The AM Forum

Excerpt from Division Director Letter to Members:


Maybe this would be a good topic to discuss, and formulate replies to go to ALL Directors.  Quite a bit was already said on this topic while we were discussing the bandwidth plan.

They probably would listen as well as they did on the bandwidth plan.

At least we could say "We toldja so."

Don said:

Don, I think we have been telling them so for some time. They choose not to listen.

You can't expect them to listen when their mouth is working!

If I was in charge of membership and my main charge was to drive up the member numbers, I would consider a new membership category. Actually, it’s not original; I believe Phil, K2PG, brought this up years ago. A membership category with full voting rights, member access to the web site, and all that good stuff, but no QST. Maybe call it “Associate” membership. Full membership cost is $39; Associate membership cost say $25.

Since there are probably lots of current members who have no use for QST, there would also be a migration of some percentage of current "full" members to "associate" members. So, to appease the advertiser’s, since monthly QST distribution would go down,  I would also create an “Advertiser’s Section” on the ARRL web site, where all the monthly ads that run in a particular issue would be posted. Each month, the ads would be updated as the new QST issue is shipped. This should not be a monumental task each month since all the ads are set up in an electronic format for printing in QST. Each month the ARRL posts this info, http://www.arrl.org/qst/, on its web site. It could add a link to the right side of this page called  “Visit Our Advertisers” where all the monthly ads are published.

But, hey, what I know, I use to engineer, once upon a time.

FYI AIYADN Associate member used to be for those who were unlicensed.

Doesn't look like they use that anymore.
Now it's:
Regular    Family    Blind    65 or older

However: They say, "Only licensed radio amateurs of the US qualify for full voting membership, however, so be sure to tell us if you're licensed when you join."

Or give the option of QEX instead of QST.  Better still, go back to putting all the stuff in QST, the way they did when it was a REAL ham magazine.

Yer absolutely right, Don, Pete, and Phil.  Hell I'd be HAPPY to pay the thirty nine bux if it included QEX. 

I spent a grand total of 5 minutes reading the latest issue of QST and it didn't even last me the whole session on the throne  >:(

What makes QST even more worthless is that the "news" and "happenings" items are stale by the time the magazine reaches subscribers.  Most of the news reported in QST has been widely posted on the internet for weeks before the magazine arrives.

The news items might be of interest to members who don't have a computer or access to the net, but a lot of it, particularly regarding FCC rulemaking issues, is already past deadlines for action by the time the magazine reaches readers.

This was a problem even before the advent of the WWW.  Members used to be able to subscribe to a paper copy of ARRL LETTER, which had more up-to-date news because of the publishing delay in QST and other magazines.  HAM RADIO magazine also published a bi-weekly newsletter, and so did W5YI.  With widespread access to the net by the ham community, those paper newsletters dried up as they became irrelevant.  ARRL LETTER is still published, but only as a free publication over the web.

Years ago, the publication delay with the magazines seemed a lot shorter, plus the fact that events seemed to move more slowly.  I can recall reading announcements about FCC rulemaking proceedings in both CQ and QST within the current month, and the comment deadline was nearly always several weeks after the magazines reached readers.

So what does that leave in QST?  The news is stale and there are few real technical articles.  The classified ads are irrelevant because most equipment trading is done via the web.

For the same reason, the old Ham Trader Yellow Sheets ceased publication years ago.  That thing used to be a real gold mine for finding parts, tubes and equipment.

So what is left?  Dave Sumner's monthly editorial, Correspondence from members, the YaeComWood and other appliance ads, and the pretty pictures (now in living colour!).  Maybe a ham-related "human interest" story every now and again.  Sometimes the Hamfest Calendar is useful.  Oh yes, I forgot... contest news. For those without web access, there is the League news and happenings and membership services.

Now does anyone wonder why QST won't  last through an entire throne session?

Now, here is how to make QST last through a throne session.


(http://www.cromwell-intl.com/toilet/pictures/loo-korinthos-03.jpg)

You put your finger on it, Don, there's very little in QST that isn't already available on teh ARRL website.  Hamfest calender, news, FCC enforcement actions, etc.

What IS lacking on the internet as a whole is original technical articles, and here, QEZ absolutely shines.  But no, they've made the decision you WILL get QST, and if you want QEX they're gonna rape you for more.

It makes good business sense if you're trying to drive the revenue stream. The overall member trend is probably less technical so why clutter QST with highly technical articles for a small audience.

But why not offer a choice?

The magazine is the one "tangible" that you get with your membership.  Why shouldn't you be able to choose which one you want?  For the 59 good luck in the contest boys, isn't there also a ARRL mag for them?

