Taking your math at face value, let's assume it's $500 for the physical cards.
That figure makes the $120 seem less of a big deal. However....
It's not a question of total cost, but the distribution that becomes
staggering. How long have you been working on getting those cards? 5 years?
10? 20? When you gradually distribute the $500 across a significant span of
time, it becomes more palatable. That's how credit cards and banks operate.
But if you balance that against a 1-time expense of $120, that $120 is much
more painful.
My 2 cents...
Adam, KM7N
Sent from my iPhone
> On Apr 29, 2017, at 15:38, Ron Notarius W3WN <wn3vaw@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> Bill,
>
> I agree in principle that a quantity discount would be nice to have.
> Especially if you're submitting 1000 cards at $.12 each... Namely $120
>
> However, let's keep things in perspective. If you have to request the
> physical 1000 cards from the domestic and DX stations, how much will it cost
> you to obtain them?
>
> Let's say 400 of those cards are from US stations or US managers. So that's
> 400 letters sent at about $.49 each for first class postage... That's $196
> right there. Plus cost of cards and envelopes. And if you have an SASE in
> with each, that's $392 just for postage. Easily can be another $100 for
> envelopes and cards. So you're looking at about $500. For the domestic 400
> cards, we haven't even gotten into the other 600 DX cards.
>
> Suddenly, that $120 doesn't look too bad, does it?
>
> 73, ron w3wn
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> Bill Parry
> Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2017 9:37 AM
> To: lu5dx@lucg.com.ar; cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Encouraging Casual Participation in Contests
>
> I am a big supporter of LOTW and have used it extensively for award
> submission. The WPX award is not one of them. I would like to use it for
> the WPX but the cost is not acceptable. If I were to apply 1000 Prefixes at
> $.12 per LOTW QSL, the cost is just too much. Using LOTW for some awards
> just doesn't work financially, nor is sending 1,000 QSLs in for checking.
> There needs to be a different method of applying for these awards that
> require a lot of QSLs such as WPX.
>
> Bill W5VX
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> Martin LU5DX
> Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 10:43 AM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Encouraging Casual Participation in Contests
>
> Absolutely great idea.
>
> TBH, LoTW should become the standard solution for issuing credits for other
> awards. National and local Clubs, Groups, could take advantage of it.
>
> We've been talking about this type of solution with LU1FAM and LU5FF.
>
> The ARRL could charge a small fee to those institutions using their LoTW
> service to validate the credits.
>
> Win-Win solution!
>
> 73,
>
> Martin LU5DX
>
>
>> El 26/04/2017 a las 11:23 a.m., Pete Smith N4ZR escribió:
>> We all agree, I think, that casual participants are a critical part of
>> the total workable population in contests. I spent the first 40 years
>> of my contesting career working contests as a quick and relatively
>> easy source of award credits, and I suspect a large majority of the
>> stations in any contest are doing some variation on this.
>>
>> There is a reasonably simple and straight-forward way to encourage
>> more of this, potentially yielding more people for us to work. We
>> need interconnection between CQ and ARRL contest databases, so that
>> any contact that is in both stations' log in a given contest can be
>> claimed for ARRL and CQ award credit without going through the QSL
>> card process.
>>
>> I'm not underestimating the programming effort involved, I hope, but
>> surely some combination of volunteer and professional staff
>> involvement can get it done. It could start small - perhaps a pilot
>> involving the CQWW open log database and DXCC. Imagine the value added
>> to LOTW if it were the hub for this process, and the potential
>> increase in DXCC fees. Surely, this is a win-win proposition.
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|