.e. renewals, adress changes, etc). I think FCC makes that info available another way, because the AH0A site carries a "new license" category. But it's based on current data, not historic stuff. Perhaps the best indicator is to watch how the total number of each license class, and the combined Tech/Techplus total, rise and fall. For instance, notice how slowly (percentagewise) the number of Advanceds is dropping, compared to how fast the number of Novices is dropping. The number of Tech Pluses is dropping fast too, but that's aided by the fact that FCC is renewing all Tech Pluses as Techs. That's why we should consider the Tech/Tech+ as a single group for the purposes whether a class is growing or shrinking. I would suspect that the number of Advanced licenses drop more slowly than the Novice for several reasons. The percentage of Advanced licensees who are active is likely to be higher than the percentage of Novices. The Advanced licensee is probably more apt to renew, as he/she has a lot more effort invested. And the Advanced licensee often has little reason to upgrade as they have almost as much spectrum as the Extras. All the upgrade would get them would be a minimal increase in band space and the privilege of being eligible to administer Extra class upgrade exams. If they are not interested in spectrum space or giving Extra exams, that only leaves the "prestige" of being able to say they are an Extra. For many that's an insufficient reason to upgrade. It would not surprise me if the drop in Advanced licensees is due in a significant part to some of them becoming silent keys. However, there really isn't any way to determine that. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message .com... "N2EY" wrote in message ... In article , "Dee D. Flint" writes: I did some exploring around in the FCC database and it appears that there is a way to determine these things. When a person changes call signs or upgrades and so on, the old one is marked as "terminated" not "expired". Is this really the case? I thought an upgrade is considered a modification. It's my understanding that an upgrade does not extend the license term, but a vanity call does (to avoid having to prorate the vanity fee). I'm talking about when they actually change call signs, the old call sign is marked as terminated. The person's license is modified with the new call sign but that is listed as a new grant date. I believe an upgrade does extend the license but a change of address does not. The term "expired" appears to be used only when a person has neither renewed nor upgraded. This is based on checking the call signs of persons that I know upgraded. Changing a name or address does not result in either an "expired" or "terminated" on the call sign. So if one uses the the feature so search on the Amateur Radio Service rather than the basic search and types in dates and checks "expired" and specifies the license class, you should get those and only those that were not renewed. The numbers are indeed rather large. Note however, it isn't marked as "expired" until the two year grace period has elapsed from what I can determine by exploring the data base. Interesting stuff, Dee! I wonder how much of this was done by the "97%" folks. So using the time period 10/18/2000 through 10/18/2001, here are the number of expired licenses that pop up. Novice - 5645 expired in that one year time frame Tech - 3811 expirations Tech+ - 3687 expirations This is a total loss of 13,143 of licensees in the year from 10/18/2000 to 10/18/2001. In those three license classes, anyway. But this info raises a question: If your method only counts licenses which have reached the end of the grace period without a renewal, then the expirations listed above are those for licenses issued or renewed during the period 10/18/1998 to 10/18/1999. But that time period is before the Tech/Tech Plus split! I was indeed focusing on the various entry level licenses as the debate has been over how many people stuck with it. These figures would be for licenses issued between 10/18/1990 and 10/18/1991. Their grace period expired 10/18/2003 and that is when they show up in the database as expired. That is to say the expiration date listed in the database is 10 years from the grant date although it won't show as expired in the database until the two year grace period has elapsed. For example, if I enter an expired date range covering the past year, it shows NO expired licenses. That's because they are still in the grace period and will not be listed as such until that grace period is up. I hope I've explained it clearly. If not let me know and I will try again. Just for kicks, I went back and looked up the number of expirations for the other classes for the same time period (10/18/2000 through 10/18/2001). General - 1654 expirations Advanced - 902 expirations Extra - 493 expirations. Total = 3049 expirations Based on other postings in this thread, the number of licensees holding Novice/Tech/Tech+ licensees in May of 2000 was 383,583. Those holding General/Advanced/Extra class licenses numbered 291,209. While I should go back and make my time period start with May 2000 to be really comparable, I'm just going to use the figures that I have for the next calculation as it shouldn't make a whole lot of difference. The percentage of Novice/Tech/Tech+ licenses that expired was approximately 3.4% in that one year time period. The percentage of General/Advanced/Extra licenses that expired was approximately 1.0% in that same time frame. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message link.net...
