Carl R. Stevenson wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

Carl R. Stevenson wrote:


I agree that the ARRL is "between a rock and a hard place" with respect

to

the split in their existing membership.

Very much so, I'd agree.


However, outside of their membership
(in the 75% of US hams who are NOT members of the ARRL), I believe
that the demographic is heavily tilted towards the no code test side ...

What makes you think this? I'm not trying to be a wise guy, but I agree
with you about the polls being self directing. Therefore are you
operating on gut feeling, what your friends tell you, or what?


I'm going on what I hear from members, from clubs, from e-mails I
get from folks, etc. I'm ALSO going on the demographic of all those
nocode techs who could get on HF were it not for a stupid Morse
requirement ... do you REALLY think they are "hot to learn Morse"???
I don't ...

Okay, it's speculation. I guess it depends on who you hang out with. I
know a lot of people who don't like the idea of dropping the
requirement. And most of the tech's I know are pretty happy with their
lot in life. Just a comparison.


thus,
I believe that the ARRL stands to pick up more members than they stand
to lose if they take a position that it's time for Morse testing to go.

It remains to be seen. Those for who the Morse test is too much trouble
may not be bothered to join the ARRL either.


ARRL membership provides a lot of benefits through QST, the website,
and all of the good things they DO do for amateur radio. However, selling
those benefits is difficult when the prospective buyer is someone who knows
his/her membership dues are going to an organization that's dedicated by
current policy to keep them off of HF ... it doesn't take Einstein or a
Gallup poll to figure that one out ...

But they really do benefit the tech's also, Of course that all depends
on the level of interest in amateur radio to begin with. Whether they
are interested in the VHF or HF/MF aspect. Those are pretty much
different worlds.

- Mike KB3EIA -