Geoff makes good points. I recall speaking with a very close friend, he and
I got our Novice tickets at the same time, some 45+ years ago now. He said
"Bob, in 1960 did you ever think you'd spend $3,000 for a radio?". Well in
1960 I doubt that I made $3,000 the entire year. My my times have changed.
Yes It would be nice if an entry level radio was available for say something
under $500. Oh it wouldn't have all the whistles and bells, certainly not
160M - 6M coverage and maybe not all the modes, maybe just LSB, USB & CW.
And maybe available in a "semi-kit" form.
I don't see much equipment around except old used stuff that the average
teenager or young adult with a family would or could afford as an entry
point into ham radio. And there's not much that folks are willing to pass
on due to the value.
Just food for thoughts.
73
Bob, K4TAX
----- Original Message -----
From: "Geoffrey S. Mendelson" <gsm@mendelson.com>
To: <ken.d.brown@hawaiiantel.net>; "Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment"
<tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 2:48 AM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Ten-Tec Transceiver Survey
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 09:22:53PM -1000, Ken Brown wrote:
>> In the questions regarding how important is 6 meters, 2 meters, 70 cm, I
>> was thinking about a home station transceiver, and I answered
>> accordingly. For a home station, I don't really want DC to daylight in
>> one box.
>
> Just to stir things up a bit, I really wonder if anything below 20m
> and CW is really needed in a low end radio these days. With many new
> or at least new to HF hams out there, there is IMHO a demand for
> a low priced radio.
>
> Anything longer in wavelength than 20m is difficult to place an antenna
> in a small or apartment, and making someone pay for something they think
> they may never use is bad business.
>
> IMHO the lower bands and CW should be cheap options, so that most people
> are encouraged to buy them anyway, but if someone does not know how to
> copy or send morse code, they would feel better if they did not have to
> pay for it. Nor would they want to buy bands they could not use.
>
> I'm not trying to start a code/no code debate, I'm only discussing it in
> relation to specifying a minimal cost/feature radio that will sell well.
>
> I often read comments by hams who are not on the air because they can't
> afford a radio, and I think there would be a demand for a small, low
> power radio, 20m-10m, USB only, with a digital readout for under $300.
>
> Many of them have never copied a single dit over the air. So they don't
> see the need for CW, and I'd rather they buy a radio and get on the air
> than try to convince them.
>
> If I had the money to buy one and could get a general coverage receiver,
> AM reception, the lower bands and CW, I would probably buy one with the
> options, but if making those optional allows the radio to sell for
> $100-$200 less, it's worth it, IMHO.
>
> Geoff.
>
> --
> Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm@mendelson.com N3OWJ/4X1GM
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|