ARRL Proposal----What should happen
 

The proposal that the arrl should be working on is increasing the membership
ranks instead of trying to change the system of licensure that has been
discussed to death here. What, theres like around 25% of all hams that are
members?? If the arrl is "sooooo good" then they should be working towards
increasing the membership.

Not only would this actually help to lower the cost of membership by
spreading the costs of doing business over a bigger spread, but also give
more strength and credibility to the organization. With a good percentage
of the members being in the 55+ range there seems to be a good need to come
up with new people to add to the membership ranks.

How about this for a marketing idea?? If the arrl recieves 200,000 new
subscriptions for 2004 then they rebate some of the cost of the subscription
rate as it is now? (Thats 200,000 over the existing memberships)

Again, the license class/testing situation as it stands now is just fine and
does not need any more changes for a while. Work on promotion and building
from within before trying to recruit more.

Ryan KC8PMX

In article m, "Ryan, KC8PMX"
writes:

The proposal that the arrl should be working on is increasing the membership
ranks instead of trying to change the system of licensure that has been
discussed to death here. What, theres like around 25% of all hams that are
members?? If the arrl is "sooooo good" then they should be working towards
increasing the membership.

Not only would this actually help to lower the cost of membership by
spreading the costs of doing business over a bigger spread, but also give
more strength and credibility to the organization. With a good percentage
of the members being in the 55+ range there seems to be a good need to come
up with new people to add to the membership ranks.

How about this for a marketing idea?? If the arrl recieves 200,000 new
subscriptions for 2004 then they rebate some of the cost of the subscription
rate as it is now? (Thats 200,000 over the existing memberships)

Again, the license class/testing situation as it stands now is just fine and
does not need any more changes for a while. Work on promotion and building
from within before trying to recruit more.

Ryan KC8PMX

Ryan:

The licensing system we had prior to April 15, 2000 was just fine, and
did not need any changes whatsoever. The ARRL (always capitalized,
BTW) is trying to increase it's membership by supporting ever declining
licensing standards. It hasn't worked yet, and I doubt that it ever will.
Too bad, because I see the League as a force for good in Amateur Radio,
particularly in these times when we faces serious challenges to our
hobby/service such as BPL, restrictive antenna ordinances, spectrum
re-allocation, and declining activity on the bands due to the Internet.
The League's failure to support the status quo in strong licensing
requirements, including Morse code testing at speeds up to 20 WPM,
has only served to polarize their membership and cause them to lose
the support of longtime members in good standing who know the
value of licensing requirements based on a firm grounding in technical
knowledge and practical operational skills.

The ARRL is digging it's own grave, and they're using progressively larger
shovels every year. If we get No-code HF licensing, you're going to see
a backhoe being delivered to 225 Main St, Newington.

73 de Larry, K3LT

In article m, "Ryan, KC8PMX"
writes:

The proposal that the arrl should be working on is increasing the membership
ranks instead of trying to change the system of licensure that has been
discussed to death here. What, theres like around 25% of all hams that are
members??

True - but what percentage of active hams are members? I think you'll find it's
a lot higher than 25%.

If the arrl is "sooooo good" then they should be working towards
increasing the membership.

They are! Note that the license proposal offers a free upgrade of license class
to 57% of licensed US hams....

Not only would this actually help to lower the cost of membership by
spreading the costs of doing business over a bigger spread, but also give
more strength and credibility to the organization.

Sure! Now, how can ARRL increase membership?

With a good percentage
of the members being in the 55+ range there seems to be a good need to come
up with new people to add to the membership ranks.

Age alone is not really a major factor because people are living longer, and
many newer hams are from the ranks of the retired and near-retired. One of the
*big* reasons you don't see many 20-, 30-, and 40-somethings at hamfests is
that they're too busy working and raising familes these days.

How about this for a marketing idea?? If the arrl recieves 200,000 new
subscriptions for 2004 then they rebate some of the cost of the subscription
rate as it is now? (Thats 200,000 over the existing memberships)

It would have to be structred in such a way that existing members would get the
benefit, too.

