FCC proposes new filing fee structure, new fees for ham radio

Not a single Starbucks closed in my area. 100% are open.

 

Pompous much?

 

Tune across 75 meters on any given night. Public service? Not hardly. Education? Yes, in how to be a social misfit. Emcomm readiness? Surely you jest?

You paint a picture of some rather lofty ideals. The reality of the situation is far different.

After reading this and related threads, I've come to the conclusion that the fees should be a LOT higher than $50.

Here's a proposal:

1. Technician Class License: Good for a maximum three years or upgrade. $25/year. No grandfather clause.

2. General Class License: Good for a maximum of three years or upgrade. $50/year. No grandfather clause.

3. Extra Class: 10-year renewal periods. $100 due at renewal.

All those Novice and Advanced Class licenses still out there, no changes. FREE renewals every 10 years.

News flash. Amateur radio is a big PITA to the FCC. Everyone would be wise to shut up and pay the fee if it is enacted. Fighting this isn't worth $50.

I am surprised by how many of you will fall on a sword over $50..

 

So the new rule tries to balance the fees by making a GMRS license the same cost as a Ham License, at least that seems to be part of their justification.
But, a GMRS license at $50 covers your entire 'family'. Per FCC: "If you receive a license, any family member, regardless of age, can operate GMRS stations and units within the licensed system."
If a family with 2 kids wants to have everyone on a Ham Radios, then the fee is $200. (for Tech, and +$200 for each upgrade)
GMRS to Ham is not an Apples to Apples comparison for setting fees.

 

Contrary to those who call hams users, according to Part 97, radio amateurs are providers of a public service, like police officers or firefighters.

Since Amateur Radio is a noncommercial public service, it should be in the same category as police and fire services in Section 8 of the NPRM.

So, that's two valid arguments against filing fees.

 

newer laws are absolutely allowed to supercede previous laws. in many cases this is how progress is made!

 

lol. a nice idea, but largely not actually true.

 

this is, pretty much, a guarantee that amateur radio will be nearly dead in ten years in the united states.

 

Well...though I no longer care to argue about what you said when, I still think that the FCC’s rationale for the applying the administrative fees is correct. So it looks like we disagree about that.

 

I don't see how a fee of this amount will detract new operators of any age. Every hobby has a buy-in amount. Maybe radio manufacturers would be smart to lower their prices to a more reasonable amount and that will free up user money for fees. That's an issue our group has a better chance of winning, disrupt the supply and demand chain. Make the equipment affordable and you'll likely draw in more new and current participants to buy new equipment.

 

If you look, historically, when the numbers of young people joined the ranks, there is a high correlation with zero-cost entry on the license.

No doubt some costs should be sought, but penalizing the younger folks is a formula for extinction, IMO

Anyway, my thoughts.

73
Chip W1YW

 

Don't you mean at a 60-90% PROFIT from the taxpayers' expenditures? I doubt very much that a private company would lower the fees. In fact, I would wager that they would increase the fees in order to increase profits. I'm sure the CEO would appropriate himself a multi-million dollar retirement plan (golden parachute) and the books will be 'cooked' so that their income tax liability will work out to ZERO. And, if you think the service is crappy now...

Sometimes privatization’s promises vastly exceed its results....

Dan WQ4G

 

Yes, they can do better... Instead of $50 every ten years you'll have to pay $50 per year. Private companies are about PROFIT. And, if there is no competition you can imagine what will happen...

Dan WQ4G

 

So you base your premise that, "There [is] a myth that Amateur Radio provides Emergency Communications" on a ship wreck that happened a hundred years ago?

You (and others with similar philosophies) are not considering all the possible scenarios...

Dan WQ4G

 

60-90%? What's your experience in service design (which includes determining customer-facing costs and the resulting "profit")?

My day job is service design and GRC in the IT security field. Basically some company releases an RFP for some IT security service (or suite of services) and my company decides to respond. It comes down to folks in my area to work with the sales pukes to develop a response and ensure it will be achievable and profitable for the company (I'm paraphrasing here because you wouldn't really be interested in how the sausage is made). Ultimately I get to review the financials for that opportunity and what we expect to earn absent any unforeseen issues (part of my job is to "predict" such issues in the form of risks and mitigate through a variety of means including adding contingency costs to the opportunity). At least in my line of work a single opportunity will result in 15-45% EBITDA (below 15% requires SLT approval, but above 45% raises eyebrows and may result in a challenge to lower price for competitive reasons). Mostly down around 15%. Other industries can be even tighter (IIRC, restaurants are around 5%). So, the idea that a company will be earning 60-90% is a bit unrealistic.

Chris