ARRL: Good, Bad or Inbetween?

[AK9R]

Could it be that maybe the majority of hams (by numbers at least) don't feel their interests are represented by the League?

Could it be that the majority of U.S.-licensed hams really aren't that active and therefore don't need an organization to represent their interests?

QST is an average magazine, take out the ads, you get a handful of articles. Some of them good, some of them not so. I'd say CQ is a much better ham mag.

QST is the only U.S.-published magazine conducting technical product reviews of amateur radio equipment. The equipment reviews in CQ are more user-interface oriented and they usually just quote the manufacturer's published specs without conducting any real testing.

All the books the league peddles aren't offered at a discount to members.

Not true. While there are no across-the-board book discounts for members, the ARRL Store routinely offers member-only discounts on select items. And, as a member, I receive regular emails with discount coupons.

One of the thing that doesn't sit well with me is how the League, IMO, took Federal grant money in 2003 to make training available...

The grant was for a specific amount of money. That money was used to offset the registration costs for specific courses. I know because I took one of the courses at no cost while the grant money was available. You assertion that the ARRL took the money and provided no benefit is false. When the grant money ran out, the courses went back to full cost. It takes money to develop, maintain, and offer training courses, even on-line ones.

So do we really need "the League" to represent us in this day and age?

Yes. While the FCC makes communications rules, Congress makes communications law. An individual is not likely to be able to do any lobbying in Congress. While the ARRL's lobbying efforts pale compared to other communications interests, it's better than nothing.

 

[Jimru]

The ARRL holds themselves out to to be "THE national resource for amateur radio"...yet why is it that only 160K of the over 700K of US hams are members? Could it be that maybe the majority of hams (by numbers at least) don't feel their interests are represented by the League? The numbers would certainly suggest it.

I don't feel I get anything for my money. Here's why: the ARRL is a "top heavy" organization. Too many chiefs, not enough indians. Lots of money in the kitty, but few benefits for members these days. QST is an average magazine, take out the ads, you get a handful of articles. Some of them good, some of them not so. I'd say CQ is a much better ham mag. All the books the league peddles aren't offered at a discount to members.

The whole representation of the amateur service. Hard to say the ARRL does a GOOD job when their isn't much to compare to. I'd say they've done their fair share of lobbying, but they hardly have the budget to do the real lobbying needed to make a dent, when going up against groups like the commercial wireless (CTIA/PCIA) types who spend the entire ARRL yearly budget in a week whining and dining.

One of the thing that doesn't sit well with me is how the League, IMO, took Federal grant money in 2003 to make training available, training that was intended under the terms of the grant, and charges for it. Slimy and sleazy. Those EMCOMM courses should be FREE. After all, WE taxpayers paid for them. But whatever. They got their little gubment grant like everyone else and squandered it.

In the past, we needed such a voice with the FCC. But thanks to the Internet and the FCC's Electronic Comment Filing System, everyone has a voice and they are all read into the record. So do we really need "the League" to represent us in this day and age?

IMO, the league does little to promote the amateur radio service and spends more time promoting itself. My experience over close to 30 years has left me with the impression it's a "good old boys" club and nothing else. Lots of meaningless titles handed out to people's buddies but nothing really gets done.

In 1987, when I was a novice- my aunt actually PAID for a membership for me in the ARRL. I never got it. I told her about it, she SHOWED ME the cancelled check. In January 1988, I called (back then long distance was expensive- especially during business hours) and inquired at Newington HQ. The lady acted uninterested, took my information, promised a call back. Never got one. Wrote a letter with a copy of my aunt's cancelled check. Never got a reply, or a membership, or QST. This was in February 1988. So maybe this left a bad taste in my mouth, duping a 12 year old out of $30.

So they don't get a check from me today. Maybe that will change when I feel I actually would benefit from being a member and they act like an organization that cares about the community and the amateur radio service and not just collecting dues. Meantime, the rest of us 540,000 of us non-members can do a fine job representing the amateur radio service on FCC and government issues using the ECFS, thoughtfully of course. No membership check needed to have a voice there.

Thanks for sharing! The more the merrier, I say.

73,
Jim

 

[gewecke]

W9RXR, stated;

"Could it be that the majority of U.S.-licensed hams really aren't that active and therefore don't need an organization to represent their interests?"

I think this is true to some degree depending on the region, but my interests have nothing to do with the arrl and likewise. WHY pay membership fees to a organization that holds no interest or benefit?
I am not a rag chewer or brass pounder, and have no interest in hf and that's mostly the type of op the arrl caters to.

73,
n9zas

 

[SCPD]

I'm responding to this thread, since coincidentally, I just received a "special offer" letter from ARRL to renew my membership.

QST is an average magazine, take out the ads, you get a handful of articles. Some of them good, some of them not so. All the books the league peddles aren't offered at a discount to members.

These were the two main reasons why I joined ARRL. The magazine and access to interesting reading material.

QST *use* to be a very good magazine and their reviews were top-notched. In the last few years, it's very clear that they are moved by politics and do not comment freely on their reviews. Their reviews are nothing more than company-written drivel.

Even some of their testing methods have been called out recently. They claim to be the "experts" and yet even their own people can't agree on certain technical aspects.

The bookstore is a joke. You can almost always find better discounts through Amazon or the internet.

I've decided not to renew my membership for now.

 

[Bazel]

I just heard of ARRL in this thread and checked out their website, I'm going to join. I don't care if they don't represent my personal interests perfectly get off track of my beliefs. One of our country's forefathers (can't remember which one) said if we don't all fight together we shall surely hang together. The point is an organization is more effective when it walks into a congress mans office when it has more members, those are votes to those guys.

Okay, so you don't like some of their actions, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO? nothing, because you are one vote and lost in the crowd. The USA is a republic not a democracy and when you get right down to it individuals only have as much voice as they have money. So, they need to band up in imperfect organizations that don't represent their interests perfectly, but run down the right track most of the time.

 

[Jimru]

I'm responding to this thread, since coincidentally, I just received a "special offer" letter from ARRL to renew my membership.



These were the two main reasons why I joined ARRL. The magazine and access to interesting reading material.

QST *use* to be a very good magazine and their reviews were top-notched. In the last few years, it's very clear that they are moved by politics and do not comment freely on their reviews. Their reviews are nothing more than company-written drivel.

Even some of their testing methods have been called out recently. They claim to be the "experts" and yet even their own people can't agree on certain technical aspects.

The bookstore is a joke. You can almost always find better discounts through Amazon or the internet.

I've decided not to renew my membership for now.

Do you have any thoughts one way or the other on the ARRL representing you and other hams nationwide?

 

[SCPD]

Do you have any thoughts one way or the other on the ARRL representing you and other hams nationwide?

Not really. Frankly Jim, I don't have time to follow any of what the ARRL does from a political standpoint. I am a HAM. So with that said, I still support the ARRL -- but I won't be "subscribing" to them.

 

[Jimru]

Not really. Frankly Jim, I don't have time to follow any of what the ARRL does from a political standpoint. I am a HAM. So with that said, I still support the ARRL -- but I won't be "subscribing" to them.

Hi Nick,

Just curious; when you say "support", do you mean with occasional contributions to one if their causes (education, spectrum defense), as a non-member, or do you mean something else?

Thanks for the post.

73,
Jim

 

[Jimru]

I just heard of ARRL in this thread and checked out their website, I'm going to join. I don't care if they don't represent my personal interests perfectly get off track of my beliefs. One of our country's forefathers (can't remember which one) said if we don't all fight together we shall surely hang together. The point is an organization is more effective when it walks into a congress mans office when it has more members, those are votes to those guys.

Okay, so you don't like some of their actions, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO? nothing, because you are one vote and lost in the crowd. The USA is a republic not a democracy and when you get right down to it individuals only have as much voice as they have money. So, they need to band up in imperfect organizations that don't represent their interests perfectly, but run down the right track most of the time.

You make a good argument here, Bazel, particularly considering that you had not heard of the ARRL before.

Thanks for joining the discussion!

73,
Jim

 

[N8OHU]

W9RXR, stated;

"Could it be that the majority of U.S.-licensed hams really aren't that active and therefore don't need an organization to represent their interests?"

I think this is true to some degree depending on the region, but my interests have nothing to do with the arrl and likewise. WHY pay membership fees to a organization that holds no interest or benefit?
I am not a rag chewer or brass pounder, and have no interest in hf and that's mostly the type of op the arrl caters to.

73,
n9zas

While that might seem true, being in ARES give me a somewhat different perspective; I have also been an ARRL member off and on since 1991 when I first got my ham license. The ARRL has three member magazines; QST, QEX and NCJ, each of which has a different focus. QST has the most generalized one, as it's the magazine most members choose to get. QEX, which is published 6 times a year, is more geared toward experimentation, and the NCJ is the one that is mostly focused on Contesting.

The commonly made complaint about QST having boring project articles is valid, at least to a point; if the only thing that is being submitted for publication is something ismilar to what they've published multiple times in the past, it's kind of hard for them to do anything else.

Matthew Pitts
N8OHU

 

[KB7MIB]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; U; en-US) Gecko/20081217 Vision-Browser/8.1 301x200 LG VN530)

I used to be a member. I also used to subscribe to CQ, CQ-VHF, Pop' Comm', and MT. Financial issues forced me to drop my membership/subscriptions. I'd probably renew if/when I have the disposable income again.

 

[KB7MIB]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; U; en-US) Gecko/20081217 Vision-Browser/8.1 301x200 LG VN530)

There was a short lived group attempting to challenge the ARRL's monopoly on representing US Hams many years ago. I even bought 1-2 of their magazines off the newsstand at HRO at the time. I don't recall the name of the group.

 

[Fast1eddie]

My license is current but I am inactive. Lost interest many years ago for many reasons. Even if I were to become active again, I would not join because of the cost. I am a NRA member and feel our second amendment rights are more important than ham radio. Everything costs money-too much money-and to me, that is more of a priority than the ARRL dues.

 

[DarkStarPDX]

When I first got my license I decided to become a member of the ARRL since I thought it would be a good way to find support when starting the hobby. Well, fast-forward a couple of years and I had a stack of magazines that were more than 50% advertisements and was pretty tired of how the ARRL kept writing to a "much older" generation of amateur, while leaving younger people like myself hanging...

I do understand that it is in their best interest to direct their energy to the largest membership, and if that is amateurs aged 50+ so be it.

Last November I decided to re-signup for my ARRL membership. The #1 factor was that QST was finally available digitally so I can export the pages of interest to a PDF file for later viewing on my Kindle or Nook without having to wade through everything else. Also, comparing the types of articles that they published in 2012, I found that many more interest the younger (digital) generation like myself.

For what it's worth, I've been emailing the ARRL for the last three weeks to get them to fix their RSS feed for the weekly ARRL Audio News podcast without any replies or changes in the feed, so I'll probably end up calling them up next week to find out why my membership is being spent on broken RSS feeds.

 

[MTS2000des]

Could it be that the majority of U.S.-licensed hams really aren't that active and therefore don't need an organization to represent their interests?



Yes. While the FCC makes communications rules, Congress makes communications law. An individual is not likely to be able to do any lobbying in Congress. While the ARRL's lobbying efforts pale compared to other communications interests, it's better than nothing.

You said it, the majority of us hams are not represented by the ARRL. You would think they would adjust their mission to get more members, younger members- but they seem to cater to the "Hi Hi OM" crowd. While this may be great for their short term health, long term are people like myself, people in their 30's (many new hams too)- and you leave a bad taste in my mouth, and I have no reason to write you a check.

We are in the Internet age. We can represent ourselves, the ECFS DOES get read and the comments left DO get made into NPRM's and clarifications, case in point was the recent clammoring (ironically by certain leaguers who felt that only THEY should have access to amateur radio) about hospital and EMA employees, who happen to be hams, using ham radio for training and emergency prepardness. The FCC DID read the many comments filed and acted appropriately. Again, the almightly ARRL was nowhere to be found on this issue.

As far as Congress, let's be serious: the ARRL budget is pennies in a fountain compared to the big dollars needed to carry any REAL weight in Washington DC.

To say that we should blindly support them because it is "all we have" is simply NOT true. There are plenty of other non-profits who use amateur radio as a community service tool, and do more to promote the amateur radio service in a positive light- such as the Baptist Relief Teams. Accepting the ARRL's mediocrity and self-importance isn't going to be a good thing for our service long term health.

The wave of new hams are younger, "doers", many of which are technically minded people who, from what I have seen, have a desire to serve their community and be a pro-active part of growing the amateur radio service and keeping it moving in the 21st century. I'm sorry but I honestly don't see the ARRL being that relevant in the future, not at least under it's current business model.

If they are interested in being around in 25 years, they need to come up with a real business plan to do it. And get people like me to join up, but blowing us off (like the poster before me with his RSS feed issue)- just reminds us who the almightly league isn't interested in serving us, but only itself. And how long will they be able to sustain that?

Oh and I'm sorry, but I disagree with you over those EMCOMM courses. They were NEVER offered free (as the grant was intended to provide) around here. Nevermind, FEMA IS-courses are more relevant, recognised by every EMA, government agencies and most employers (they can even count for college credit)- and are FREE OF CHARGE to anyone who wants them. COM-L is also great training. No league membership required either.

 

[AK9R]

Oh and I'm sorry, but I disagree with you over those EMCOMM courses. They were NEVER offered free (as the grant was intended to provide) around here.

The free courses were available nationwide and were widely publicized in ARRL publications.

From the ARRL Letter, July 19, 2002:

The ARRL will receive a $181,900 homeland security grant from the US government to train Amateur Radio operators in emergency communication. The League was among several dozen nonprofit organizations designated to receive some $10.3 million in federal money to boost homeland defense volunteer programs. The grant, from the Corporation for National and Community Service special volunteer program, will provide free ARRL Amateur Radio Emergency Communications Course training to 5200 volunteers nationwide, starting in 2003.

As it turned, out the ARRL was able to start offering the grant-subsidized courses earlier than they originally announced. From the ARRL Letter, November 1, 2002:

* ARRL Emergency Communications course registration: Registration opens Tuesday, November 5, at 4 PM Eastern Time (2100 UTC) for the Level I Emergency Communications course (EC-001). Registration remains open through the November 9-10 weekend or until all available seats have been filled--whichever comes first. Class begins Tuesday, November 19. Thanks to the federal homeland security grant from the Corporation for National and Community Service, the $45 registration fee paid upon enrollment will be reimbursed after successful completion of the course. During this registration period, approximately 200 seats are being offered to ARRL members on a first-come, first-served basis. To learn more, visit the ARRL Certification and Continuing Education Web page <http://www.arrl.org/cce> and the C-CE Links found there. For more information, contact Emergency Communications Course Manager Dan Miller, K3UFG, dmiller@arrl.org; 860-594-0340.

The CNCS grant-subsidized courses continued to be offered through the summer of 2005.

 

[Jimru]

The wave of new hams are younger, "doers", many of which are technically minded people who, from what I have seen, have a desire to serve their community and be a pro-active part of growing the amateur radio service and keeping it moving in the 21st century. I'm sorry but I honestly don't see the ARRL being that relevant in the future, not at least under it's current business model.

If they are interested in being around in 25 years, they need to come up with a real business plan to do it. And get people like me to join up, but blowing us off (like the poster before me with his RSS feed issue)- just reminds us who the almightly league isn't interested in serving us, but only itself. And how long will they be able to sustain that?

Hi and glad you have joined the discussion!

