Interesting Anytone Termn-8r info

[12dbsinad]

Any other manufacturer introduces a new model, and there is no question about the Part 90 TA.
Anytone does it, and it can't be legal. Something smells of ulterior motives.

I've been scratching my head since day one with all of these part 90 certified ham radios. Have you ever put a Baofeng on a spectrum analyzer? Talk about dirty. I thought this was a big no no in part 90.

Again, how are they able (all of them) to get part 90 certified with 5 khz deviation enabled? Anyone? Anytone? Bueller? How about the new guy? You must know...

 

[Observer411]

I'm starting to think one of my parrots is posting.

RAWWK! Prove it! Prove it! RAAWK!

Any other manufacturer introduces a new model, and there is no question about the Part 90 TA.
Anytone does it, and it can't be legal. Something smells of ulterior motives.

Very much agree; I would agree the FCC has lost their control and is slapping IDs everywhere - but there definitely seems to be ulterior motives going on here.

 

[Titan520]

Very much agree; I would agree the FCC has lost their control and is slapping IDs everywhere - but there definitely seems to be ulterior motives going on here.

Course there is. Cash, money, dollah, para, etc.

 

[KT0DD]

Man, It seems worrying has become a national pastime. Two way radios legal or not is such huge issue to some.

What about global climate change, fracking,, Hillary possibly becoming president, the doomsday asteroid or comet..? etc etc...ad nauseaum.

No matter what, some are going to tout the letter of the law while others look at the spirit/intent of the law. To me there's room for argument in the grey areas of the rules in many things. It depends on the individual situation.

Look at the 10 meter radio issue. It's been around for years, yet they are still legal to sell / own if type accepted, just not allowed to use on 11 meters. People do it anyway.

Unless Stalin / Hitler type absolute mandates come down from the FCC/Customs and Anytone / Baofeng / Wouxun owners will be shot on sight, these radios will still be sold and used in the U.S. regardless. There are
already hundreds of thousands of them out there. No one here can control it.

I think dirty Part 15 devices are more of a worry. Every mini-mart gas station / quick mart I pass is a huge RF interference generator. Big cities have dirty high power paging systems that whack most all ham HT's. New computer controlled cars are making HF almost unuseable mobile. We own a washer/dryer that is AWFUL to HF.

Yes Virginia...there is more to worry about than the TERMN-8R

 

[hotdjdave]

The burden of proof lies with the person making the challenge,...

This is true, in a court of law, the burden of proof lies upon the accuser (except for the "Yes means yes" law in CA).

 

[hotdjdave]

Course there is. Cash, money, dollah, para, etc.

That's what I am sayin'.

 

[rapidcharger]

The burden of proof lies with the person making the challenge, have you not heard: "Innocent until proven guilty")))

Yes. You're the one accusing me of libel.
The proof has come out. I have presented lots of it. You have countered with conjecture and assorted baloney. You cannot back up your claims.

(((You have made a claim it is not legal, in which it has been countered it is a 398UV which is listed on the application.)))

Show me. I didn't see that.

(((
The statement of calling buyers of the radios 'dumb' definitely inferred you thought little of them; thank you for clarifying that as equipment you do not disagree that they are good radios.)))

The buyers that were dumb were the ones that had the facts and chose to ignore them.

(((The multiple certificates were present as well during the purchase. Again the certificates were pulled dismissed on weak claims (previously discussed see prior posts); and they even mention the fact for re-application.)))

They were not dismissed because of weak claims. They were dismissed because they didn't conform with the rule parts.

(((Many of your 'facts' (by your definition, a substitution of vocabulary would better be 'allegations') have been disproved - from the Part 90 "facts" to your thought process on how a re-application works. )))

I'll take that to mean you still don't have any proof.

(((It is not illegal to do business "un-licensed". In fact this claim is another one of your "facts". It is a guarantee if AnyTone Tech is doing business in the United States that Amazon.com has their tax information in order to report a 1099.)))

I can't think of anywhere that you can do business without a license. Even if it's just a local occupational tax license.

(((Businesses can operate as a sole proprietorship, in which any revenue is reported on the personal income tax form.)))

And even with sole props, you need a business license.
I guess you admit you have no idea and no proof.

(((Businesses can operate under the wings of Parent Corporations that have different legal names. Have you not noticed tax forms that request your DBA (doing business as). I doubt you have even checked business registrations; but even if you have there would be no way to know if it was a sole proprietor business or under the umbrella of a Corporation or LLC.)))

Is that what is happening here? All I asked for was the name of the supposed company and the location of their business. If they are as transparent and honest you as make them out to be, this should be an easy thing to provide, yet you have danced around this question every time I asked it.

(((Once again if you are presenting the "facts" please provide information contrary to the above.)))

I'm through presenting facts. Now its your turn. If they are a legitimate business, what is the name of the business and where is it located? If it is a sole prop, that's ok just let me know who the proprietor is.

(((Considering the TCB application process is well known, I am not sure that I have to prove it to most readers. For yourself you may want to consider searching "TCB" on Google and see how they interact with the FCC)))

Are you going to provide me proof or not?

(((You haven't realized a lot of the information you choose to ignore. Once again a simple Google search of "lawsuit slander libel" will probably reveal some of the information you are seeking for.

I'm familiar with libel. I've been sued over it in the past by someone who didn't think I had proof to back up my statements. Here's the thing. It's only libel if it ain't true. And everything I've said is true. If you disagree, bring it on. The last suit ended with a very large settlement that I was very pleased with. If you want to bring it, please do. I'm waiting.

 

[Observer411]

Yes. You're the one accusing me of libel.
The proof has come out. I have presented lots of it. You have countered with conjecture and assorted baloney. You cannot back up your claims.

The conversation circles around the grants of the AnyTone radios; it is not all about you - but I guess since you are not able to see the previous claims given, or intentionally turn a blind eye to the circumstances - I will helps you out

Show me. I didn't see that.

Not a problem:
http://forums.radioreference.com/bu...esting-anytone-termn-8r-info.html#post2378521
http://forums.radioreference.com/bu...ting-anytone-termn-8r-info-2.html#post2378812

The buyers that were dumb were the ones that had the facts and chose to ignore them.

Your lack of respect noted; otherwise no other comments

They were not dismissed because of weak claims. They were dismissed because they didn't conform with the rule parts.

A blogger went into detail here: http://www.km4fmk.com/blog/8R_revoked.html; it is an interesting summary

I'll take that to mean you still don't have any proof.

Well since I believe I have proven you wrong in almost every statement proceeding from you mouth - we can get into more details about the TCB here:

Equipment Authorization procedures | FCC.gov

Please see the procedure for certification that proceeds through a TCB and not the FCC (as you had made mention that there was no application on the FCC website)

I can't think of anywhere that you can do business without a license. Even if it's just a local occupational tax license.

And even with sole props, you need a business license.
I guess you admit you have no idea and no proof.

Certainly I can assist you with all sorts of things you aren't aware of:
Sole proprietorship - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
DBA - Existing Corporations or LLCs

Since it is not known how the business is run; there is no way to be able to "find a license" - a sole proprietorship at the most would require a sales tax license (which would be filed under their name and social security number) Under the parent corporation structure, you would need to know who that business is as well.

To be a seller on Amazon they must provide these details in which Amazon files a 1099 (http://services.amazon.com/global-selling/taxes-regulations-us.htm); with a 1099 on file with the federal government - it is a guarantee they are licensed for retail

I'm through presenting facts. Now its your turn. If they are a legitimate business, what is the name of the business and where is it located? If it is a sole prop, that's ok just let me know who the proprietor is.

Why are you so interested? Are you a vendor? A business with competing interests?

As previously mentioned (like many things) - how many Amazon or eBay storefronts display owner or parent corporation ownership? Why are you on a witch hunt?

Are you going to provide me proof or not?

Yes I have been, and this time I made it easy with links - aren't I nice?

I'm familiar with libel. I've been sued over it in the past by someone who didn't think I had proof to back up my statements. Here's the thing. It's only libel if it ain't true. And everything I've said is true. If you disagree, bring it on. The last suit ended with a very large settlement that I was very pleased with. If you want to bring it, please do. I'm waiting.

Why would you be sued? You have such a calming personality, and no obvious ulterior motives associated with the endless: "prove its"

EDIT: Fixed Links

 

[Titan520]

*Quietly lean back in chair, with a bowl of popcorn and enjoys the tennis match. Back and forth... Back and forth...*

 

[Titan520]

Not a problem:
http://forums.radioreference.com/bu...esting-anytone-termn-8r-info.html#post2378521

^ That, I'm sad to say is a load of crap. I know I was the one who said it. But according to the FCC documentation that Anytone rep was lying through her teeth. The AT-3318UVD and AT-398UVD are the same radio with no changes beyond what is accepted under the FCC permissive change policy.

 

[Observer411]

^ That, I'm sad to say is a load of crap. I know I was the one who said it. But according to the FCC documentation that Anytone rep was lying through her teeth. The AT-3318UVD and AT-398UVD are the same radio with no changes beyond what is accepted under the FCC permissive change policy.

The claim here is the TERMN-8R and the 398UVD are the same radio. The statement you were lied too is that the 398UV is better than the exact 3318 (based on the FCC cert I previously posted)

I personally own a 3318UVD and a TERMN-8R; the menu options on the radios are IDENTICAL this is what matters in this issue - I only used your previous posting as those claims came from the manufacturer - here are the two radio's user manuals (same core - more details on the TERMN-8R) notice the same menu option layout and features:

https://anytonetech.com/downloads/OBLTR-8R TERMN-8R29.3 (Secure).pdf
http://www.wouxun.us/Manuals/Anytone/AT-3318UV_USA(A,D,E)_English_Edited.pdf

 

[12dbsinad]

What about the last paragraph on the dismissal letter. A caution not to market with the current FCC ID.

 

[prcguy]

I have an Anytone UV3318UV-E and it has 220MHz in addition to VHF and UHF, so there might be differences between the 398 and 3318. my E model is FCC Part 90 Certified -- T4K-QZQX3318.
prcguy

The claim here is the TERMN-8R and the 398UVD are the same radio. The statement you were lied too is that the 398UV is better than the exact 3318 (based on the FCC cert I previously posted)

I personally own a 3318UVD and a TERMN-8R; the menu options on the radios are IDENTICAL this is what matters in this issue - I only used your previous posting as those claims came from the manufacturer - here are the two radio's user manuals (same core - more details on the TERMN-8R) notice the same menu option layout and features:

https://anytonetech.com/downloads/OBLTR-8R TERMN-8R29.3 (Secure).pdf
http://www.wouxun.us/Manuals/Anytone/AT-3318UV_USA(A,D,E)_English_Edited.pdf

 

[Observer411]

I have an Anytone UV3318UV-E and it has 220MHz in addition to VHF and UHF, so there might be differences between the 398 and 3318. my E model is FCC Part 90 Certified -- T4K-QZQX3318.
prcguy

The 3318E is a triband version of the 3318D. Only the UHF/VHF (no 1.25M) frequency range is mentioned in the previously posted FCC documentation for the 3318.

The 3318D is the same version of the 398UV having the two bands.

I had already previously mentioned that since the 3318E has 3 bands and is obviously different than the 2 bands listed in the Part 90 application for the 3318; if anything it appears the 3318E is the radio that has modified frequency limits not stated in the 3318 documentation and not the TERMN-8R or 398UV

 

[Titan520]

The claim here is the TERMN-8R and the 398UVD are the same radio. The statement you were lied too is that the 398UV is better than the exact 3318 (based on the FCC cert I previously posted)

I personally own a 3318UVD and a TERMN-8R; the menu options on the radios are IDENTICAL this is what matters in this issue - I only used your previous posting as those claims came from the manufacturer - here are the two radio's user manuals (same core - more details on the TERMN-8R) notice the same menu option layout and features:

https://anytonetech.com/downloads/OBLTR-8R TERMN-8R29.3 (Secure).pdf
http://www.wouxun.us/Manuals/Anytone/AT-3318UV_USA(A,D,E)_English_Edited.pdf

Very well, then we are in agreement.

 

[Titan520]

EDIT: double post.

 

[MTS2000des]

What about the last paragraph on the dismissal letter. A caution not to market with the current FCC ID.

Furthermore, the IF the product is granted a new TCB grant, it will have a new FCC ID number, as was stated in the FCC dismissal letter, and the existing FCC ID cannot be re-used again. Of course the sock puppet brigade that has arrived refuse to acknowledge this fact, nor the fact that these and other Chinese radios sold or imported after 1/1/2013 allow for wideband programming (even in their software in "part 90" mode). I won't even address the performance issues, there are some really poor Chinese radios and some really good ones (the Puxing PX-UV973 I had was more on freq than my XTS5000 and put out a super clean carrier) but most of the ones I have owned/used had poor intermod rejection, low/muddy TX audio,frequency error and quirky firmware.

Instead, the sock puppets want to make personal attacks, veiled threats of libel (bring it on), and other non sequiturs about everything from the price of Tea in China.

It's really simple to me. AnyTone Tech/Baofeng Tech made some pretty incredible claims. Claims that consumers in a free market put to the test, and the regulating agency dismissed thus proving those claims false.

If consumers with to believe that paying $139-150 for a $50 ham radio is a great deal, just like these suckers who pay several hundred dollars for a 15 year old subpar 2 meter rig, far be it from anyone to separate a fool from his money.

