Cleaning out QEX magazines
amdx
About 140 issues. I don't know if they are all there but most are.
If anyone is interested in them, $10 plus shipping from 32405.
Email me if interested.
Mikek
dave
Not to pee on your Wheaties, but isn't QEX available online to ARRL
members? Great magazine. Way more meat than QST.
mikea
The _indices_ are; the articles seem always to be unavailable for
reasons that don't make sense.
--
Mike Andrews, W5EGO
mi...@mikea.ath.cx
Tired old sysadmin
Henry
> In rec.radio.amateur.homebrew dave <da...@dave.dave> wrote:
>
>>On 04/12/2011 02:13 PM, amdx wrote:
>>
>>>I have a 22 lb box of QEX magazines from June 1982 to 1994.
>>>About 140 issues. I don't know if they are all there but most are.
>>>If anyone is interested in them, $10 plus shipping from 32405.
>>> Email me if interested.
>>> Mikek
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Not to pee on your Wheaties, but isn't QEX available online to ARRL
>>members? Great magazine. Way more meat than QST.
>
>
> The _indices_ are; the articles seem always to be unavailable for
> reasons that don't make sense.
>
Why would they give their products away.
Henry WA0GOZ
John KD5YI
> In rec.radio.amateur.homebrew dave<da...@dave.dave> wrote:
>> On 04/12/2011 02:13 PM, amdx wrote:
>>> I have a 22 lb box of QEX magazines from June 1982 to 1994.
>>> About 140 issues. I don't know if they are all there but most are.
>>> If anyone is interested in them, $10 plus shipping from 32405.
>>> Email me if interested.
>>> Mikek
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Not to pee on your Wheaties, but isn't QEX available online to ARRL
>> members? Great magazine. Way more meat than QST.
>
> The _indices_ are; the articles seem always to be unavailable for
> reasons that don't make sense.
>
From the ARRL Web site itself:
http://www.arrl.org/arrl-periodicals-archive-search
"About this database. This database contains an index of articles for
QST from 1915 to the present, QEX from 1981 to the present, Ham Radio
from 1968 to 1990 and NCJ from 1973 to the present. (Note: Beginning in
1998, each issue of QEX covers two months. This index shows the first
month. For example, the index shows the January/February 1998 issue of
QEX as Jan 1998 QEX.)"
So, the index covers anything for which I'd be interested. But I am more
interested in obtaining past articles. Then there is this:
"QST Archive for Members Only - ARRL Members can access the QST magazine
archive online, from December 1915 through December 2007."
Also:
"ARRL Periodicals on CD-ROM - Recent volumes of QST magazine and back
issues of QEX, NCJ and Ham Radio magazines are available on CD-ROM."
I guess this means that, if you want to get articles later than 2007,
then you must buy the CD.
Thanks for spurring my research on this. Now I will re-evaluate the
importance of remaining a member.
John
dave
I give them money to fight BPL. The rest is ad-supported gravy.
John KD5YI
I kinda thought that was what I was doing by being a member.
I've been paying:
ARRL membership $39
QEX for members $24
------
Total $63
If I drop my ARRL membership the cost would be:
ARRL membership $00
QEX non-member $36
--------
Total $36
Almost a 43% reduction in cost to get the cream of publications. Of
course, I'd be giving up QST. Somehow, that doesn't bother me too much.
John
Scott
>
> I kinda thought that was what I was doing by being a member.
>
> I've been paying:
>
> ARRL membership $39
> QEX for members $24
> ------
> Total $63
>
> If I drop my ARRL membership the cost would be:
>
> ARRL membership $00
> QEX non-member $36
> --------
> Total $36
>
> Almost a 43% reduction in cost to get the cream of publications. Of
> course, I'd be giving up QST. Somehow, that doesn't bother me too much.
