ARRL Membership is Down

[k4kyv]

Click here to read the thread (http://amfone.net/Amforum/index.php?topic=7270.0)

[K9STH]

The ARRL membership has been going down steadily for some time. From time to time the ARRL must publish a statement of distribution (required by the feds) which includes things like paid subscriptions. This they put in the back of QST in a type font so small that you really have to use a magnifying glass to read it. If you compare the figures from one period to another it is obvious that membership numbers have been declining for quite a while.

Unfortunately, the ARRL has done a "fair" number of things that have NOT met with the approval of a significant number of their members. These actions have really "turned off" both present members and potential members. The result has been a decline in the membership.

I gave up on the ARRL back in the later half of the 1970s which means that it has been well over 25 years since I have been a member. I know several life members who say that if they were not a life member that they would have ceased to be a member years ago.

I do not criticize anyone who is a member of the ARRL for that is their personal choice. I also do not criticize internal policies of the ARRL. But, when the ARRL makes a proposal to the FCC then that becomes a matter of public record and the ARRL (and anyone else who makes a proposal) "fair game" where the proposal is concerned.

Glen, K9STH

A bit of additional trivia Glen. The part published in QST is that postal data that is required by the United States Post office on what is mailed. It does NOT include what is shipped by air to forwarders. I know that there is a freight forwarder in Europe that handles not only QST, but many other publications as well. Many, many skids are sent all over the world by this company.

Jim

[wa9cwx]

'How can we increase it?"

By promoting quality in Amateur Radio, representing Amateurs who contribute to the Hobby, and respecting those traditions that have proven value.

Like most things, simple but challenging.

[KC9ECI]

The membership will go down by at least one more in a few days. I did not renew my membership.

[kb9lei]

The League just started one of biggest marketing, public relations and membership pushes in a long time with the "Hello" campaign, based around the 100th anniversary of voice communication via the airwaves.

This is targeted at non-hams, with the idea many new licensees will join the League. #But, a lot of this is dependent on the locals hams being welcoming to newbies, providing the mentoring--Elmering, if you will--to those trying to join the "fraternity".

Take a look at hello-radio.org which is part of the first step down this 8 month road. #Many items are already available for recruiting purposes and there are more coming as fast as they can be produced.

They only way to get more members is to get more hams, since many already licensed amateurs have drifted away or "soured" on the ARRL.

The only way any of us will EVER grow amateur radio is to attract new blood. #Maybe we don't have all the gee whiz and flash of a new text-enabled, G3/4, camera phone--but we still have the magic of world-wide communication without an interdependent infrastructure--and that is what today's hams have to sell.

[w4hwd]

Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Mar. 28 2006,17:18)]The membership will go down by at least one more in a few days. #I did not renew my membership.
That's OK...the loss was offset by my renewal last month... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[ae4fa]

Quote[/b] ]targeted at non-hams, with the idea many new licensees will join the League

Groan.

That's been their strategy for quite some time now. It hasn't been working.

You know the thing about insanity - same thing over and over, always expecting a different result.

The ARRL could try a number of other things that would make more sense.

Don't blame it on lack of local elmering. There's still lots of that for anyone who wants to learn. And don't blame older hams for being disenchanted with ARRL. The ARRL is at fault for losing touch with its members.

My membership runs another year and a half. After that, I honestly don't know.

[ne3r]

I did it for the QST http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Not really, the ARRL isn't all bad, but the don't represent my intrests very well.

73
Joe
N3PAQ

[ka9inv]

Quote[/b] (w4hwd @ Mar. 28 2006,10:26)]Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Mar. 28 2006,17:18)]The membership will go down by at least one more in a few days. I did not renew my membership.
That's OK...the loss was offset by my renewal last month... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Too bad, because my membership lapsed without renewal too.

[w4hwd]

Quote[/b] (N3PAQ @ Mar. 28 2006,19:22)]I did it for the QST http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Not really, the ARRL isn't all bad, but the don't represent my intrests very well.

73
Joe
N3PAQ
I really did do it for QST! I'm getting sick of reading the same material over and over in the bathroom.

[N1MLF]

Representing amateur radio instead of the internet would be a good place to start.
QST should contain more full page articles rather than full page ads.
Unless things change dramatically and soon I'll be done this coming fall.

..JW..

[K6BTM]

Quote[/b] (N3PAQ @ Mar. 28 2006,16:22)]I did it for the QST http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Not really, the ARRL isn't all bad, but the don't represent my intrests very well.

73
Joe
N3PAQ
The ARRL haven't represented the me, or the every day Ham for 20 + years. I gave up on them a long time ago. Sad for them and us. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[W5HTW]

I just renewed yesterday. Thought a lot about it over the past two months when they first advised me I was about to expire! I get lots of junk mail in the po box, so a slick magazine once a month is welcome, even if I manage to read all that interests me in the course of a single evening.

A second factor was being in ARES I like to keep up with that. Thirdly, I do like knowing I have access to the members only portion of their website, though I think the last time I used it was months ago. But i like knowing I have a lawn mower in the garage, too, even if I don't have a lawn, nothing but dirt. It's there in case I need it.

Fourth, it does allegedly give me a say. Not sure to whom, or about what, but, hey, if I think of something I can say it.

Fifth, I get ARRL junk mail in my email box.

All that seemed to be worth 34 bucks a year, so I did it.

That said, I have found almost nothing else the ARRL does to be worth ANYTHING a year. The "Hello..." stuff may help our struggling club, I don't know. Way out here in the boondocks there aren't many hams, and fewer wannabe hams, so it may be saying "Hello" to an empty barrel. But our club does need some recruiting. I'll be taking a close look at that.

Certainly the ARRL has the financial bottom line as its focal point. It does have expenses and salaries to meet, after all. Maybe it can make more money on advertising in QST, than it can off new members? Or old members? The ARRL seems strongly bent upon pushing the old timers out of ham radio. That has to be financial in cause.

But they haven't quite pushed me out yet.

Ed

[n0iu]

Quote[/b] (K9STH @ Mar. 28 2006,14:45)]From time to time the ARRL must publish a statement of distribution (required by the feds) which includes things like paid subscriptions.
I don't have the answer as to how to increase the numbers, but if you want to know the actual number of League members, it can be found in the annual report (available on their website). Unfortunately, the latest one available is for the year end 2004. I don't know when 2005's report will be out. Maybe Jim can shed some light on this.