But none of the sock puppet theatrics detract from the FACTS and legitimate issues many have raised regarding the questionable claims and certifications. Instead, the sock puppets have engaged in a classic Monty Python "Spam" skit to cloud the real issues. Gotta wonder why any legitimate firm would recruit such sock puppets to barrage a forum rather than just coming forward, and addressing these issues directly without all the ad hominems and mantras about other non-topics or pushing the responsibility for these issues with the product onto testing labs, the FCC, the governor of California, or President Obama.

One thing that will come out of this is the FCC will pay a little closer attention to the issuing of equipment authorization. You can take that to the bank.

 

[Observer411]

Furthermore, the IF the product is granted a new TCB grant, it will have a new FCC ID number, as was stated in the FCC dismissal letter, and the existing FCC ID cannot be re-used again. Of course the sock puppet brigade that has arrived refuse to acknowledge this fact, nor the fact that these and other Chinese radios sold or imported after 1/1/2013 allow for wideband programming (even in their software in "part 90" mode). I won't even address the performance issues, there are some really poor Chinese radios and some really good ones (the Puxing PX-UV973 I had was more on freq than my XTS5000 and put out a super clean carrier) but most of the ones I have owned/used had poor intermod rejection, low/muddy TX audio,frequency error and quirky firmware.

Please re-read the letter no where does it state it cannot re-use the application ID. In fact it mentions - "re-applying"

Only in FCC "denials" can you NOT reapply for the FCC ID

Also - I have no affiliation with Anytone tech other than radios bought through them --- It may be hard to believe but people can have trust with Anytone tech and not be paid actors...

 

[Observer411]

If consumers with to believe that paying $139-150 for a $50 ham radio is a great deal, just like these suckers who pay several hundred dollars for a 15 year old subpar 2 meter rig, far be it from anyone to separate a fool from his money.

FYI: Considering the closest Anytone radio actually retails for $10 more, plus shipping charges - the TERMN-8R is below market price

 

[rapidcharger]

Not a problem:
http://forums.radioreference.com/bu...esting-anytone-termn-8r-info.html#post2378521
http://forums.radioreference.com/bu...ting-anytone-termn-8r-info-2.html#post2378812

)))

Links to other threads in this forum. What is that supposed to prove?
It is more conjecture and hearsay.
The 3318 is a completely different radio. You stuck the label on there just to fudge it.

(((
Your lack of respect noted; otherwise no other comments)))

Yeah. You never did like my tone, did you.
Is that why you banned me from your facebook page?

(((
Well since I believe I have proven you wrong in almost every statement proceeding from you mouth - we can get into more details about the TCB here:

Equipment Authorization procedures | FCC.gov

Please see the procedure for certification that proceeds through a TCB and not the FCC (as you had made mention that there was no application on the FCC website))))

Proof of the application that you claim to have submitted.

(((Certainly I can assist you with all sorts of things you aren't aware of:
Sole proprietorship - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
DBA - Existing Corporations or LLCs)))

I didn't say they had to be incorporated. I said they had to be licensed.
You evidently don't know the difference between corporate registration and a business license. You really ought to stop pretending you know about things.

(((Since it is not known how the business is run; there is no way to be able to "find a license" - a sole proprietorship at the most would require a sales tax license (which would be filed under their name and social security number) Under the parent corporation structure, you would need to know who that business is as well.)))

You could always ask anytone tech but since it's pretty clear I'm talking to him, why don't you come clean?

(((To be a seller on Amazon they must provide these details in which Amazon files a 1099 (Taxes and regulations: U.S. | Amazon Global Selling); with a 1099 on file with the federal government - it is a guarantee they are licensed for retail)))

You sure do know a lot about selling on Amazon. Hmm.

(((Why are you so interested? Are you a vendor? A business with competing interests?)))

I'm just curious. You've already pointed out all the other vendors and who owns them and where they are. But YOU are hiding because you don't want to get in trouble. Therefore you're not releasing your identity or your location. Like I said, you can only hide for so long.

(((
Yes I have been, and this time I made it easy with links - aren't I nice?
)))

I'm still waiting for proof. You have given me none.

(((
Why would you be sued? You have such a calming personality, and no obvious ulterior motives associated with the endless: "prove its"

I'm sorry that you don't like my personality. SUE ME.
Please, I implore you.

If I were you, I'd stop wasting time on this forum and start looking for lawyers. You're going to need one. And I'd start planning how you're going to refund everyone's money and also change your website.

You managed to change the link to where to order the terminator really fast but you never got around to changing where it says the radios are fully certified.