>
> John
I re-joined ARRL a few years back after having let my membership lapse
because of what I considered a lack of technical articles in QST. I was
primarily a member to get QST. After my membership expired again, I got
boatloads of mailings from ARRL, begging me to come back and even
offering a choice of a book to get me to come back. I mailed back their
letters with a hand written note saying I wasn't interested. They asked
me why. I said QST isn't nearly technical enough for me anymore. They
suggested I get QEX. So I made a "counter-offer"...I asked them to
substitute QEX for QST. They basically laughed and said they couldn't
do that. Seems it would have saved them some money as QEX only comes
out 6 timers per year versus 12 for QST. So, now they get NO money from
me...
N0EDV
arthr...@webtv.net
>
> - Show quoted text -
That's what libraries were invented for : long time ago . And free .
Joe from Kokomo
> I've been paying:
>
> ARRL membership $39
> QEX for members $24
> ------
> Total $63
>
> If I drop my ARRL membership the cost would be:
>
> ARRL membership $00
> QEX non-member $36
> --------
> Total $36
>
> Almost a 43% reduction in cost to get the cream of publications. Of
> course, I'd be giving up QST. Somehow, that doesn't bother me too much.
>
> John
I would respectfully suggest that you are missing the big picture. It's
not just the magazine(s).
Like them or not, the ARRL is the ONLY organization that supports ham
radio on a national level, going to bat for us before Congress and the FCC.
73,
Joe
Joe from Kokomo
> I re-joined ARRL a few years back after having let my membership lapse
> because of what I considered a lack of technical articles in QST. I was
> primarily a member to get QST. After my membership expired again, I got
> boatloads of mailings from ARRL, begging me to come back and even
> offering a choice of a book to get me to come back. I mailed back their
> letters with a hand written note saying I wasn't interested. They asked
> me why. I said QST isn't nearly technical enough for me anymore. They
> suggested I get QEX. So I made a "counter-offer"...I asked them to
> substitute QEX for QST. They basically laughed and said they couldn't do
> that. Seems it would have saved them some money as QEX only comes out 6
> timers per year versus 12 for QST. So, now they get NO money from me...
>
> N0EDV
I would respectfully suggest that you are missing the big picture. It's
atec77
about 1/3 or less , having really bad representation which is expensive
is worse than having none at all
--
X-No-Archive: Yes
dave
I like the little ads in back. It's interesting how they market some of
those radios. It reminds me of Sansui stereos.
dave
>
> I re-joined ARRL a few years back after having let my membership lapse
> because of what I considered a lack of technical articles in QST. I was
> primarily a member to get QST. After my membership expired again, I got
> boatloads of mailings from ARRL, begging me to come back and even
> offering a choice of a book to get me to come back. I mailed back their
> letters with a hand written note saying I wasn't interested. They asked
> me why. I said QST isn't nearly technical enough for me anymore. They
> suggested I get QEX. So I made a "counter-offer"...I asked them to
> substitute QEX for QST. They basically laughed and said they couldn't do
> that. Seems it would have saved them some money as QEX only comes out 6
> timers per year versus 12 for QST. So, now they get NO money from me...
>
> N0EDV
QST is about the ads. QEX appeals to people who are pretty immune to ads.
John KD5YI
> On 4/13/2011 9:01 PM, John KD5YI wrote:
>
>> I've been paying:
>>
>> ARRL membership $39
>> QEX for members $24
>> ------
>> Total $63
>>
>> If I drop my ARRL membership the cost would be:
>>
>> ARRL membership $00
>> QEX non-member $36
>> --------
>> Total $36
>>
>> Almost a 43% reduction in cost to get the cream of publications. Of
>> course, I'd be giving up QST. Somehow, that doesn't bother me too much.
>>
>> John
>
> I would respectfully suggest that you are missing the big picture. It's
> not just the magazine(s).
Well, maybe. I think that the big picture depends on the desires of the
observer.
> Like them or not, the ARRL is the ONLY organization that supports ham
> radio on a national level, going to bat for us before Congress and the FCC.