[AB1FV]

I am already a member of the ARRL, I joined last year.
I took, and passed my Extra Exam on the 8th of Feb of this year.
Two weeks later, I got a package from the ARRL.
Inside, was a letter of congratulations that I have passed my exam and the ARRL was wishing that as a "new Ham" I would enjoy the Amateur Radio Hobby.

I have been licensed since 1990 when I earned my Novice ticket, then I went up thru Tech, Tech Plus, and General to Extra. I did not take my first exam on the 8th of Feb of this year. I know that the ARRL probably sent that out because of my upgrade to Extra, but calling me a "New Ham" was incorrect.
The ARRL should really look at who they send out their "New Ham" packages to!
Perhaps that is only one reason they are dropping members.

73
AB1FV

[AC0H]

I'm another one hwo puposely didn't renew my membership. The bandwidth proposal is just another in a long line of arrogant decisions they've made over the last 10 years and I'll not be supporting them till I see some change.

I was a non-stop member from 1992 to January of this year.

[kr1st]

I guess to answer that question you'd really have to step outside the box of what it would take for you personally to become a member (again).

What the ARRL needs to do is to make the threshold as low as possible to become a member. They need to offer a multi tiered membership. Not different membership levels, just one and the same (full) membership at different prices. Say $20 for everyone under 18, everyone who attends college regardless of age, everyone on active duty and free if you're on active duty overseas.

They can try to explain all they want that for 39 bucks you get a whole lot more than just QST, but 39 dollars is 39 dollars. It's a spending decision for people and they look at the tangible things they receive immediately. Once they become a member and fully start to understand what Amateur Radio is all about they will develop an appreciation for the ARRL as an organization. You have to foster the relationship and then focus on membership retention.

Yes, that will take some investment. This can be offset by a more active campaign on unrestricted donations or set up a special new membership fund. All these campaigns on Spectrum Defense etc. are nice but they result in restricted funds for that particular goal. Of course it really is just a matter of making a few budget decisions to shift money that was originally budgeted from unrestricted funds for say SD to use it for something else, and then fund SD fully from SD restricted funds only. (Of course the money has to be there, it's just an example.)

By setting up a New Membership Fund you can ask current members if they'd like to donate $20 so that it will make it easier for. Ask yourself, if you believe in the ARRL, wouldn't you be willing to spend 20 bucks so that a kid could become a member, gets a glossy magazine and maybe a few other perks that will help to keep that kid interested?

This process will gain a lot of useful information for future targeted campaigns. You get to know who was in college for instance and that may help you raise more funds. You could have a targeted campaign that will ask them to donate $20 or so because they benefited from the same program.

The Diamond Club is an interesting start, but really, folks who can afford to give at those various levels are really not interested in the petty perks that come with it. It needs to be restructured in a way that will make donators feel good about themselves, and they need to be reminded of that. (and you don't do that by begging for more money) What you need to do is set up a level structure so that the donating party knows what will be done with the money. Be explicit in saying that for example for a $100 donation you can offer free memberships to so many people. Or that you can offer courses with it to members active in certain activities. And then prove it with a record when these activities occur.

And as the organization grows you can increase advertising revenue. QST is already 50% filled with ads, so even when you'll lose a few advertisers, this can be easily offset.

It really is a matter of some creative thinking and planning for the futureto gain some new members. Set your goal to where you want to be 5 years from now and make a plan how to get there.

Here, there you go, another non-league bashing post from me. Now can I have my money back for the few years I was a member? ;-)

73,
--Alex KR1ST
http://www.kr1st.com

[WA3KYY]

I became a life member in the 70's while I was in graduate school and money was very tight. I did it primarily to save money in the long run on getting QST but back then the technical articles had some worth. Now days, there is not much of interest to this 40+ year ham in QST. I would rather receive QEX. At least one benefit I use frequently is the outgoing QSL bureau. I think I have saved nearly the cost of the life membership in postage alone in the past 4 years of active DXing.

They do certainly seem to have alienated many long time hams and members and have not been able to attract many of the new hams that became licensed since the advent of the no code Tech license. It seems some very serious soul searching is needed to figure out why they have failed to retain long tme members and attract the new hams.

73,
Mike WA3KYY

[K3UD]

Quote[/b] (w4hwd @ Mar. 28 2006,18:26)]Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Mar. 28 2006,17:18)]The membership will go down by at least one more in a few days. I did not renew my membership.
That's OK...the loss was offset by my renewal last month... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Unfortunately, In the circulation business a renewal from an existing subscriber does not offset a loss of a subscriber. In the industry this is known as "Churn".

In order for a publication to remain even it needs to generate one new subscriber for each subscribe that has not renewed. In many publications the churn rate can get has high as 75% of subscribers that need to be replaced on an annual basis. This also applies to membership organizations. It would seem that as the overall number of hams decline, the ARRL membership would also reflect this.

When I took a look at the FCC license stats this morning and saw that we are now down to 659,000 (round number) and I will have the details up on QRZ News when I finish my now quarterly report for publication on QRZ.

I just received my monthly email newsletter for my Division Director, Jim Weaver. In the newsletter, Jim talks about the ARRL membership declining and wonders how the trend can be turned around. He also mentioned that the ARRL does sometimes make mistakes in policy matters affecting the membership, citing Incentive Licensing as a 'doozy' of a mistake.

On the other hand He does not seem to think that RM-11306 is a mistake and is asking members for imput on a potential band plan. Nowhere in the newsletter did I see a mention of the comments to RM-11306 or the ARRL's reply to the comments.

My situation as it concerns the ARRL is that I have been a member for a rather long time but not as long as I have been licensed as I dropped out over Incentive Licensing for a number of years before re-joining. My membership will continue until I see how regulation by bandwidth affects my day to day on the air operations.

If my experience is spoiled by the potential problems outlined in the comments to RM-11306 I will most likely not remain a member. (yes it sounds selfish but it would be a personal choice)

Everyone who joins the ARRL does so for specific reasons and everyone who leaves also has specific reasons for doiing so which include but are not limited to; economic / price value reasons, policy reasons, health, infirmity reasons, death, representation reasons and perceptions of the ARRL being out of touch with the member reasons.

My personal opinion is that the ARRL (Board and others who have input on policy) but not the working staff, is presently out of touch with the membership to an extent that rivals what happened with IL, and that the ARRL (as defined above) has come under the influence of a very few who want to shape Amateur Radio in ways that will benefit themselves at the expense of the much greater majority of hams.

This could be why the ARRL is losing membership and is not replacing the membership fast enough. 425,000 licensed hams
are not members. It seems that there is a fertile field to be harvested there.