Maybe it could work like this: If membership grows by a certain number, every
member gets a rebate coupon worth a certain amount, good towards any ARRL
publication or membership.

Again, the license class/testing situation as it stands now is just fine and
does not need any more changes for a while.

I disagree slightly. I think the entry-level license should be more balanced
between HF and VHF-UHF. But that's about it.

More important, what's all the rush?

73 de Jim, N2EY

Work on promotion and building
from within before trying to recruit more.

N2EY wrote:
In article m, "Ryan, KC8PMX"
writes:


The proposal that the arrl should be working on is increasing the membership
ranks instead of trying to change the system of licensure that has been
discussed to death here. What, theres like around 25% of all hams that are
members??


True - but what percentage of active hams are members? I think you'll find it's
a lot higher than 25%.

True. Is there anyone out there that has any idea how many hams out of
the total number licensed ARE active? I suspect that its something that
would be hard to find, since the ARRL is likely more interested in the
larger total number licensed.

I know most of the hams I associate with and know are active are members.



If the arrl is "sooooo good" then they should be working towards
increasing the membership.


They are! Note that the license proposal offers a free upgrade of license class
to 57% of licensed US hams....

Imagine if 25 percent of the ~400K new HF access hams join the ARRL? Of
course some of us think that might be the wrong way to go about it....

Not only would this actually help to lower the cost of membership by
spreading the costs of doing business over a bigger spread, but also give
more strength and credibility to the organization.


Sure! Now, how can ARRL increase membership?

Their new Elmering program is a good start. That it is on the internet
is a good idea too. New hams will be coming into the service as much by
the internet as by the more traditional methods.

Here are two things that are a little tricky that they need to work on.
IMO, they need to convey spectrum threat as a serious thing without
getting too shrill about it. I think they do a pretty good job now, but
there always seems to be a few people out there that get panicky. Not a
good way to get introduced to Ham radio when a prospective amateur gets
to think that maybe there is no reason to get a license when s/he won't
be able to operate because of (name the threat)

Second, and I have no idea if this is even possible, is how to propose
anything without alienating a lot of Hams. I'm not sure about this one,
because from what I've seen, a number of Hams will probably be
dissatisfied no matter what the ARRL does. Maybe they are just
dissatisfied in general?



With a good percentage
of the members being in the 55+ range there seems to be a good need to come
up with new people to add to the membership ranks.


Age alone is not really a major factor because people are living longer, and
many newer hams are from the ranks of the retired and near-retired. One of the
*big* reasons you don't see many 20-, 30-, and 40-somethings at hamfests is
that they're too busy working and raising familes these days.

Glad to hear that from someone else! New and young Hams are a good
thing, but I think some people get obsessed with the perceived need to
have all these Hams licensed in Jr. high school. More important is new
and active Hams.

As time goes on, I am becoming more and more convinced that the digital
modes are *very* important to attracting new hams to the hobby. The kids
are usually very interested in anything that has to do with a computer,
and many of the older prospects find it fascinating too.


How about this for a marketing idea?? If the arrl recieves 200,000 new
subscriptions for 2004 then they rebate some of the cost of the subscription
rate as it is now? (Thats 200,000 over the existing memberships)


It would have to be structred in such a way that existing members would get the
benefit, too.

Maybe it could work like this: If membership grows by a certain number, every
member gets a rebate coupon worth a certain amount, good towards any ARRL
publication or membership.

Why do so many think that league membership is so expensive anyway?
Between the QST subscription and the members access to the webpages, the
ARRL is one of the best bargains around. Oh, and they do other things to
help us too!


Again, the license class/testing situation as it stands now is just fine and
does not need any more changes for a while.


I disagree slightly. I think the entry-level license should be more balanced
between HF and VHF-UHF. But that's about it.

More important, what's all the rush?

73 de Jim, N2EY

Work on promotion and building
from within before trying to recruit more.


Did you write that line, Jim? In any event, I think both need to be
done at the same time.

- Mike KB3EIA -