If eQSL can do it with a flat fee of $5 for two years for unlimited award
apps, why not ARRL?
Maybe it costs more at ARRL, but I'm missing the obvious here...
I don't expect them to lower it that low, but sometimes I do an award and
it's $80 just in credit costs. C'mon!
I just did a WAZ award with CQ. $5 for the bronze membership (you can go
higher if you wish, I may do so) which lasts for 2 years. $12 to CQ for the
award, $6 if you're a subscriber.
Ria
N2RJ
On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 2:58 PM, Jim Preston <jpreston1@cox.net> wrote:
> Ron,
>
> It isn't a presumption. WPX is set up on LOTW, and the cost is 12 cents
> per QSO.
>
> I agree with a flat fee, but I'm thinking more along the lines of $5 or
> $10. Possibly charge 0.12 per QSO up to that maximum. The lower the fee,
> the more likely people will be to use the system. While I don't want the
> ARRL to lose money on LOTW, I think fees should be reasonable.
>
> To keep this contest related, a lrge number of my confirmed prefixes have
> been worked during contests.
>
>
> 73,
>
> Jim N6VH
>
>
> On 5/1/2017 4:55 AM, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote:
>
>> Well, that's just it, Mike.
>>
>>
>> The presumption in this particular subthread is that if WPX is ever
>> set up for LotW, the per confirmation fee will be the same as it
>> currently is for the ARRL awards. That's actually a heck of a
>> presumption.
>>
>>
>> If I were asked, which I have not been, I'd recommend a flat fee for
>> the basic award, rather than a per confirmation charge (on top of the
>> actual fees for WPX itself). Something reasonable -- it costs $$ to
>> run and maintain the LotW server, after all -- but not outrageous or
>> out of line. Would $25 be out of line, considering the alternative
>> of how much it would cost (even over a long period of time) to gather
>> the physical cards themselves?
>>
>>
>> W5VX may accuse me of missing the point, which of course is out of
>> context considering his PM to me. But I don't believe that I have.
>>
>>
>> The simple fact is, TANSTAAFL. Somewhere, someone has to pay the
>> bills. The ARRL can not continue to do so out of membership dues,
>> and it is not unreasonable to ask those applying for these awards to
>> cover some of the reasonable administrative costs. If & when other
>> awards are brought online, the same issue of covering those
>> administrative costs will still exist. We all wish it were
>> otherwise, and we could go back to the days when the costs were
>> hidden... but those days are long gone.
>>
>>
>> 73, ron w3wn
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> 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
|