73
George
K3UD

[ac3p]

Waiting in the wings to take over.......QRZ http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[kr1st]

Quote[/b] ]I just received my monthly email newsletter for my Division Director, Jim Weaver.

Say what? A newsletter? I just checked the Roanoke Division that I used to belong to. I never even heard from the DD and in the past when I was a member he never responded. I think he doesn't really exist.

Roanoke Division (http://www.arrl.org/divisions/roanoke/)

The last newsletter is from February 2005!

The absence of his voice towards the membership is evidence that Dennis Bodson couldn't give two cents about his constituents. Oh, he's there at board meetings, but not as a representative, but just for his own pleasure and interest, I think. He's way to busy with his own Telecom Consultation business (remember that someone was prevented from running because of perceived conflicts?) and IEEE committees on Standards (still no conflict?). (Legal note: I'm merely stating my opinion here and do not present the above as facts.)

He may be very competent, but these are not the kind of people that should be representing the membership. It's no wonder that people feel disconnected with the organization, except for the 10 or so members that could prove that he's actually alive. Then again, he's in office, so ya'll who elected him must think he's doing a great job.

On the other hand, take the SC Section Manager. Dr. Jim Boehner, N2ZZ. I've met him several times, exchanged emails with him, he visits hamfests and I don't know how many sites he visits at Field Day each year. Every month he publishes a news letter and he keeps his web site updated with the latest new and developments. He's even very responsive to non-members like me and very active on the air, too. I gave him an incredible hard time before he got elected a few years ago and he's shown character. I have a lot of respect for this man. These are the kind of people the ARRL needs.

My point is, if you take office for an organization like the ARRL, you can not use the excuse that you're too busy to respond or listen. It's your job. You have to show that you are a responsible officer for the organization. Sure, you can not be everywhere, but you *can be somewhere*. There should be some visibility, some acknowledgement that you and I exists and that we know of each other's existence. There really should be more than a monthly newsletter published every one-and-a-half year or so. If you're not willing to accept that responsibility, then don't run.

Quote[/b] ]that the ARRL (as defined above) has come under the influence of a very few who want to shape Amateur Radio in ways that will benefit themselves at the expense of the much greater majority of hams.

It is exactly that what a BOD is supposed to prevent from happening. It's perfectly normal that a special interest committee is going to form proposals that are in their best interest, but it is the BOD's responsibility to check these proposals against the goals of the organisation and the aims of their constituents. Then it needs to take steps to hammer out a compromise in which all parties are represented. The Good Ol' Boys network at the ARRL needs to be dismantled and replaced by a responsible team that thinks about the issues that are important to the members more than twice a year at the board meeting.

But it is you, the members, who elect these people in office. This is what you allow your organisation to do. You the members have shaped the organisation into something that I don't want to belong to.

73,
--Alex KR1ST
http://www.kr1st.com

[WA3KYY]

George,

My initial thought about a response to Jim is:

1) What gives the ARRL the right to develope a bandplan when they represent by numbers less than 25% of all licensed amateurs?

2) What good is a bandplan that will be ignored by one and all if it suits their immediate purpose to do so?

3) How will the details of the bandplan be made known to the vast majority of hams that are not ARRL members?

4) What will the ARRL do when RM-11306 is simply dismissed due to the overwhelming opposition expressed in the comments?

Not sure what I will actually send to him yet.

73,
Mike WA3KYY

[WB2WIK]

If I were "running" the ARRL as a business, to bolster membership I would:

1. Scan every issue of QST back to issue #1, create a great lookup index and search index for them, and put them all on line in a "Members Only" section that has no access for non-members. That alone would be worth the price of membership for almost anyone who is really active in this hobby. [This is already available for Product Reviews back to 1980, and that works well. To bolster the value to members, it needs to be not just reviews back to 1980, but articles, editorial content and everything else back to the beginning.]

2. Do the same for QEX and NCJ. That's a smaller job, obviously, and still of great value.

I'd think this service would bring back a lot of old members who let their memberships lapse. I know I'd get a huge kick out of browing back issues from my desktop. I can buy CDs of them, now....but without search capability, I might have to look through hundreds of issues to find what I want -- or give up, never finding it.

Can you imagine the value of something like this....(rhetorical)...

I can remember that back about 30 or 40 years ago, there was an article in QST about making a parabolic dish antenna out of an old umbrella, a tripod and a dog food dish. I have no idea of its title or who wrote it, but I'd really like to review that, right now. SEARCH: dish+antenna+umbrella+dog+food+dish....and ten seconds later, the article pops up on my screen.

Holy cow.

I'd pay double for my membership.

WB2WIK/6

[WA2ZDY]

Thomas Paine wrote it and I repeat it often: "What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly."

ARRL proved ths over the last 19 years. Novice enhancement did not bring vast numbers to the ham ranks. When that didn't work, we found the no-code tech. That hasn't worked either. Yes, the NCT brought lots of licensees but not hams.
And the no code general promises to bring us lots more sailors who want free email on their sailboats. These aren't hams, they're licensees.

ARRL thought by nearly giving away licenses that they'd increase their own bottom line. It seemed to make sense. Easier entry would make for more entrants who would buy more radios, and who would join ARRL. In some cases I'm sure they did buy radios, and that did increase ad revenues for QST to some degree. But these new licensees didn't join ARRL.

Many of these new licensees were spouses and significant others of hams who figured "well it's so easy now I'll do it just to make him/her happy." Then there were the cell phone families and lots of REACT folks who already had hams in the groups convincing them how good it would be to be a ham in an emergency. Let's be honest though, Katrina doesn't happen to most or very often (Thank God,) so most of the emergency preparedness folks are drilling and not much else.

Then there are the cop wannabees who wanted an excuse to carry their radios around to look important. And there is another group of radio hobbyists many of you likely don't know about.

We've all heard of the freebanders. But did you know there are large numbers of guys who lurk on the VHF/UHF business bands? Not just the unlicensed GMRS pirates either. There are groups of guys who are squatters on commercial frequencies and some are even so bold as to have unlicensed repeaters up. And some who claim to have businesses and who get licenses that way - all to play with their radios. (Not all radio hobbyists are hams or CBers.) Some of these guys have gotten ham tickets since it's pretty easy now.

Then there are the folks who never got on the air, never even bought rigs. Their calls just takes up space on the qrz.com harddrive for ten years then slowly fade away. Who knows what the story there was.