>
> 73,
> Joe
It is not that I do not like the ARRL. I've been a member for many years.
But, just being a member doesn't pay for that support. Notice from the
cost of membership shown on the ARRL site that only $8 per year is left
over after paying for QST. I'd bet that that $8 barely pays them to
maintain their records and Web site. What they apparently depend on for
money to represent us in Washington is donations. Along with volunteers,
perhaps.
So, does this mean that those of us who do not send in donations are
missing the big picture?
73,
John
John KD5YI
Well, I overlooked the revenue generated by ads in QST. It is probably
true that a greater membership means a greater magazine circulation
which means ads can garner more because they reach a greater audience.
I just wanted that on record to show I am not advocating discontinuing
membership.
73,
John
Scott
Yes, I understand that very well. However, they should have more money
to spend to fight for ham radio if they would let me substitute the 6
issues per year of QEX versus the 12 issues of QST.
N0EDV
tom
I'm basing this opinion on the ARRL budgets that were published in QST
about 20 years ago. They currently (still) claim they are there for
mainly 2 things, protecting our rights and privileges as operators and
adding new operators through education and other methods. Unless they
have gotten rid of all the bits they used to have that they didn't need,
they are still spending between 2 and 5% of the money they collect on
what's supposed to be the main goal.
Where does all the rest go? Read the budgets if they still make them
available.
Charlatans then, are they now? I don't know. And don't care. They
lost me.
tom
K0TAR
Gaius
@taring.org says...
>
> I'm basing this opinion on the ARRL budgets that were published in QST
> about 20 years ago. They currently (still) claim they are there for
> mainly 2 things, protecting our rights and privileges as operators and
> adding new operators through education and other methods. Unless they
> have gotten rid of all the bits they used to have that they didn't need,
> they are still spending between 2 and 5% of the money they collect on
> what's supposed to be the main goal.
>
> Where does all the rest go? Read the budgets if they still make them
> available.
>
> Charlatans then, are they now? I don't know. And don't care. They
> lost me.
>
> tom
> K0TAR
Pretty well identical with the UK situation. The RSGB have lost many,
many members for these reasons - including me.
Joe from Kokomo
> On 4/14/2011 5:18 PM, Scott wrote:
>> On 4-14-2011 12:51, Joe from Kokomo wrote:
>>>
>>> I would respectfully suggest that you are missing the big picture. It's
>>> not just the magazine(s).
>>>
>>> Like them or not, the ARRL is the ONLY organization that supports ham
>>> radio on a national level, going to bat for us before Congress and the
>>> FCC.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>> Joe
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I understand that very well. However, they should have more money
>> to spend to fight for ham radio if they would let me substitute the 6
>> issues per year of QEX versus the 12 issues of QST.
>>
>> N0EDV
On 4/14/2011 9:47 PM, tom wrote:
> I'm basing this opinion on the ARRL budgets that were published in QST
> about 20 years ago. They currently (still) claim they are there for
> mainly 2 things, protecting our rights and privileges as operators and
> adding new operators through education and other methods. Unless they
> have gotten rid of all the bits they used to have that they didn't need,
> they are still spending between 2 and 5% of the money they collect on
> what's supposed to be the main goal.
>
> Where does all the rest go? Read the budgets if they still make them
> available.
>
> Charlatans then, are they now? I don't know. And don't care. They lost me.
>
> tom
> K0TAR
tom, just my personal opinion, but too bad you left the ARRL and too bad
you don't care.
I don't know about your "2 to 5%" figure, but even if it is true, it's
exactly 2 to 5% more than any other organization is spending to go to
bat for ham radio...and IMHO, we NEED (and should support) a national
organization.
73,
Joe
Scott
>
> tom, just my personal opinion, but too bad you left the ARRL and too bad
> you don't care.
>
> I don't know about your "2 to 5%" figure, but even if it is true, it's
> exactly 2 to 5% more than any other organization is spending to go to
> bat for ham radio...and IMHO, we NEED (and should support) a national
> organization.
>
> 73,
> Joe
Why? If every ham just wrote to their elected officials (for the cost
of a stamp, or free by email), they would get the message just as well,
if not better than, if they got 1 letter or a personal visit from the
ARRL "lobbyist".
Joe from Kokomo
> On 4-15-2011 12:27, Joe from Kokomo wrote:
>
>>
>> tom, just my personal opinion, but too bad you left the ARRL and too bad
>> you don't care.
>>
>> I don't know about your "2 to 5%" figure, but even if it is true, it's
>> exactly 2 to 5% more than any other organization is spending to go to
>> bat for ham radio...and IMHO, we NEED (and should support) a national
>> organization.
>>
>> 73,
>> Joe
On 4/15/2011 6:41 PM, Scott wrote:
> Why? If every ham just wrote to their elected officials (for the cost of
> a stamp, or free by email), they would get the message just as well, if
> not better than, if they got 1 letter or a personal visit from the ARRL
> "lobbyist".
Just my personal opinion, but I believe it is quite naive to think that
if "every ham just wrote". Extremely unlikely...and oh, if not the ARRL,
just who do you think is going to tell the hams to write and what to
write about?
Finally, it's quite naive to think that a national lobbying organization
is not helpful -- just look at how successful the NRA is.
Kenneth Scharf
now the 'back bone' of the system that handles testing for ham licenses.
Without them it would be almost impossible to find where you can
locally take the test to apply for or upgrade your ham ticket. The ARRL
also publishes most of the test guide material (though I would be
surprised if it wasn't also available on line). Finally they have a
good line of excellent technical publications on radio and electronics
technology.
Also they DO offer membership without QST, for additional members of a
family. Maybe the price of that will give you an idea of what they
think the membership itself is worth.
John KD5YI
Yes, and the blind can get a membership without QST for $8, same as a
family member without QST. That was where I got my number from in
another post in this thread.
Again, I am not suggesting anyone give up their membership in the ARRL.
tom
>
> tom, just my personal opinion, but too bad you left the ARRL and too bad
> you don't care.
>
> I don't know about your "2 to 5%" figure, but even if it is true, it's
> exactly 2 to 5% more than any other organization is spending to go to
> bat for ham radio...and IMHO, we NEED (and should support) a national
> organization.
>
> 73,
> Joe
The ARRL seems to have little to do with the most important part of
getting new hams, licensing.
The National VEC page, http://www.ncvec.org, apparently doesn't even
acknowledge the ARRL.
You have to search the site and get to Question Pool 3 to find the first
hint of the ARRL, and it's an email address for WY1O, who seems quite
dedicated and appears several more times. And he's all there is.
So much for making new hams.
tom
K0TAR
Scott
> On 4/15/2011 6:41 PM, Scott wrote:
>
>> Why? If every ham just wrote to their elected officials (for the cost of
>> a stamp, or free by email), they would get the message just as well, if
>> not better than, if they got 1 letter or a personal visit from the ARRL
>> "lobbyist".
>
> Just my personal opinion, but I believe it is quite naive to think that
> if "every ham just wrote". Extremely unlikely...and oh, if not the ARRL,
> just who do you think is going to tell the hams to write and what to
> write about?
Well, if hams won't take any initiative to write their Congressmen, then
they probably don't give two craps enough to really care if we lose
bandwidth. All proposed NPRMs are published in the Federal Register and
a simple search on their website for "FCC" will list them.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/multidb.cgi
>
> Finally, it's quite naive to think that a national lobbying organization
> is not helpful -- just look at how successful the NRA is.
So, the ARRL is donating how much to political parties?
The NRA has donated a bit over $18 million from 1989-2010. They were
number 39 of the top 140 donors...
39 National Rifle Assn $18,209,746 17%(To Dems) 82% (To Repubs)
THAT'S probably why they are so successful. Money talks, BS Walks...
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php
Didn't see the ARRL in the top 140. Searched and didn't find them on
the list at all. #140 donated about $4.7 million over the same period.
If the ARRL is so successful at lobbying, why did BPL go through even
though they begged members to send more money to fight against it and
lost the battle anyway? Remember when the 13cm band used to be
2300-2450 MHz? I do. Remember when the 1.25M band used to be 220-225
MHz. I do. Remember when a lot of foreign countries had no code
requirement for HF and we did? I do.
I'm not saying they aren't worth something, but why won't they give a
guy a choice about which magazine he wants with his membership?
Probably because QEX doesn't have so many ads as QST and they want the
advertisers to get more bang for their buck (understandably, since they
can charge more for ad space based on the number of magazine "subscribers")
Scott
> All of you are also forgetting that the ARRL (for better or worse) is
> now the 'back bone' of the system that handles testing for ham licenses.
> Without them it would be almost impossible to find where you can locally
> take the test to apply for or upgrade your ham ticket.
Don't forget W5YI as a VEC. That's who I'm affiliated with, although
I'm not active with any VEC at present. They list VEs by state, so you
can find a local examiner.
http://www.w5yi.org/exam_locations_ama.php
The ARRL also
> publishes most of the test guide material (though I would be surprised
> if it wasn't also available on line). Finally they have a good line of
> excellent technical publications on radio and electronics technology.
Yes, so I would almost say they are more in the publishing business than
the lobbying business.
>
> Also they DO offer membership without QST, for additional members of a
> family. Maybe the price of that will give you an idea of what they think
> the membership itself is worth.
So, can I just pay for membership and skip QST?
I believe they are required by the IRS to set a "value" on membership if
they are a non-profit. They are a non-profit, aren't they?
Joe from Kokomo
> On 4/15/2011 7:27 AM, Joe from Kokomo wrote:
>>
>> tom, just my personal opinion, but too bad you left the ARRL and too bad
>> you don't care.
>>
>> I don't know about your "2 to 5%" figure, but even if it is true, it's
>> exactly 2 to 5% more than any other organization is spending to go to
>> bat for ham radio...and IMHO, we NEED (and should support) a national
>> organization.
>>
>> 73,
>> Joe
On 4/15/2011 9:47 PM, tom wrote:
> The ARRL seems to have little to do with the most important part of
> getting new hams, licensing.
Huh? It's really not clear what you are saying. Have you visited the
ARRL web site?
Here are some of the sections they have listed relating to developing
new hams under the "Licensing, Education & Training" tab:
*FCC License Info & Forms
ARRL can provide helpful FCC information about licensing
requirements, forms, fees and regulations.
*Getting Licensed
Get the information you need to get started: find a class or
study materials and prepare for your licensing exam. Already licensed?
Take the next step and upgrade.
*Volunteer Examiner Coordinator
The ARRL Volunteer Examiner Coordinator (VEC) offers resources
for finding an exam session, becoming a volunteer examiner and VE Team
support.
*Volunteer Instructors/Mentors
*ARRL Courses & Training
ARRL training materials and online classes have been developed to
help you learn at your own pace.
*FCC License Info & Forms
ARRL can provide helpful FCC information about licensing
requirements, forms, fees and regulations.
*Get on the Air
You've got your license, now what? Find resources to help you set
up your first station, get on the air and have fun! Learn More
Volunteer opportunities, recruitment and unique ways to support
Amateur Radio advocacy.
o Amateur Radio in the Classroom
This sure seems like a lot of stuff for a group that you claim is not
supposed to be interested in beginners.
> The National VEC page, http://www.ncvec.org, apparently doesn't even
> acknowledge the ARRL.
Again, huh? This site is "unto themselves". They don't seem to
acknowledge ANY group except themselves. Sorry, but IMHO, a totally
bogus point.
> So much for making new hams.
One more time...Huh?
They DO have a VE program (I AM one), they have an Educational program
to bring ham radio to kids in the class room, they set up space station
contacts for kids in classrooms, they have a Volunteer Instructor
program to teach people how to be instructors for training new hams,
they have volunteer mentors, almost every article in QST has a
"Hamspeak" section to explain unique ham terms to beginners.
Finally, what makes you think they don't want new hams? It would be in
their best interest and longevity to have more new hams. Why would they
shoot themselves in the foot by not wanting new hams?
The only thing that IS clear to me is that you have not read QST in a
long time, have not been to their web site in a long time and seem to
have a real grudge against them for whatever reason (certainly your
prerogative). But you DO demonstrably have your facts wrong about them
doing nothing to encourage new hams.
I would respectfully suggest that you visit their site, arrl.org, and at
the main page choose the "Licensing, Education and Training" tab to see
just how much they ARE doing to cultivate new hams. (Admittedly a tough
job in the Internet Age, but contrary to what you are saying, they ARE
trying).
73,
Joe
raypsi
> I have a 22 lb box of QEX magazines from June 1982 to 1994.
> About 140 issues. I don't know if they are all there but most are.
> If anyone is interested in them, $10 plus shipping from 32405.
> Email me if interested.
> Mikek
Hey OM:
wtf we going to do now they not going to be making Japanese radios'
anymore?
73
den8zu
raypsi
Those jap radio's sure will be hot
73 de n8zu
raypsi
And the radio's that aint hot will be hotter,
de n8zu
John KD5YI
QEX is a magazine. They never made radios, Japanese or otherwise.
John
dave
> On 4-16-2011 00:40, Kenneth Scharf wrote:
>
>> All of you are also forgetting that the ARRL (for better or worse) is
>> now the 'back bone' of the system that handles testing for ham licenses.
>> Without them it would be almost impossible to find where you can locally
>> take the test to apply for or upgrade your ham ticket.
>
> Don't forget W5YI as a VEC. That's who I'm affiliated with, although I'm
> not active with any VEC at present. They list VEs by state, so you can
> find a local examiner.
> http://www.w5yi.org/exam_locations_ama.php
>
.
RHF
> On 4-16-2011 00:31, Joe from Kokomo wrote:
>
> > On 4/15/2011 6:41 PM, Scott wrote:
>
> >> Why? If every ham just wrote to their elected officials (for the cost of
> >> a stamp, or free by email), they would get the message just as well, if
> >> not better than, if they got 1 letter or a personal visit from the ARRL
> >> "lobbyist".
>
> > Just my personal opinion, but I believe it is quite naive to think that
> > if "every ham just wrote". Extremely unlikely...and oh, if not the ARRL,
> > just who do you think is going to tell the hams to write and what to
> > write about?
>
> Well, if hams won't take any initiative to write their Congressmen, then
> they probably don't give two craps enough to really care if we lose
> bandwidth. All proposed NPRMs are published in the Federal Register and
>
>
>
> > Finally, it's quite naive to think that a national lobbying organization
> > is not helpful -- just look at how successful the NRA is.
>
> So, the ARRL is donating how much to political parties?
>
> The NRA has donated a bit over $18 million from 1989-2010. They were
> number 39 of the top 140 donors...
> 39 National Rifle Assn $18,209,746 17%(To Dems) 82% (To Repubs)
> THAT'S probably why they are so successful. Money talks, BS Walks...
>
> http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php
>
> Didn't see the ARRL in the top 140. Searched and didn't find them on
> the list at all. #140 donated about $4.7 million over the same period.
>
> If the ARRL is so successful at lobbying, why did BPL go through even
> though they begged members to send more money to fight against it and
> lost the battle anyway? Remember when the 13cm band used to be
> 2300-2450 MHz? I do. Remember when the 1.25M band used to be 220-225
> MHz. I do. Remember when a lot of foreign countries had no code
> requirement for HF and we did? I do.
>
> I'm not saying they aren't worth something, but why won't they give a
> guy a choice about which magazine he wants with his membership?
> Probably because QEX doesn't have so many ads as QST and they want the
> advertisers to get more bang for their buck (understandably, since they
> can charge more for ad space based on the number of magazine "subscribers")
*IF* The ARRL want to have a real "Voice" at the Table
in Congress and at the FCC :Then they have to be as
'smart' as the other "Players" in the Washington, DC
Political 'Action' {Power} Game.
Look At Success : Look at the NRA Political Victory
Fund (NRA-PVF) : http://www.nrapvf.org/
You have and build your 'basic' ARRL Membership
-roughly- 155,000 ARRL Members
http://www.arrl.org/membership
+ Plus you have to have and build a supporting
{Independent} "Voice of Amateur Radio" PAC Fund
The ARRL has enough Members who are Lawyers
set-up and make a "Voice of Amateur Radio" PAC
Fund Do-Able and Work-Able -so- Just Do It !
Encourage Each ARRL Member to make a
Matching {Voluntary} Contribution to the
"Voice of Amateur Radio" [VoAR] PAC Fund
-so- Take the 155,000 ARRL Members
-by- $5 = $775,000 VoAR-PAC Fund : Figure about
20% for a Part-Time Lobbyist and leaves around
$1000 in 'political' contributions per Member of Congress
-by- $10 = $1,555,000 VoAR-PAC Fund : Figure about
20% for a Part-Time Lobbyist and leaves around $2000
in 'political' contributions per Member of Congress
? Is Your Amateur [Ham] Radio "Hobby" Worth an
Extra $5 to $10 per Year To You For A Seat At The
Table of Congress and the FCC in Washington, DC ?
Promote the "Voice of Amateur Radio" PAC Fund
to the American Public and the Corporate World
Git Them To Become Sponsors and Underwriters
of the "Voice of Amateur Radio" PAC Fund too.
Then Use the "Voice of Amateur Radio" PAC Fund
Money to Lobby Congress and the FCC to ensure
Fairness and Equal Treatment for Amateur Radio
in Congress and Before the FCC.
It's All Legal & It's All Good - it's very smart too ~ RHF
.
REALITY CHECK : WITH ONLY 155,000 MEMBERS
THE ARRL HAS THREE GOALS :
1st : Build Membership and Increase the Number of Hams
-or-lose-spectrum-and-vanish-from-the-air-waves-
2nd : Build Membership and Increase the Number of Hams
-or-lose-spectrum-and-vanish-from-the-air-waves-
3rd : Build Membership and Increase the Number of Hams
-or-lose-spectrum-and-vanish-from-the-air-waves-
.
.
Bert Hyman
<acepilo...@bloomer.net> wrote:
> So, the ARRL is donating how much to political parties?
>
> The NRA has donated a bit over $18 million from 1989-2010. They were
> number 39 of the top 140 donors...
The NRA has spun off an entire "separate" organization to do that, since
the tax status of the basic organization doesn't allow it.
The NRA also has about 4 million members; how many does ARRL have?
http://www.arrl.org/political-campaigns-and-the-arrl
--
Bert Hyman W0RSB St. Paul, MN be...@iphouse.com
MTV
The ARRL DOES lobby in D.C. - Chwat & Co., Alexandria,VA
Plus direct HQ access to the FCC commissioners and staff.
Your contributions are regularly requested, plus the most effective,
personal letters to our representatives.
"non-profit" organizations do have restrictions on how money is spent,
e.g. no money to political campaigns, etc.
http://www.arrl.org/regulatory-advocacy
W5MTV
> It's All Legal& It's All Good - it's very smart too ~ RHF
RHF
- BPL has NOT "gone through."
-
- The ARRL DOES lobby in D.C. - Chwat & Co., Alexandria,VA
- Plus direct HQ access to the FCC commissioners and staff.