Ad makers look for the best bang for the buck. If ARRL offered a choice between QST and QEX, QST distribution would go down. As it currently stands, their Ads in QST  hit all the "special interests". Major manufacturers wouldn't advertise in QEX since that magazine  tailors to technical/experimenters. Look at the advertising index for Sept/Oct 2004, http://www.arrl.org/qex/qx0409toc.pdf Wouldn't pay for them to run any ads here. That's why I said, if they allowed QST as an option, they would then (to keep the advertisers happy), have to create a section on the ARRL/QST web page where advertisers could run their monthly ads with little to no increase  in their ad rate.

Sorry, RM-11307, has already been assigned.

But I thought Incentive Licensing was supposed to have addressed that trend back in the 60's.  Could it be that Incentive Licensing turned out to be a dismal failure, in terms of its stated purpose?

If anything, the trend towards a less technical amateur radio accelerated after the advent of Incentive Licensing.

If Incentive Licensing failed to achieve its stated goals, why do we insist on maintaining licence class subbands?  Could it be that both ARRL and FCC don't want to admit that they made a mistake nearly 40 years ago?

It would be easy enough to return full amateur privileges to General class and above, and maintain Advanced and Extra as honorific licence classes, carrying no additional operating privileges, as prior to 1969.

"It makes good business sense if you're trying to drive the revenue stream"

A statement that precisely describes the motivation of the ARRL. Thank you Pete. Non profit organizations often have philanthropic or, at least, helpful goals. The ARRL has become a for profit tent show in the guise of advancing amateur radio. That's the problem. You can hire PR managers, SPIN interns, and lawyers till doomsday and informed amateur radio licensees are going to see through it.

It is interesting that ARRL pays more for QST articles than they do for QEX.
I almost considered that when I did the Class E amplifier article but quickly came to my senses.  A guy I work with just gave me a stack of QSTs to look at. 8 issues in a luch break and maybe 2 useful articles worth reading.
QST is like a soap opera for an old lady.  Seems to me ARRL wants to market rice boxes rather than support ham radio which appears to be their front.
They need to change and their reducing numbers confirms it.

Phil I nominate you to head the fact-finding committee.

Consumer groups and state tax agencies have successfully stripped tax-exempt status from all manner of sham church groups and bogus charities. 

Separately, with the lobbying scandal in full swing, I bet Rinaldo will have a harder time making any headway in Washington when the reform legislation kicks in.

From what I know, a "non-profit" organization CAN make a profit and is encouraged to do so so that they can pay their salaries, expenses, expand into new areas, provide retirement pensions for their employees, better buildings, executive perks, bonuses for performance, etc etc. etc, just like any other corporation. No difference on the outside.

What gives them the right to this status is that they fill a need of helping some facet of the public that a government agency does not already fullfill. At least that's what the IRS likes to see to become a bonified 501C corporation.

If you look at the operation of the ARRL or any other "non-profit" they operate the same as any other "for profit", except that no one owns any stock. ie, you can be the founder, financier and main guy who ran it for years, but once you leave, you have no stake or ownership to anything, unless it was a loan of money that can be repaid by the nonprofit.  But a donantion remains a donation and is gone.


A "non-profit" status certainly gives it a better marketing come-hither for donations too. 

I'm no atty, but I once looked into them for a cause at one time. That's about all I remember about that, so that's that on that.

T

Het Paul,
What reform legislation ????? The Fox giving up chicken?

Actually Tom, you pretty well summed it up on the merits of a non-profit org. Generating revenue to recover costs of operations, pensions, etc. is the major motivator in keeping the organization financially viable.

ARRL has ongoing costs that need to be recovered(paid). How else would you expect them to  drive the revenue stream to pay their bills? Yes, let us all praise the "informed".

Yes, non-profits can legally pile up millions in cash in the bank through profits. And most big ones do.

The main key is that they fill a public need as blessed by the IRS and nobody owns it. It's run by the trustees on the board with a fiduciary responsiblity.

Some 501C's get into gray areas... like remember the United Way scandel with the CEO taking down millions in salary with big perks?  To attract talent, they have to pay some executives the same as a regular corp. But, most of us like to think of a non-profit as having employees that are on a mission and work for free...    So vely solly.

I understand at the ARRL, the pay is much lower than the same job in a for-profit. Over the years, I've known perhaps ten guys who worked there and they have always mentioned that. All just loved being there, so lived with it.

T

"ARRL has ongoing costs that need to be recovered(paid). How else would you expect them to  drive the revenue stream to pay their bills? Yes, let us all praise the "informed"."

Ahh, sarcasm . .  I live for it . . . especially when it is so transparent . . . check the ARRL portfolio report . . . do ya think they could support their ongoing costs with it? I could. The portfolio has been increasing all the while they are begging for amateur radio ops to support their pseudo useful functions and "ongoing" costs. And Petey . .  I agree, informed amateur radio operators are apparently the last thing the ARRL wants and bane of your pronouncements.

Translated: If sarcasm is all you have . . . don't bother. You aren't impressing anyone.