So what we have here is a huge number of folks who got tickets not because they wanted to be hams but because it was so easy to get a ticket there was no particular reason not to.

Except of course that they never wanted to be hams in the first place.

So to paraphrase what Thom Paine said, if it didn't mean enough to work for it, it doesn't mean enough to respect or care about it. And this is the basket ARRL put a whole lot of their eggs. No wonder the basket is vanishing.

Maybe it's time to tighten things up. Make sure only those really interested are attracted. It won't attract more but it will attract a higher percentage of those who will really contribute. And ARRL can stop throwing money away on what we all know doesn't work.

[NL7W]

Quote[/b] (WA2ZDY @ Mar. 29 2006,12:49)]Thomas Paine wrote it and I repeat it often: "What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly."

ARRL proved ths over the last 19 years. Novice enhancement did not bring vast numbers to the ham ranks. When that didn't work, we found the no-code tech. That hasn't worked either. Yes, the NCT brought lots of licensees but not hams.
And the no code general promises to bring us lots more sailors who want free email on their sailboats. These aren't hams, they're licensees.

ARRL thought by nearly giving away licenses that they'd increase their own bottom line. It seemed to make sense. Easier entry would make for more entrants who would buy more radios, and who would join ARRL. In some cases I'm sure they did buy radios, and that did increase ad revenues for QST to some degree. But these new licensees didn't join ARRL.

Many of these new licensees were spouses and significant others of hams who figured "well it's so easy now I'll do it just to make him/her happy." Then there were the cell phone families and lots of REACT folks who already had hams in the groups convincing them how good it would be to be a ham in an emergency. Let's be honest though, Katrina doesn't happen to most or very often (Thank God,) so most of the emergency preparedness folks are drilling and not much else.

Then there are the cop wannabees who wanted an excuse to carry their radios around to look important. And there is another group of radio hobbyists many of you likely don't know about.

We've all heard of the freebanders. But did you know there are large numbers of guys who lurk on the VHF/UHF business bands? Not just the unlicensed GMRS pirates either. There are groups of guys who are squatters on commercial frequencies and some are even so bold as to have unlicensed repeaters up. And some who claim to have businesses and who get licenses that way - all to play with their radios. (Not all radio hobbyists are hams or CBers.) Some of these guys have gotten ham tickets since it's pretty easy now.

Then there are the folks who never got on the air, never even bought rigs. Their calls just takes up space on the qrz.com harddrive for ten years then slowly fade away. Who knows what the story there was.


So what we have here is a huge number of folks who got tickets not because they wanted to be hams but because it was so easy to get a ticket there was no particular reason not to.

Except of course that they never wanted to be hams in the first place.

So to paraphrase what Thom Paine said, if it didn't mean enough to work for it, it doesn't mean enough to respect or care about it. And this is the basket ARRL put a whole lot of their eggs. No wonder the basket is vanishing.

Maybe it's time to tighten things up. Make sure only those really interested are attracted. It won't attract more but it will attract a higher percentage of those who will really contribute. And ARRL can stop throwing money away on what we all know doesn't work.

Well said my friend! The League's egg basket really does have a hole in it.

73 de Steve, NL7W
Licensed at 15 years of age and a 25-year ham in 2006.

[kj3n]

Quote[/b] ]ARRL Membership is Down, How can we increase it?

A Cranial-Rectal Extraction tool for the ARRL, about the size of the Titanic. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[k0cmh]

I renewed because I strongly believe in, and participate in, emergency communications, e.g. ARES. However, I disagree with most of the ARRL positions, including how they structure and run ARES. I believe the ARES structure is old, outmoded, and far out of step with current US culture.

But, the ARES organization is the only thing going at present (beside RACES, which is basically dead in my areas). So, I stick with what I have now, and hope I can make changes from inside the orgainzation, at least for one more year.

What concerns me is if the FCC believes they represent "ham radio". They do not, the represent a few hams that hold offices in the ARRL.

[KF0RT]

Quote[/b] (WB2WIK @ Mar. 29 2006,12:49)]1. Scan every issue of QST back to issue #1, create a great lookup index and search index for them, and put them all on line in a "Members Only" section that has no access for non-members. That alone would be worth the price of membership for almost anyone who is really active in this hobby. [This is already available for Product Reviews back to 1980, and that works well. To bolster the value to members, it needs to be not just reviews back to 1980, but articles, editorial content and everything else back to the beginning.]
They've sorta done this, with the CD's. I've got 5 sets of them, and each one covers 5 years. Cover to cover, including the ads, and they have them all the way back to the first issue.

Problem is, this was done back in the late 90's and it all runs very poorly on today's computers. Smells a lot like Windows 3.0 to me. They need to rescan the whole thing, re-index it and make PDF files. As-is, it may or may not be worth the $39.95 per set they charge. Photo resolution is poor, contest results are illegible in some cases, etc. The whole set, if bought at once, is $399. The only word I can use to describe the software that runs it is "abysmal."

You're right, though. Having access to it ALL online would be worth a lot. I've decided I'm not going to buy any more of them because the quality just isn't there.

73, Rob

[ab0wr]

Quote[/b] (WA2ZDY @ Mar. 29 2006,12:49)]Thomas Paine wrote it and I repeat it often: "What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly."

ARRL proved ths over the last 19 years. #Novice enhancement did not bring vast numbers to the ham ranks. #When that didn't work, we found the no-code tech. #That hasn't worked either. # #Yes, the NCT brought lots of licensees but not hams.
And the no code general promises to bring us lots more sailors who want free email on their sailboats. # These aren't hams, they're licensees.

ARRL thought by nearly giving away licenses that they'd increase their own bottom line. #It seemed to make sense. #Easier entry would make for more entrants who would buy more radios, and who would join ARRL. # In some cases I'm sure they did buy radios, and that did increase ad revenues for QST to some degree. #But these new licensees didn't join ARRL. #

Many of these new licensees were spouses and significant others of hams who figured "well it's so easy now I'll do it just to make him/her happy." #Then there were the cell phone families and lots of REACT folks who already had hams in the groups convincing them how good it would be to be a ham in an emergency. #Let's be honest though, Katrina doesn't happen to most or very often (Thank God,) so most of the emergency preparedness folks are drilling and not much else.