To your point (and others with similar complaints); perhaps running for office on a platform of actually changing things at the League, to more accurately represent a younger demographic, and to address the various points made here in this thread would be the thing to do.

After all, the ARRL is a membership organization and it's only as powerful as it's members.

When I was a "young Turk" agitating for change in my union local in NYC (this was about 25 years ago) we felt we were not being heard and after consulting with an organization that helped folks keep their unions democratic, we ran for various positions in the next election.

We lost, but not by all that much. Some things did change for the better (not all) because the incumbents saw how close they came to losing.

My point is: referring to the League strictly as "they" is ultimately giving "them" more power, as if things can't be changed, but they can.

Would it be easy? No. Would it take time and effort (and perhaps some money)? Yes, but that is how you change things in an organization like that.

Just a thought to throw into the ring for the discussion!

 

[zz0468]

The bigest single problem with the ARRL today is the non-member non-participants. It does no good to come to forums like these, and complain that they don't represent your interests if you don't make your interests known to them.

Some of you will (and have) said you're not "joiners". Well, then shut up. You have no right to complain. How many of you are on a first name basis with the section manager in your area? How many of you can and do send an e-mail or make a phone call to them when something comes up that gets you fired up. I do.

I'm not the ARRL's biggest fan, not by a long shot, but at least I know that my input is getting there, because I'll actually participate, not just grumble. And surprise surprise, sometimes they actually act on the input I (and others) have provided.

In the last few years, the ARRL has asked for, and received input on things like VHF/UHF band plans, and has enacted some based on west coast interests and practices. Maybe not such a great thing for east-coasters, but it indicates to me that if you talk to them, they'll at least throw your input into the hat with everyone else's.

It beats grumbling on RR saying no one represents your interests.

 

[MTS2000des]

The bigest single problem with the ARRL today is the non-member non-participants. It does no good to come to forums like these, and complain that they don't represent your interests if you don't make your interests known to them.

Some of you will (and have) said you're not "joiners". Well, then shut up. You have no right to complain. How many of you are on a first name basis with the section manager in your area? How many of you can and do send an e-mail or make a phone call to them when something comes up that gets you fired up. I do.



It beats grumbling on RR saying no one represents your interests.

Well did you read the posts? First off, if people want to complain, they can. Don't like it, just like a QSO on 20, use your VFO and act accordingly. No one is forcing you to read the complaints.

Join up? Why? (BTW, tried that in 1987/1988, sent money, never got a membership). Why would I want to try that again? Give away more money to an organization that clearly isn't interested in having me as a member? Why not send a check to the KKK while I'm at it. They don't represent me either.

I don't need the ARRL and their paper tiger titles of all chiefs and no indians to get my point to the FCC or government agencies. It's 2013, there's this great thing called the Internet. The ECFS was instrumental in effecting proper rule clarifications for use of ham radio by EMA employees. If anything, reading the comments, it were the old fart leaguers who were moaning and complaining that some evil gubment folks were gonna take away their precious sandbox. Yeah, that's a great attitude.

Kind of like the petitioning the FCC against new technologies like Sky Command- the ARRL certainly has advancing the art of radio communications technology at their heart. Where are they on P25, or DMR?
Silence speaks volumes. Oh I'm sure they'll tell me that MotoTRBO on ham radio is illegal...yawn. Send me an "OO" notice then.

 

[poppafred]

I got my novice license in 1990. I immediately joined the ARRL and enjoyed the QST subscription and became very active with a local affiliated club. By 1998, I was so burned out and bummed out by the petty politics locally, I basically shut everything down and left it off for 2 years. I have met several ARRL "chiefs" and I was not that impressed. At least I was not as impressed with them as they seemed to be with themselves.

It is a needed organiztion, flaws and all, but taking in the funds that they do, I see no need to give them more. Like all bureaucrats, they loose touch with their base and become arrogant. It is a human flaw.

I figure that if they protect their 160,000 members, watershed from their actions will protect me and I don't have to get involved with the politics I detest.