At 10:30 AM 6/17/2009, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote:
>What "loss of revenue" for the ARRL?
>
>Can't we discuss this without the snide little quips?
Ron, there was nothing snide about what I said. There's nothing
dishonorable about financial concerns. We all know that ARRL does a
good job, and that it is in continuing financial straits. There is
revenue from the DXCC program, and from the outgoing QSL bureau
program, which helps to some degree to balance the books. If I
remember my 1970s correctly, the ARRL didn't charge for DXCC in those
days, and of course manually cross-checking paper logs would have
become impossible at some point.
I was simply suggesting that maybe allowing credit for cross-checked
contest QSOs would be revenue-neutral, or even positive, if it
resulted in a reduction in the volume of paper QSLs to be checked one
by one by ARRL staff.
73, Pete
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|