Then there are the cop wannabees who wanted an excuse to carry their radios around to look important. #And there is another group of radio hobbyists many of you likely don't know about. #

We've all heard of the freebanders. #But did you know there are large numbers of guys who lurk on the VHF/UHF business bands? #Not just the unlicensed GMRS pirates either. #There are groups of guys who are squatters on commercial frequencies and some are even so bold as to have unlicensed repeaters up. #And some who claim to have businesses and who get licenses that way - all to play with their radios. #(Not all radio hobbyists are hams or CBers.) #Some of these guys have gotten ham tickets since it's pretty easy now.

Then there are the folks who never got on the air, never even bought rigs. #Their calls just takes up space on the qrz.com harddrive for ten years then slowly fade away. #Who knows what the story there was.


So what we have here is a huge number of folks who got tickets not because they wanted to be hams but because it was so easy to get a ticket there was no particular reason not to.

Except of course that they never wanted to be hams in the first place.

So to paraphrase what Thom Paine said, if it didn't mean enough to work for it, it doesn't mean enough to respect or care about it. # And this is the basket ARRL put a whole lot of their eggs. # No wonder the basket is vanishing.

Maybe it's time to tighten things up. #Make sure only those really interested are attracted. #It won't attract more but it will attract a higher percentage of those who will really contribute. #And ARRL can stop throwing money away on what we all know doesn't work.
Man, you have said a mouthful.

The ARRL has been co-opted by special interests for policy making, it no longer has the overall good of the community as the underpinning of its policy development. And it has been co-opted by those who see the membership as retail consumers instead of constituents to be served. It has lost its roots and, like a large oak tree whose roots get undercut, it is in danger of crashing to the ground.

Look at their current push - get more new hams into the hobby. Blow off the 75% of current hams and focus on trying to recruit more hams that can be encouraged to join the ARRL. This is a losing proposition and you would think that anyone smart enough to run a business would be able to understand that. As a niche market, you'll never be able to attract enough new members on an annual basis to make up for the loss of non-renewals.

It's just one more measure of how the ARRL has lost touch with the amateur community. Someone said they would rather have QEX than QST. That would be a VERY good way to retain membership - give people a choice of the magazine they want.

The NRA recognized this years ago. There is a huge split among their readers for what they want out of the magazine they get. So the NRA offers the Rifleman and the Hunter. That's one reason the NRA is recognized as a membership focused organization and not as a BOD focused, Priest-King organization telling everyone what is best for them.

Like you say, the ARRL needs to quit focusing on getting "licensees" and start focusing on getting hams.

But I'm not going to hold my breath waiting. I think they are in a downward spiral they won't recover from.

tim ab0wr

Tim said: As a niche market, you'll never be able to attract enough new members on an annual basis to make up for the loss of non-renewals."

You should have said, "those who are now silent keys."

It is pretty hard to renew when you are six feet under ground.

[k4lem]

I used to belong, but the annuals dues got way out of line with what I was deriving from memborship.

I do respect the over all technical expertise and liasonship with the FCC.

QST ok, but I have dropped all my mags except Scientific American. Too much waste and paper to land fill. Save a tree and publish to the internet.

If ARRL would become like SALON.com and so forth, perhaps they could half their dues and attract me again.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[ab0wr]

Quote[/b] (w5jbp @ Mar. 29 2006,19:38)]Tim said: As a niche market, you'll never be able to attract enough new members on an annual basis to make up for the loss of non-renewals."

You should have said, "those who are now silent keys."

It is pretty hard to renew when you are six feet under ground.
It's not just from the OF's passing on. Many of the new hams will join the ARRL for a year and then never renew because they get no benefit from it.

I suspect that a truly unbiased study of the membership in the ARRL will show that the non-renewals of new hams plus the drop-out rate of older hams who are disenchanted with the policy decisions of the ARRL add up to more than the ARRL can ever recruit as new hams each year.

It's that dropout rate of older hams (not SK's either) that is the telling metric and should be of the biggest concern to the ARRL. If they can't retain long term members they will never retain enough new, short term members to end up with a growing membership roll.

But it's just like any embedded management team - they have to be willing to face the music before they can play the tune. Just ask GM - things finally got so bad there that they had to face the music and they are finally playing a tune that may (and I want to emphasize the *may*) let them survive.

I haven't seen any indication from the ARRL that they are willing to face the music -- all they are doing is making a lot of discordant noise. But I guess it sounds like music to them!

tim ab0wr

[AE6QE]

I'll admit it...the only reason I joined ARRL again (a couple of years lapsed between memberships) was so I could get the reduced prices on the ARECC courses.

I will probably not renew in '07.

One way to spur growth is instead of ARRL just being this huge organization out in the cosmos, it should integrate into local clubs. Instead of ARRL affiliated clubs (where membership to the club is not membership to ARRL), you would have ARRL sanctioned clubs, where membership to the club and ARRL would be one and the same. Honestly, I would rather pay club dues than the current ARRL dues, as clubs offer so much more - access to club equipment, an focus point for event organization, and most importantly, comraderie!

73,
Rickey

[KI6ADA]

When I passed Element 2 last year, they were trying to send me every possible offer. I enjoy QST, but I don't have a need to receive it every month. The news storys in QST are up to 6 months old. The tech articles are good. The feel good stories are good,too. If I only have to pay 14 dollars for my 10 year license fee, where is my 10 year subscription to QST? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[ab0wr]

Quote[/b] (AE6QE @ Mar. 29 2006,23:02)]I'll admit it...the only reason I joined ARRL again (a couple of years lapsed between memberships) was so I could get the reduced prices on the ARECC courses.

I will probably not renew in '07.

One way to spur growth is instead of ARRL just being this huge organization out in the cosmos, it should integrate into local clubs. #Instead of ARRL affiliated clubs (where membership to the club is not membership to ARRL), you would have ARRL sanctioned clubs, where membership to the club and ARRL would be one and the same. #Honestly, I would rather pay club dues than the current ARRL dues, as clubs offer so much more - access to club equipment, an focus point for event organization, and most importantly, comraderie! #

73,
Rickey
Another good idea the ARRL will never accept.

tim ab0wr

[K3UD]

Quote[/b] (ab0wr @ Mar. 29 2006,21:11)]It's just one more measure of how the ARRL has lost touch with the amateur community. Someone said they would rather have QEX than QST. That would be a VERY good way to retain membership - give people a choice of the magazine they want.
I have heard this expressed by other hams.

The reason why it does not happen is that QST is the publication that carries the advertising and brings in the dollars.

Perhaps there needs to be several levels of membership.

IE:

A basic membership that includes most of the benifits but no QST which costs about 50% of the cost of the standard membership. This might be a way to address the hams who say that they can not afford it.

Next, we have the present membership model which would continue as is.

A higher member level membership could be introduced which would allow the member to request QEX alond with QST. Perhaps another ARRL publication could be included (Antenna handbook, maybe even the handbook itself. Obviously a higher price would need to be charged.

Other than QST I really don't know how many other benefits I personally use in a year and I have to say that after being a member for about 35 years, I don't even know what most of the membership benefits are, other than the several I have used at one time or another.

The largest benefit to me is the archive of product reviews on their website. I agree with WB2WIK that a complete archive of QST in searchable PDF format would be a tremendous benefit for members. Newspapers do this all the time and many are converting their microfilm to PDF and putting them online.

73
George
K3UD

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Mar. 30 2006,08:20)]A basic membership that includes most of the benifits but no QST which costs about 50% of the cost of the standard membership. This might be a way to address the hams who say that they can not afford it.
Won't work, George, and I am surprised at the suggestion. Being the pro you are, you know better.

This statement you made says it all: "The reason why it does not happen is that QST is the publication that carries the advertising and brings in the dollars."

Were the League to offer such non-QST memberships, the circulation numbers would suffer, bringing the ad revenues down accordingly. What they are doing now, with regard to membership fee versus the balance of goods and services in the quid pro quo is probably the best that they can do on a realistic basis.

I confess without blushing that I have many problems with a few of the League's recent decisions with regard to regulation, but I put that in perspective with all of the rest of the things the League does for us. And that rest is a bunch.

The only way to deal with the things that one does or does not like about the League is to influence the BOD, as hard as that may be to do in practice.

In the final analysis, it is no different from the problems we all face in having our views and desires made known to and accepted by our county/city governors, the state legislature or the US Congress.

I could spit tacks over the bandwidth petition as filed, and I put my comments before the Commission, but I will not drop out of the ARRL. That would be cutting my nose off to spite my face, and any other opinions with regard to that fact are but foolish notions unworthy of consideration.

Period.

Hi, Jim. Hope all is well with you and that you are keeping busy now that you "retired," hi hi hi.


http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[K3UD]

Hi Albert,

From what I have heard from people directly associated with the ARRL it seems that one of the largest limiting factors affecting membership is the annual cost. While this might be a straw man, it has been an ongoing discussion at the ARRL for as long as I have been licensed.

Back in the mid 70s I had some correspondence with HQ concerning a discounted rate to new hams coming in, kind of like an introductory offer. My reasoning was that a newly licensed ham would pay perhaps 50% of the rate for the first year and as he saw the value of ARRL membership, he or she would have no problems paying the full rate when the membership expired.

I received a very nice letter back from HQ thanking me for my suggestion and pointing out that it was not the policy to discount a membership and that the cost was insignificant when compared to the outlay that a new ham would need to make in order to set up a station. As one who joined the ARRL when I received my Novice, I debated as to whether or not to spend the $5.00 it took to join. In the end I sent in the money (a $5.00 bill) http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

The ARRL certainly has the lists of every new ham that is licensed and I think that my introductory offer idea would still be viable. We license about 25,000 new hams each year. What happens if 10,000 of them take up the ARRL on their offer and it continues year after year? I think this would grow membership.

Yes QST magazine circulation serves to set the rates of its advertising. However, If the present trends in membership keep going the way that it is those rates will eventually need to be lowered as circulation / membership erodes. The idea I proposed in the 70s might help. On the other hand, how many new hams even know a little bit about the ARRL and its benefits? That new hams are not joining in large enough numbers to offset losses says a lot about the way the ARRL markets itself.

Of course we can conjecture all we want about why the ARRL membership is declining and there are some valid reasons for it. As Jim Haynie put it, it is hard for a dead person to renew a membership. If death is the main reason for the decline, and the ARRL is not able to make it up by tapping the annual 25,000 pool of new hams, then there are more problems down the road.

Is membership more important than QST circulation? If there is a membership available without QST and it jumps the numbers quite a bit, is the ARRL better or worse off? Do more members regardless of QST make the ARRL a stronger organization for Amateur Radio or are the members just really subscribers to a magazine that carries a lot of advertising? Is the ARRL getting to the point where the ARRL cannot have it both ways?

73
George
K3UD

[N8CPA]

I have my renewal notice in my hand. What I will likely do is renew at Dayton. But that slice of my finances will be served with a huge piece of my mind. Bon apetit, my League.

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (w5jbp @ Mar. 28 2006,15:02)]A bit of additional trivia Glen. The part published in QST is that postal data that is required by the United States Post office on what is mailed. It does NOT include what is shipped by air to forwarders. I know that there is a freight forwarder in Europe that handles not only QST, but many other publications as well. Many, many skids are sent all over the world by this company.

Jim
Sorry to see you go, Jim. You were a shining light in the darkness for many of us. Good luck amigo!

[ky5u]

As an organization, the ARRL has to redefine itself. This problem is not unique to the League. Other older groups are opening up the windows and letting members have more direct say in matters. When you define yourself based on the "the BOD knows best what Amateurs need", there is a chance they will be very wrong. Human nature says it is hard to admit a mistake. That's where groups redifining themselves are learning to change with the times and be smarter about what their members want.

Is the League's purpose to represent the wishes of their members? Or is it to steer a course based on the imperical knowledge of a few officers? All indicators say the latter is not working.

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Mar. 30 2006,10:02)]Hi Albert,

From what I have heard from people directly associated with the ARRL it seems that one of the largest limiting factors affecting membership is the annual cost. While this might be a straw man, it has been an ongoing discussion at the ARRL for as long as I have been licensed.

Back in the mid 70s I had some correspondence with HQ concerning a discounted rate to new hams coming in, kind of like an introductory offer. My reasoning was that a newly licensed ham would pay perhaps 50% of the rate for the first year and as he saw the value of ARRL membership, he or she would have no problems paying the full rate when the membership expired.

I received a very nice letter back from HQ thanking me for my suggestion and pointing out that it was not the policy to discount a membership and that the cost was insignificant when compared to the outlay that a new ham would need to make in order to set up a station. As one who joined the ARRL when I received my Novice, I debated as to whether or not to spend the $5.00 it took to join. In the end I sent in the money (a $5.00 bill) http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

The ARRL certainly has the lists of every new ham that is licensed and I think that my introductory offer idea would still be viable. We license about 25,000 new hams each year. What happens if 10,000 of them take up the ARRL on their offer and it continues year after year? I think this would grow membership.