"Brian" wrote in message om... "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message link.net... "Brian" wrote in message m... "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message ink.net... How Come with all these 'new' Ektra class tickets they STILL ain't covering the HF bands? Perhaps they can't figure out how to cut that dipole, eh? Dan/W4NTI So you're saying that HF HASN'T been ruined by hordes of unwashed CBers? No, Brian....I'm saying that they are too ignorant to get a signal on HF. Dan/W4NTI Bruce, thanks. Brian As usual, Brian opens mouth, and inserts foot. If you are trying to infer that Bruce, WA8ULX, is not able to put up a antenna for HF, you are wrong. I talked to him on 14.275 a month ago. Get over it. Dan/W4NTI Dan, it has nothing to do with Bruce's antenna. It has everything to do with your attitude, which could have easily come straight out of Bruce's mouth. Two (2) peas in a pod. You're just almost as vulgar as Bruce, the only real difference. Don't get over it, fix it. |
|
You're just almost as vulgar as Bruce, the
only real difference. VULGAR, you havent seen VULGAR yet |
I guess you've got four (4) hands between the both (2) of you.
Go for it you sickos. Dan do you think Brian is ALOT LITE in his shoes? |
Jim,
I think I have the answers to your bonus quiz: Hanging Fire (or Hang Fire) - an old military term used when a black powder artillery piece did not immediately fire when the priming charge was lit (could be a few seconds delay before the main charge was ignited). Still used in this context whenever modern ammunition misfires. Doubling The Hill - this one is probably an old railroad term for the practice of seperating train cars and taking them up a steep hill in two runs, back when steam locomotives were common. Insufficient power to pull the entire train up the hill in one run would have necessitated this practice. 73, Leo On 19 Oct 2003 18:28:53 GMT, (N2EY) wrote: * special bonus trivia section - how did the phrases "hanging fire" and "doubling the hill" originate? |
"Brian" wrote in message om... "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message link.net... "Brian" wrote in message om... "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message link.net... "Brian" wrote in message m... "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message ink.net... How Come with all these 'new' Ektra class tickets they STILL ain't covering the HF bands? Perhaps they can't figure out how to cut that dipole, eh? Dan/W4NTI So you're saying that HF HASN'T been ruined by hordes of unwashed CBers? No, Brian....I'm saying that they are too ignorant to get a signal on HF. Dan/W4NTI Bruce, thanks. Brian As usual, Brian opens mouth, and inserts foot. If you are trying to infer that Bruce, WA8ULX, is not able to put up a antenna for HF, you are wrong. I talked to him on 14.275 a month ago. Get over it. Dan/W4NTI Dan, it has nothing to do with Bruce's antenna. It has everything to do with your attitude, which could have easily come straight out of Bruce's mouth. Two (2) peas in a pod. You're just almost as vulgar as Bruce, the only real difference. Don't get over it, fix it. What makes you think I care what you want, or like, or not like, or not want ? And who appointed you usenet god anyway? Not to mention that to tell someone who they can talk with is beyond reason. Let me sum it up for you Brian... If you don't like what I say, I do, I think, or who I talk with.....get over it. Dan/W4NTI |
"WA8ULX" wrote in message ... I guess you've got four (4) hands between the both (2) of you. Go for it you sickos. Dan do you think Brian is ALOT LITE in his shoes? He does keep bringing it up, doesn't he? Dan/W4NTI |
He does keep bringing it up, doesn't he?
Dan/W4NTI Well Dan you know he is an NCI Member, that should have given us a CLUE. |
In article , Leo
writes: Jim, I think I have the answers to your bonus quiz: Hanging Fire (or Hang Fire) - an old military term used when a black powder artillery piece did not immediately fire when the priming charge was lit (could be a few seconds delay before the main charge was ignited). Still used in this context whenever modern ammunition misfires. Also used in connection with cord-fused explosives in blasting for mining, tunneling, etc. Hang-fires were one of the reasons for the change to blasting caps. Doubling The Hill - this one is probably an old railroad term for the practice of seperating train cars and taking them up a steep hill in two runs, back when steam locomotives were common. Insufficient power to pull the entire train up the hill in one run would have necessitated this practice. Give the man a cee-gar! Sometimes the problem was lack of motive power, but there was also the factor of coupler strength and rail adhesion. Modern RRs are well-documented enough know that horsepower and train characteristics are figured out ahead of time by computers. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
These are the number of unexpired FCC ARS
licenses held by individuals on the dates listed: As of May 14, 2000: Novice - 49,329 Tech - 205,394 Tech Plus - 128,860 General - 112,677 Advanced - 99,782 Extra - 78,750 Total - 674,792 As of October 31, 2003: Novice - 32,939 (decrease of 16,390) Technician - 257,987 (increase of 52,593) Technician Plus - 64,302 (decrease of 64,558) General - 141,315 (increase of 28,638) Advanced - 82,460 (decrease of 17,322) Extra - 104,706 (increase of 25,956) Total - 683,709 (increase of 8,917) 73 de Jim, N2EY |
These are the number of unexpired FCC ARS
licenses held by individuals on the dates listed: As of May 14, 2000: Novice - 49,329 Tech - 205,394 Tech Plus - 128,860 General - 112,677 Advanced - 99,782 Extra - 78,750 Total - 674,792 As of November 16, 2003: Novice - 32,875 (decrease of 16,454) Technician - 258,433 (increase of 53,039) Technician Plus - 63,976 (decrease of 64,884) General - 141,350 (increase of 28,673) Advanced - 82,323 (decrease of 17,459) Extra - 104,728 (increase of 25,978) Total - 683,685 (increase of 8,893) 73 de Jim, N2EY |
These are the number of unexpired FCC ARS
licenses held by individuals on the dates listed: As of May 14, 2000: Novice - 49,329 Tech - 205,394 Tech Plus - 128,860 General - 112,677 Advanced - 99,782 Extra - 78,750 Total - 674,792 As of November 30, 2003: Novice - 32,830 (decrease of 16,499) Technician - 258,967 (increase of 53,573) Technician Plus - 63,689 (decrease of 65,171) General - 141,387 (increase of 28,710) Advanced - 82,209 (decrease of 17,573) Extra - 104,750 (increase of 26,000) Total - 683,832 (increase of 9,040) 73 de Jim, N2EY |
N2EY wrote:
These are the number of unexpired FCC ARS licenses held by individuals on the dates listed: As of May 14, 2000: Why select May 14th 2000? Restructuring took effect a month earlier. I upgraded from tech + to extra on April 15, 2000 and the paperwork reached the FCC just a few days later the next week. Thus I would show up as an extra in the May 14th 2000. If your objective is to show the effects of restructuring, you need to list the numbers for April14, 2000. |
In article , Robert Casey
writes: N2EY wrote: These are the number of unexpired FCC ARS licenses held by individuals on the dates listed: As of May 14, 2000: Why select May 14th 2000? Two reasons: 1) I happened to have those numbers recorded 2) By that date, it's reasonable to expect that all of the backlog from before the April 15 changes had gone through FCC. Restructuring took effect a month earlier. I upgraded from tech + to extra on April 15, 2000 and the paperwork reached the FCC just a few days later the next week. Thus I would show up as an extra in the May 14th 2000. If your objective is to show the effects of restructuring, you need to list the numbers for April14, 2000. If you have them, I'll show them. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
N2EY wrote:
In article , Robert Casey writes: N2EY wrote: These are the number of unexpired FCC ARS licenses held by individuals on the dates listed: As of May 14, 2000: Why select May 14th 2000? Two reasons: 1) I happened to have those numbers recorded 2) By that date, it's reasonable to expect that all of the backlog from before the April 15 changes had gone through FCC. Restructuring took effect a month earlier. I upgraded from tech + to extra on April 15, 2000 and the paperwork reached the FCC just a few days later the next week. Thus I would show up as an extra in the May 14th 2000. If your objective is to show the effects of restructuring, you need to list the numbers for April14, 2000. If you have them, I'll show them. Okay, that makes sense, especially reason #2. There would be some cross leakage, but probably not enough to matter in determining long term trends. 73s Bob PS, I don't have the numbers myself, but as you mentioned, they would miss the backlog of activity before April 15th. |
Robert Casey wrote in message ...
N2EY wrote: In article , Robert Casey writes: N2EY wrote: These are the number of unexpired FCC ARS licenses held by individuals on the dates listed: As of May 14, 2000: Why select May 14th 2000? Two reasons: 1) I happened to have those numbers recorded 2) By that date, it's reasonable to expect that all of the backlog from before the April 15 changes had gone through FCC. Restructuring took effect a month earlier. I upgraded from tech + to extra on April 15, 2000 and the paperwork reached the FCC just a few days later the next week. Thus I would show up as an extra in the May 14th 2000. If your objective is to show the effects of restructuring, you need to list the numbers for April14, 2000. If you have them, I'll show them. Okay, that makes sense, especially reason #2. There would be some cross leakage, but probably not enough to matter in determining long term trends. Yep. One can look at the AH0A site for monthly numbers as well. FCC and the various VECs got pretty backlogged around then, too. Some folks didn't see actual database changes for a few weeks. PS, I don't have the numbers myself, but as you mentioned, they would miss the backlog of activity before April 15th. Yup. I know a bunch of hams who strove to upgrade *before* April 15, for various reasons (such as getting an Advanced before they were gone forever). -- What I find interesting is how *little* the numbers have changed in almost 4 years. For example, at the end of March, 2000, there were a little over 103,000 Advanceds. Now there's something over 80,000, even though the 20 wpm code test is gone. In similar fashion, look how many Tech Pluses still exist despite the fact that they need never take another code test, and that many of them already have credit for the General written as well. And FCC has been renewing Tech Plus as Tech since April 15, 2000, too. IOW, perhaps the code test wasn't the "barrier" it was proclaimed to be. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
"N2EY" wrote in message om... Robert Casey wrote in message ... N2EY wrote: In article , Robert Casey writes: N2EY wrote: These are the number of unexpired FCC ARS licenses held by individuals on the dates listed: As of May 14, 2000: Why select May 14th 2000? Two reasons: 1) I happened to have those numbers recorded 2) By that date, it's reasonable to expect that all of the backlog from before the April 15 changes had gone through FCC. Restructuring took effect a month earlier. I upgraded from tech + to extra on April 15, 2000 and the paperwork reached the FCC just a few days later the next week. Thus I would show up as an extra in the May 14th 2000. If your objective is to show the effects of restructuring, you need to list the numbers for April14, 2000. If you have them, I'll show them. Okay, that makes sense, especially reason #2. There would be some cross leakage, but probably not enough to matter in determining long term trends. Yep. One can look at the AH0A site for monthly numbers as well. FCC and the various VECs got pretty backlogged around then, too. Some folks didn't see actual database changes for a few weeks. PS, I don't have the numbers myself, but as you mentioned, they would miss the backlog of activity before April 15th. Yup. I know a bunch of hams who strove to upgrade *before* April 15, for various reasons (such as getting an Advanced before they were gone forever). What I find interesting is how *little* the numbers have changed in almost 4 years. For example, at the end of March, 2000, there were a little over 103,000 Advanceds. Now there's something over 80,000, even though the 20 wpm code test is gone. In similar fashion, look how many Tech Pluses still exist despite the fact that they need never take another code test, and that many of them already have credit for the General written as well. And FCC has been renewing Tech Plus as Tech since April 15, 2000, too. IOW, perhaps the code test wasn't the "barrier" it was proclaimed to be. Good thing I never made the argument about code testing being a barrier. I have always strictly viewed the code test as simply no longer necessary as a test requirement. Cheers, Bill K2UNK |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:13 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com