-
- Your contributions are regularly requested, plus the most effective,
- personal letters to our representatives.
-
- "non-profit" organizations do have restrictions on how money is
spent,
- e.g. no money to political campaigns, etc.
-
- http://www.arrl.org/regulatory-advocacy
-
- W5MTV
W5MTV --- Hence "Look At {Better} Success" :
Look at the NRA Political Victory
Fund (NRA-PVF) : http://www.nrapvf.org/
The Are More and Bigger Challenges To Amateur Radio Then
Just BPL : Such As Lose of RF Spectrum and Radio Bands.
http://www.arrl.org/files/file/Hambands_color.pdf
Simple Fact : With just 155,000 Members the ARRL
is a relatively 'small' Constituency Group for anyone
Congressman or Senator; and the US Congress as a
whole; as contrasted to :
* NRA ~ 4 Million Members [25X ARRL]
* AARP ~ 40 Million Members [250X ARRL]
Both of Which Claim To Be "Non-Profit" Organizations too...
Again I Simply Posse The Question :
Why-Not ? : A "Voice of Amateur Radio" PAC Fund !
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/15807e1c0a01df1c
.
.
bpnjensen
> On Apr 16, 3:46 pm, MTV <volzte...@comcast.net> wrote:
> - BPL has NOT "gone through."
> -
> - The ARRL DOES lobby in D.C. - Chwat & Co., Alexandria,VA
> - Plus direct HQ access to the FCC commissioners and staff.
> -
> - Your contributions are regularly requested, plus the most effective,
> - personal letters to our representatives.
> -
> - "non-profit" organizations do have restrictions on how money is
> spent,
> - e.g. no money to political campaigns, etc.
> -
> -
> - W5MTV
>
> W5MTV --- Hence "Look At {Better} Success" :
> Look at the NRA Political Victory
> Fund (NRA-PVF) :http://www.nrapvf.org/
>
> The Are More and Bigger Challenges To Amateur Radio Then
>
> Simple Fact : With just 155,000 Members the ARRL
> is a relatively 'small' Constituency Group for anyone
> Congressman or Senator; and the US Congress as a
> whole; as contrasted to :
> * NRA ~ 4 Million Members [25X ARRL]
> * AARP ~ 40 Million Members [250X ARRL]
> Both of Which Claim To Be "Non-Profit" Organizations too...
>
> Again I Simply Posse The Question :
What hams need are wealthy, high-profile members - like the NRA and
AARP. They may be small, but fascinating people, even if they are
stooges, can yield results.
atec77
> On Apr 16, 4:23 pm, RHF<rhf-newsgro...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>> On Apr 16, 3:46 pm, MTV<volzte...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> - BPL has NOT "gone through."
>> -
So you need a dozen younger Barry Goldwaters ?
or a 2nd organisation same as here because the incumbent are hopeless
--
X-No-Archive: Yes
dave
dave
> W5MTV --- Hence "Look At {Better} Success" :
> Look at the NRA Political Victory
> Fund (NRA-PVF) : http://www.nrapvf.org/
>
> The Are More and Bigger Challenges To Amateur Radio Then
> Just BPL : Such As Lose of RF Spectrum and Radio Bands.
> http://www.arrl.org/files/file/Hambands_color.pdf
>
.
dave
Speagle
*IF* The ARRL want to have a real "Voice" at the Table in Congress and at
the FCC :Then they have to be as 'smart' as the other "Players" in the
Washington, DC Political 'Action' {Power} Game.
Look At Success : Look at the NRA Political Victory Fund (NRA-PVF) :
http://www.nrapvf.org/
Government for sale to the highest bidder?... typical stupid teabagger
Teabagging republicans would sell their mother's SS to the rich while
living under a bridge burning the corpses of the children they fought so
hard not to abort and brag to each other about their perceived superior
intellect on their new 400Mhz cellphones.