Yes QST magazine circulation serves to set the rates of its advertising. However, If the present trends in membership keep going the way that it is those rates will eventually need to be lowered as circulation / membership erodes. The idea I proposed in the 70s might help. On the other hand, how many new hams even know a little bit about the ARRL and its benefits? That new hams are not joining in large enough numbers to offset losses says a lot about the way the ARRL markets itself.

Of course we can conjecture all we want about why the ARRL membership is declining and there are some valid reasons for it. As Jim Haynie put it, it is hard for a dead person to renew a membership. If death is the main reason for the decline, and the ARRL is not able to make it up by tapping the annual 25,000 pool of new hams, then there are more problems down the road.

Is membership more important than QST circulation? If there is a membership available without QST and it jumps the numbers quite a bit, is the ARRL better or worse off? Do more members regardless of QST make the ARRL a stronger organization for Amateur Radio or are the members just really subscribers to a magazine that carries a lot of advertising? Is the ARRL getting to the point where the ARRL cannot have it both ways?

73
George
K3UD
We are in full agreement on this, George. I think you idea would, indeed, be a very big help over time and would cost little in the long run.

Whoever responded to your initial idea was a very short-sighted marketing novice, not to mention an arrogant fool. When one spends the amount needed to set up a station, particularly one for HF, every penny is counted carefully and analyzed (with eyes under a green-eisenglas shade) for economy.

Alas, this narrow-minded and short-sighted approach is not unique to the League; I have found it an affliction of a great many large organizations/associations. It seems far too many of the folks who go into these jobs and stay there for long periods become so convinced of the merits of their group they no longer see the forest for the trees.

Your idea would be a very good addition to the ARRL's new "Hello" promotion in my opinion.

73

[WA2ZDY]

Quote[/b] (N8CPA @ Mar. 30 2006,11:21)]I have my renewal notice in my hand. #What I will likely do is renew at Dayton. #But that slice of my finances will be served with a huge piece of my mind. #Bon apetit, my League.
This is not directed specifically at you but you've said it giving me a post to point to.

You say you'll give them a piece of your mind.

Don't you and the others who feel as you do get it?

THEY DON'T CARE.

And they care even less once they've got your money. It's like a car salesman. When your new car is a service problem, do you ask your salesman for help? No because he already got his commission - your money. He doesn't care if you EVER come back. There's nothing more he can take you for, you're old news.

I decided not to renew ARRL this year largely because of RM11306, their position on Winlink, encryption (which is tabled - for now,) and a host of other issues. And $39 isn't peanuts either.

But they don't care about that except for what the $39 would mean to the bottom line along with all the other non-renewals' $39. (The SKs they know can't be avoided.)

[ac3p]

Quote[/b] ] I believe the ARES structure is old, outmoded, and far out of step with current US culture.

But, the ARES organization is the only thing going at present (beside RACES, which is basically dead in my areas).

ARES is virtually dead in my area.

The local government decided that RACES was the way to go. So they dropped the tie with ARES and sent out a mass mailing asking for amateurs within the jurisdiction to volunteer. The reconstituted RACES program has its own net protocols and message formats.

The ARES net no longer meets and there appears to be no role for it to play as the new RACES group has taken over those functions.

[WA3KYY]

Quote[/b] (ac3p @ Mar. 30 2006,10:49)]Quote[/b] ] I believe the ARES structure is old, outmoded, and far out of step with current US culture.

But, the ARES organization is the only thing going at present (beside RACES, which is basically dead in my areas).

ARES is virtually dead in my area.

The local government decided that RACES was the way to go. So they dropped the tie with ARES and sent out a mass mailing asking for amateurs within the jurisdiction to volunteer. The reconstituted RACES program has its own net protocols and message formats.

The ARES net no longer meets and there appears to be no role for it to play as the new RACES group has taken over those functions.
We've got a similar situation down the road from you. For governmental EMCOMMS at the County and State level it is RACES. However ARES plays a role for non-governmental EMCOMMS such as Red Cross, Salvation Army, local hospitals and for pubilic service events like road races, etc.

Our local training net is advertised as a joint RACES/ARES net and many are registered with both organizations.

73,
Mike WA3KYY

[kl7aj]

Please abide by my atypically verbose response here. I think I have a few valuable insights.

Like almost everyone else, I have a few bones to pick with ARRL In many ways it seems like they have lost their focus. In fact, I addressed this issue in a recent Op-Ed piece (which ARRL, interestingly enough, actually published!) called A New Soul for Amateur Radio.

Herein is my point. Over the past 30 years I have had probably 100 articles published in QST, with the firm conviction that the pen is mightier than the sword. We hear a lot of grumbling about the dumbed down content of QST (which is probably quantifiable), but how many hams actually submit articles to QST? (And yes, I'd say that about 3/4ths of the articles I send to QST are rejected, so I don't really have a lot of sympathy for "first time rejectees"). If QST were to be continuously inundated by better material than what they are getting, things WOULD change. The squeaky wheel DOES get the grease. The fact is, QST only publishes what they get, and if all they get is Central Wisconsin Fencepost Maintenance Society QSO party scores and pictures of morbidly obese, middle-aged slobs trying to do bunny hunts without dying of apoplexy....that's what they're going to publish...and that will be the public's impression of amateur radio.

There are enough of us out here who can produce heavy hitting scientific and technical articles to fill QST and QEX every issue...if we were determined to do it. We could flood the place with meaningful artwork and literature. (Where are all the Phil Gildersleeves out there?)

I'm not saying this as an effete Connecticut "insider", in case you're wondering...I live up here in the toolies of Alaska. If I can get in QST, so can anyone.

I now relinquish my soapbox. Thank you for your time


Eric, KL7AJ

[N5PVL]

Maybe if they gave away glow in the dark plastic desk mikes, in a likeness of VANNA...

[n5tjd]

I have been contemplating joining the league myself. I don't know yet if I will. Whenerver I make up my mind to, they go and do something that sets me back, so who knows? There definitly are benefits, QST, members only section on their site, outgoing buro, etc.... not to mention when they aren't shooting themselves in the foot, they are trying to protect the bands from threats like BPL.

[ab0wr]

Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ Mar. 30 2006,06:55)]Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Mar. 30 2006,08:20)]A basic membership that includes most of the benifits but no QST which costs about 50% of the cost of the standard membership. This might be a way to address the hams who say that they can not afford it.
Won't work, George, and I am surprised at the suggestion. Being the pro you are, you know better.

This statement you made says it all: "The reason why it does not happen is that QST is the publication that carries the advertising and brings in the dollars."

Were the League to offer such non-QST memberships, the circulation numbers would suffer, bringing the ad revenues down accordingly. What they are doing now, with regard to membership fee versus the balance of goods and services in the quid pro quo is probably the best that they can do on a realistic basis.

I confess without blushing that I have many problems with a few of the League's recent decisions with regard to regulation, but I put that in perspective with all of the rest of the things the League does for us. And that rest is a bunch.

The only way to deal with the things that one does or does not like about the League is to influence the BOD, as hard as that may be to do in practice.

In the final analysis, it is no different from the problems we all face in having our views and desires made known to and accepted by our county/city governors, the state legislature or the US Congress.

I could spit tacks over the bandwidth petition as filed, and I put my comments before the Commission, but I will not drop out of the ARRL. That would be cutting my nose off to spite my face, and any other opinions with regard to that fact are but foolish notions unworthy of consideration.

Period.

Hi, Jim. Hope all is well with you and that you are keeping busy now that you "retired," hi hi hi.


http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Albert,

If the ad revenues are being used to cover more than the operating costs associated with publishing QST then the ARRL is in trouble anyway because of declining membership.

Offering membership without QST, while lessening circulation, will also *cut* publishing costs meaning less ad revenue is needed in order to cover the costs. So lowering ad prices would not necessarily be a "bad" thing.

If the circulation gets so low that QST can't survive as a standalone entity, then what does that tell you about the magazine anyway? It would tell me that there is an inherent problem to begin with.

It would seem pretty simple to me. Either QST is an enticement for joining or it isn't. If it can't stand on its own as a magazine then just how much of an enticement is it? That's the question the ARRL needs to do some soul searching on.

If it is NOT an enticement, then either fix the mazazine so that it becomes one, or provide a lower-cost membership option that doesn't include QST. That will enhance the membership roles more than anything I can think of.

The really sad thing is that in the 60's and 70's QST, *was* an enticement to join the ARRL. It is my opinion that it is *not* an enticement today.

The ARRL needs to decide what it is - a membership organization dedicated to the advancing the goals of the amateur community with a magazine published on the side OR it is a magazine publisher with a membership organization on the side.

Once that is decided then they can *FOCUS* and get in a mode of beating everyone's expectations rather than focusing on nothing and doing everything badly.

tim ab0wr

[wa9cwx]

AJ, and ZDY,

You BOTH have made excellent points.

Worth re-reading.

[KC5SAS]

Quote[/b] (WA3KYY @ Mar. 30 2006,09:00)]Quote[/b] (ac3p @ Mar. 30 2006,10:49)]Quote[/b] ] I believe the ARES structure is old, outmoded, and far out of step with current US culture.

But, the ARES organization is the only thing going at present (beside RACES, which is basically dead in my areas).

ARES is virtually dead in my area.

The local government decided that RACES was the way to go. So they dropped the tie with ARES and sent out a mass mailing asking for amateurs within the jurisdiction to volunteer. The reconstituted RACES program has its own net protocols and message formats.

The ARES net no longer meets and there appears to be no role for it to play as the new RACES group has taken over those functions.
We've got a similar situation down the road from you. #For governmental EMCOMMS at the County and State level it is RACES. #However ARES plays a role for non-governmental EMCOMMS such as Red Cross, Salvation Army, local hospitals and for pubilic service events like road races, etc.

Our local training net is advertised as a joint RACES/ARES net and many are registered with both organizations.

73,
Mike WA3KYY
Here it's similar to what you guys said. RACES is Civil Defense EMCOMM and ARES is, ...well I'm not sure what ARES is doing lately. I'm the RACES officer and personally don't care if an applicant is ARES, SATERN, REACT, CAP, MARS or anyother jumble of letters. As long as they can pass the background check, get the training and commit to showing up when neded they can have their names on any other list they want. But once they come through our doors after a call up they are RACES and nothing else until they are finished with the duties needed for that event or their shift ends.

[W0MT]

I am a member of the ARRL. My membership is paid up until May 31, 2008. Starting June 1, 2008 I will no longer be a member. The reasons are very simple.

1. I do not believe the ARRL represents the best interests of Amateur radio.

2. I think that most of the ARRL publications including QST are pretty weak.

If either of these were “fixed” I would gladly continue to be a member. In other words, I would continue to be a member if I felt that I got a benefit of either representation of the best interests of Amateur radio or good technical publications.

Unfortunately, the feeling that I have is that there is an extreme case of arrogance at the ARRL. I have tried to correspond with several members of the staff about various issues and the responses I have received (if I got a response at all) have ranged from being dismissive to being down-right rude.

There are a number of quite good books on the subject of what makes a “good” company or organization. They pretty universally talk about how an organization has to learn to have a customer focus. Look how most of us respond to companies that make you go through voice-mail hell to get a problem fixed or to companies that refuse to fix problems with their products. Organizations that operate by ignoring what the customers want are bound to fail. The entire approach taken by the ARRL on RM-11306 is a perfect example of the direct opposite of having a customer focus.

[KI6ADA]

My immediate thought about the ARRL is the great books that are written. Do I want to pay membership dues? No, I do not want to support a political lobbyist who is representing themselves in front of the FCC and not asking their members for a deciding vote. I like the section manager in my area, however I don't have to subscribe to like him and ask him questions.
my thought on ARES, well I think ARRL is trying to sell to the public that all amateur radio operators are trained to serve the public during a crisis. I disagree, I just received my FEMA certificate for completion of ICS 100. I am now eligible to attend County approved training by instructors certified by FEMA and Homeland Security. My only positive note about ARES was they responded quickly during Katrina crisis. There was still a lack of organization and proper use of radio. How do I no this fact? My elmer drove from California to Biloxi MS, to help coordinate and train people how to do their jobs. He also put in long hours of third party messaging.
Anyway ARRL is a good organization to buy books and news on their web site. I have not decided how long I will hold back my subscription.
Have a great day and remember these are only my thoughts, I did not read any of the negative thoughts in this thread, http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[KI4NGN]

Have to ask, how do you know they were negative thoughts if you didn't read them?

[KI6ADA]

Quote[/b] (KI4NGN @ Mar. 31 2006,05:20)]Have to ask, how do you know they were negative thoughts if you didn't read them?
caught me, I must agree the only nice thing to do is read the posts before adding your thoughts. I am still holding my subscription. There have been negative thoughts on these posts and I contributed mine. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif