Paul is right: what he says is what attracted us and continues to attract us.
That's not the relevant question, however.
He's also right to say apples and oranges. But the problem is the kids
like oranges and aren't even trying our apples.
We can't continue trying to market ham radio the same way it was marketed
to us. When I got my licence, my friends were blown away by my ability to
work Europe. Today, kids see that and go 'meh.'
"But why can't you see their faces? And what's that weird beeping noise?"
Competition will attract some, but to slaughter an old saw from Alfred P.
Sloan, you can sell an old man a young man's hobby, but you can't sell a
young man an old man's hobby.
So, how do we sell it as a young man's hobby? By showing young people
enjoying it. I've seen photos of some mall displays, Field Days, etc.,
where the average age of presenters was between 60 and 70.
Bless them for trying, but the image is of a hobby that's dying.
The nerd factor also cuts both ways: jocks won't get it, but the kid who
revels in his electronics class will love it.
73, kelly, ve4xt
Sent from my iPhone
>> On Mar 25, 2016, at 3:46 PM, Paul O'Kane <pokane@ei5di.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 23/03/2016 21:01, David Gilbert wrote:
>>
>>
>> I enjoy contesting, but it's a legacy that isn't going to successfully
compete for attention among anything beyond a very small percentage of
today's youth. Most of the young ops at Field Day or contest stations
are only there because of some family connection, and most of those don't
last. Even the great majority of new hams the ARRL likes to tout as
evidence of a growing base don't stick with the hobby ... if they did, we
wouldn't be having these discussions. I do think that contesting is
drawing a growing percentage of hams, but the base is getting old fast,
and from my perspective here are some of the reasons:
>
> David is right, but also wrong - especially when he compares
> ham radio to the internet - that's an apples and oranges
> comparison.
>
>> 1. Ham radio is expensive, especially of you actually want to be
competitive instead of just participating. Rigs and antennas cost far
more than a decent computer or smart phone, both of which offer far more
effective communication and opportunities for competition.
>
> "Expensive" applies to all competitive activities when you
> want to be competitive - to include time and money spent
> on diets, training, equipment, travelling and expenses.
>
>>
>> 2. Ham radio requires antennas. Theey are physically obtrusive and
often create conflict with neighbors. Hardly anybody has to fight to get
connected to the internet.
>
> Apples and oranges.
>
>>
>> 3. Ham radio is real time and unreliable, subject to the vagaries of
propagation and activity on the other end.
>
> That's precisely what attracts us, and what distinguishes
> amateur radio from most other forms of communication.
>
>
> Why do some people still compete in sailboat racing,
> subject to the vagaries of wind, waves, tides and
> currents? Because it's hard and they enjoy it - it's
> what gives the activity its name, sailboat racing.
>
>> Applications like Twitter, Facebook, and online forums (like this one)
are precise, dependable, and "sticky" (you can read and answer at your
convenience). Online game competition against real opponents from around
the world is available around the clock every day with virtually no waiting.
>
> All hosted on the internet, a public worldwide communications
> utility and, for all intents and purposes, free.
>
>>
>> 4. Ham radio requires a license, one which many of us perceive as
relatively easy to get but which isn't needed at all for any other
pursuit. It's a roadblock with no particular advantage to the user ...
it's not like it keeps LIDs off the air.
>
> Licences are required for many competitive pursuits,
> including some motor sports (on land, sea and air), and
> competition licences are required for some athletics
> events.
>
>>
>> 5. Almost any video game out there is more immediate with more
intense real time competition than ham radio contesting has.
>
> Apples and oranges - powerboat racing can be a lot more
> immediate and intense than sailboat racing.
>
>> I honestly hope that radiosport hangs around for a while ...
>
>> I do too - it's fun for me and I have a lot of money invested in
it. But it needs to change if it's actually going to draw new people to
the game.
>
> Does sailboat racing have to change? If not, why not?
>
>
>> I've tried to come up with the idea of a contest format that would
capture some of the real time features of a video game, particularly the
ability to directly and immediately counter (either by action or by
score) the actions of another contester,
>
> Don't golfers (other than in matchplay) compete in
> isolation? The all have access to real-time scoreboards,
> and we could have them too, although some contesters
> prefer others not to let others know how they're doing.
>
>>
>> Ham radio simply doesn't have the fascination for anybody today that
it did for us ... and if we were young again in today's world it wouldn't
for us either.
>
> Why then, some two hundred years after the introduction
> of mechanical propulsion, do some people insist on
> racing without it? The answer is they do it for its
> own sake.
>
>> If we want to change the demographics of our hobby, our hobby is going
to have to change. It's as simple as that.
>
> Sure - change is good so long as our hobby, amateur radio,
> doesn't change into another hobby.
>
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest