K4CAP/K4YZ wrote: (about license fees)

I think fees in the $25/year range would not be inappropriate.

So let's take a poll:

Q1: If it cost $250 (plus testing fees) for a 10-year license would you
have become a new amateur radio operator?

--- or ---

Q2: If it had cost $250 to renew your license each time over your ham
radio career, would your license have lapsed by now?



Here are my responses:

Q1: Not a chance.

Q2: When raising a family, spending $250 on a discretionary avocational
item would have been out of the question.

73, de Hans, K0HB

Subject: License Fees --- a poll
From: "KØHB"
Date: 8/11/2004 9:25 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id: .net

K4CAP/K4YZ wrote: (about license fees)

I think fees in the $25/year range would not be inappropriate.

So let's take a poll:

Q1: If it cost $250 (plus testing fees) for a 10-year license would you
have become a new amateur radio operator?

--- or ---

Q2: If it had cost $250 to renew your license each time over your ham
radio career, would your license have lapsed by now?



Here are my responses:

Q1: Not a chance.

Q2: When raising a family, spending $250 on a discretionary avocational
item would have been out of the question.

If you had to drop it at once, maybe not. But WHO said "all at once"?

Part of the reason the FCC license structure is at "10 year" intervals now
is that it's too expensive otherwise. You get all those Amateurs chipping in
$25 a year for license every year and watch how fast they'd change THAT.

But there are very few people who CAN'T drop $25 right now for some
recreational purpose.

Most of us are spending about that much A MONTH for ISP service...More for
broadband...So P L E A S E don't try THAT tact, Master Chief. It's baseless.

Furthermore, one only need see that the manufacturers seem to be confident
enough in the financial solvency of the Amateur Radio program in order to do
R&D and subsequently manufacture radios that START a $1500, now as high as $12,
000 or more! And they are right.

Now...if people can afford alcohol, CD's, cigarettes, XBox's and other
"recreational" pursuits, they can also manage to prioritize $25/year for
Amateur Radio if that's what they want to do.

And if THAT is not good enough for you, Hans, we'll get Congress to allow
prorated license fees based on their tax returns.

Or is there some other argument you'd care to pursue?

Steve, K4YZ

"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote


Or is there some other argument you'd care to pursue?


I initiated a poll. You may feel free to answer the questions at your
convenience. If you want an argument, contact Len or Brian.

73, de Hans, K0HB

Subject: License Fees --- a poll
From: "KØHB"
Date: 8/11/2004 10:02 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id: .net


"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote


Or is there some other argument you'd care to pursue?


I initiated a poll. You may feel free to answer the questions at your
convenience. If you want an argument, contact Len or Brian.

But your poll (and comments in other replies in various threads this week)
were in direct response to and in contrast to my suggestion FOR license fees.

Your "poll" was worded in such a way as to elicit a "bleeding heart" reply
over necessary household expenses as opposed to paying for "dsicretionary
avocation" expenses. If that wasn't trying to "pad" the results, I don't know
what was...

Perhaps you'd care to exercise some of your claimed education and reword
your "poll" in such a way so as to elicit more valid responses without being
confrontational?


Steve, K4YZ

"KØHB" ) writes:
K4CAP/K4YZ wrote: (about license fees)

I think fees in the $25/year range would not be inappropriate.

So let's take a poll:

Q1: If it cost $250 (plus testing fees) for a 10-year license would you
have become a new amateur radio operator?

--- or ---

Q2: If it had cost $250 to renew your license each time over your ham
radio career, would your license have lapsed by now?



Here are my responses:

Q1: Not a chance.

Q2: When raising a family, spending $250 on a discretionary avocational
item would have been out of the question.

73, de Hans, K0HB

$250 does seem like a lot of money.

But then, the issue is that one is expected to pay it in a lump.

As I said, we had an annual license fee here in Canada up to 2000,
and it was just part of the cost. But if it was that you paid
once every ten years, I think it would affect things, maybe dramatically.

It's cheaper to require a renewal only every ten years, but that would
then require a lump sum, that might be a difficulty to some or many.
Of course, an annual fee paid annually would offset the cost of
an annual renewal.

Of course, an annual renewal has other benefits. Ten years seems a long
time, and it doesn't allow for keeping track of the hams. When they dropped
the license fee for hams here in Canada in 2000, licenses became lifetime.
Not only are we not paying a fee once a year, but even that level of
interaction between the ham and the regulatory body has disappeared. I'm
not sure that's a good thing.

Michael VE2BVW

I wrote:

If you want an argument, contact Len or Brian.

"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote back:

But ...............

PLONK

"KØHB" wrote in message hlink.net...

So let's take a poll:

Q1: If it cost $250 (plus testing fees) for a 10-year license would you
have become a new amateur radio operator?

A1: Not at the time I did (age 13, 1967). Maybe not at all.

Even if you adjust for inflation, it was a lot of money for me back
then.
Today I'd spring for it.

In the late '60s and early '70s I could (and did) build a pretty good
station for less than $50. CW, of course, but capable of worldwide
communication.

--- or ---

Q2: If it had cost $250 to renew your license each time over your ham
radio career, would your license have lapsed by now?

A2: No. By the time I was 23, I would have spent $250 for a ten-year
license. But that question is somewhat academic because without a
license in the first place, renewal would not matter. While coming up
with $250 in one lump would be difficult, I would simply have saved up
for it.

--

There's a bit of marketing psych going on here, of course. Asking
somebody to cough up seven cents a day or forty-nine cents a week
isn't the same thing as asking them to pay $25 a year. And asking them
to pay $25 a year isn't the same thing as asking them to pay $250 for
ten years, payable up-front.

The smart marketer knows that you need to make the initial payout
relatively small. That's why there was never any fee for a Novice
exam.

--

Hopefully, Hans will submit his proposal to FCC before it's too late.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Subject: License Fees --- a poll
From: "KØHB"
Date: 8/11/2004 10:29 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id: .net

I wrote:

If you want an argument, contact Len or Brian.

"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote back:

But ...............

PLONK

Coward....

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: License Fees --- a poll
From: Jack Twilley
Date: 8/11/2004 12:28 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

"K0HB" =3D=3D groupk0hb writes:

[... the poll ...]

K0HB So let's take a poll:

K0HB Q1: If it cost $250 (plus testing fees) for a 10-year license
K0HB would you have become a new amateur radio operator?

K0HB --- or ---

K0HB Q2: If it had cost $250 to renew your license each time over
K0HB your ham radio career, would your license have lapsed by now?

Of course not, but it's a straw man you've assembled. You're the only
one that I've noticed who has assumed that a license paid for with
fees would continue to have a term of ten years, and you're the only
one that I've noticed who has assumed that said license would require
payment in full.

Of course it was a strawman. Hans is as bad about being unifocal on his
own views as he accuses others of.

Hans' "poll" was along the lines of "Do you enjoy beating your wife"...

Here are some options that would have better assayed the demographic:

Would you be in favor of a yearly license fee for your Amateur Radio
license

(1) Yes

(2) No

If a yearly license fee were imposed, it would:

(1) Be no problem

(2) Be of little problem.

(3) Negatively impact my finances, but I'd work it out

(4) Would preclude me from Amateur Radio licensure

If you would be ameniable to a license fee, assuming a commensurate return
of service, what would you consider a reasonable fee?

(1) $1 to $5 a year

(2) $6 to $10 a year

(3) $11 to $15 a year

(4) $16 to $20 a year

Of course these options would not have provided Hans with the desired
"See, MY opinon was THE right one..."

I'd easily pay $50 every two years for my amateur radio license. If
my license required $250 for ten years, I'd budget for it. Now, if
the FCC wants to get the cash and continue to encourage new hams,
they'd make the first ten-year license free, with each subsequent
ten-year license renewal costing $250. In that case, you'd have to
budget for it if you wanted to renew it, but you wouldn't be dropping
a large chunk of change for an untested hobby.

That's an idea. Or another idea...Your operator license and simple
station license are free...(make 2 meters an automatic "gimme"), then each
additional band you want to operate is "extra".

Personally, I don't think "having a large number of licensed amateur
radio operators" is necessarily a good thing for amateur radio, at
least in the USA.

It's four times bigger than it was when I was first licensed, but it's
harder to strike up "routine" conversations on 2 meters anymore...Other than
being a rough guideline for the government to judge "occupancy" by, I don't
think it much matters...

I would personally prefer to see one-tenth as many
operators with each of those operators being active in at least one
common facet of amateur radio (contesting, rag-chewing, emergency
services, et cetera) and one uncommon facet of amateur radio (spread
spectrum, innovative antenna/rig design, alternative power, et
cetera). At least then the assertions that amateur radio operators
advance the state of the art of technology and contribute to the
health and safety of the community at large would have as much weight
as the assertions that hams are just a bunch of overweight balding
white men wasting valuable spectrum by discussing their colostomies
and deviated septums. Sure, the ARRL and other lobbyists would lose
"the power of numbers", but quality's worth more than quantity to me,
and I suspect the FCC might actually agree, given a moment's freedom
=2D From the political and economic overtones of every word that passes in
and out of their offices.

I think there should still be a requirement to have a minimum amount of
activity logged at each renewal period.

But those are just my personal opinions, of course.

And well stated.

73

Steve, K4YZ

"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote

We shouldn't expect other radio services to pay
our way any more than we'd tolerate having
to pay for thier operations!

No other radio service pays for our licenses. The FCC budget comes out
of the Treasury Dept's "General Fund", not from fees collected.

Good luck on this one now!

73, de Hans, K0HB