When I was in business I always had great ideas that would generate revenue
but lose money horribly. We do not know the overhead of running a
certificate program, nor the additional cost of running one more, two more,
etc.
My suspicion is that the general membership isn't anxious for warehousing
employees just to offer exciting new revenue streams like "WAS, AM Mode Tube
Only Transmitters", etc.
CEOs should know when to act, how to act and when not to act.
I trust the League knows their own business well enough that spawning
"designer certificates" doesn't make enough money to pursue. I am sure their
view that RTTY as a valuable digital mode hasn't diminished, but they do not
want a separate wing at HQ of modulation-specific certificate
administrators. There was a good reason to act as I am sure 90% of active
hams are regularly using PSK as opposed to a much lower percentage of those
using RTTY outside of contests.
While I have never, nor thing I will ever, submit a non-rtty qso for a
certificate, this just doesn't upset me. It sounds like we are just killing
time until September!
73
Neal
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Phil Cooper <pcooper@guernsey.net> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Whilst I agree that the RTTY DXCC ought to stay, as has already been said,
> many of us have a RTTY DXCC certificate, with RTTY printed on it, that was
> gained from a mix of the data modes.
> OK, we know that some of you have a true and real RTTY DXCC, but that is
> not
> really the point.
>
> I do tend to agree with Bill W6WRT, in that the ARRL is losing a potential
> revenue stream from other data awards, BUT, where do you start and finish?
> I can see the relevance of a PSK DXCC certificate, but do you then split
> that down into PSK31, PSK63, etc etc, and do you have one for each and
> every
> data mode, many of which are now pretty much obsolete and no longer used?
>
> If we are going to argue for a true RTTY DXCC, isn't it fair to other data
> modes users to cater for them too?
> Also, there are plenty of other PSK (as well as other data modes
> certificates) available from various sources, and maybe they suffice for
> the
> PSK (etc) enthusiasts?
> Also, if they did decide to do one for RTTY, and another for all other data
> modes, would the phone fraternity then decide they would like an AM
> certificate?
> Like I said, where do they stop?
>
> So, the question is: Are the ARRL really losing another revenue stream?
>
> Just my own views, and partly playing devil's advocate here, so no flames
> please!
>
> 73 all
>
> Phil GU0SUP
>
>
>
> ---
> avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
> Virus Database (VPS): 110804-0, 04/08/2011
> Tested on: 04/08/2011 18:08:40
> avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2011 AVAST Software.
> http://www.avast.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
--
Abroham Neal Software
www.abrohamnealsoftware.com
Work:(540) 645 5394
Mobile:(540) 645 8171
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|