Lenof21 wrote:
One problem with using "massaged" numbers is that those massagers
seldom show their justification for such massaging.

To whom do you refer, Len?

As an example,
the data from www.hamdata.com for January 1, 2005, and January 1,
2004 is given following, as Hamdata totalled it -

In the left blocks, in one year's time, there have been 12,203
license
class changes. Total number of licensed amateurs is not affected
by that. For the same period, there were 17,282 new amateurs, but
19,065 are expired and no longer licensed. As far as the overall
license totals go, that means a 1,783 DROP in numbers. Not a
big thing and might be ascribed to normal attrition rates.

Reducing the test requirements was supposed to produce *growth*. It
hasn't.

The one thing the regular poster wants to downplay is the number
of Technician Class licensees.

To whom do you refer, Len?

Those have been continually growing
and now make up (within 0.02%) two-fifths of all licensees.

Why is that significant? After all, there are only three classes of
license available to new licensees or upgrades.

That
growth rate is, by far, the biggest of all classes, amounting to
nearly 10 thousand a year.

And it's quite understandable, because:

1) Most new hams start out as Technicians
2) FCC has been renewing Technician Pluses as Technicians since April
15, 2000
3) A Novice who passes Element 2 gets a Technician

Reason 2), all by itself, guarantees a stead influx of thousands of
licenses to the Technician totals each year. In a little more than 5
years, if the rules don't change, there will be no more Technician
Pluses at all. Every one will have either renewed as a Technician,
upgraded or expired.

So we should really look at the sum of Technicians and Technician
Pluses to understand what's going on, because they are so closely
linked. And that sum didn't grow very much in 2004.

So much for the alleged "drop due to
end of grace period." :-) That allegation turned out to be
false.

Who alleged that, Len? Who are you quoting?

Class totals can be compared from Hamdata numbers based on
January 1 of 2005 growth/decline relative to January 1, 2004:

Only one year. Can you make the same comparisons going back to, say,
2000?

Technician 289,868 (39.98% of total) (growth of
9,902)
Technician Plus 60,664 ( 8.37% of total) (decline of
9,326)
Novice 35,894 (4.95% of total) (decline of
4,117)
General 146,668 (20.23% of total) (growth of
846)
Advanced 83,424 (11.51% of total) (decline of
1,566)
Extra 108,537 (14.97% of total) (growth of
1,768)

All excepting
club calls 725,055
(decline of
2,493)

Note: Rounding of percentages to one-hundredths decimals
results in 100.01% instead of 100.00%.

And the significance of all these numbers is?

--

Here comes a *big* mistake on Len's part:

All licensees are perfectly legal to continue operating in their
grace
period.

Nope. Wrong. You are mistaken. Once an amateur's license expires, he or
she *cannot* legally operate until the license is renewed and that
renewal appears in the FCC database.

To quote FCC rules:

"97.21(b) A person whose amateur station
license grant has expired may apply to
the FCC for renewal of the license grant
for another term during a 2 year filing
grace period. The application must be
received at the address specified above
prior to the end of the grace period.
Unless and until the license grant is
renewed, no privileges in this Part are
conferred."

Last sentence says it all:

"Unless and until the license grant is
renewed, no privileges in this Part are
conferred."

This isn't some fine point of the rules that's subject to
interpretation. FCC amateur licenses have 10 year terms, and
if a license is allowed to expire, the licensee *cannot*
legally operate until the license is renewed. Period.

Do you agree or disagree, Len?

There is no necessity (nor sense) to eliminate those in the
grace period from those in the normal 10-year license period from
any class totals.

Sure there is - their licenses are expired and they cannot operate.

If you want to include expired-but-in-the-grace-period licensees in the
totals, go right ahead. But be sure to indicate that you are doing so,
unless *you* want to "massage" the numbers.

The numbers I post twice each month are the totals of *unexpired*
licenses held by *individuals*. That's clear (to people who can
understand plain English) in every one of my post of license totals.
Nothing "massaged" about them.

To repeat, the allegation that there is a "big drop" in Technician
Class numbers is WRONG. Raw data doesn't show that. Implying
that the allegation still exists is merely compounding the
wrongness.

Who made such an allegation, Len?

It should be noted that the sum of *unexpired* Technicians and
Technician Pluses *has* declined since May of 2000.


Jim, N2EY