[CQ-Contest] Contests/Magazine Subs

[Jay Townsend]

Pete Smith wrote:
> I'm VERY sympathetic with both Chris and Alan.  Even at the domestic US
> prices, I found I didn't wish to continue my CQ subscription any longer,
> given the deterioration in content - and I was a 20+ year subscriber.  I
> miss the contest results slightly, but I can always pick up 2-3 issues a
> year at a newsstand.  Regrettably, I also concluded after a year that CQ
> Contest wasn't worth it, given the watery mix of articles.

Certainly, I can't quibble with that...much the same has happened to me.

> With the coming upswing in the solar cycle and [potential]  improvement in
> the financial straits of ham manufacturers, I suspect that there is an
> opportunity for an Internet magazine aimed at performance-oriented hams --
> contesters and DXers, HF and VHF.  Can it work financially?  Who'll be the
> one to invest the sweat equity and capital to find out?

Well, on this issue I have a couple of points. First, The Digital Journal
has ceased publication after 40 or 50 years. It has been, sort of,
replaced with the following:  www.n2hos.com

But, as the sponser of the WW RTTY WPX, or should I say the Ex-sponser we
quickly found out just what happens when a magazine folds. The DJ which
was formerly the RTTY Journal reported all the contest activity of the
Digital World for years and years. Guess what? There is no longer any
place to publish the contest results. Yes, CQ has the CQWW RTTY which was
a joint contest and the ARRL has RTTY Roundup, but the other contests no
longer have a place for results.

So think carefully when cancelling your subscriptions. If we no longer
have magazines to read the results in and to store them then I think that
contesting is on a straight line down. The RTTY experience may well be a
good indicator in years to come. Right now the internet certainly is very
useful and its cheap. There is no way to charge for internet things that
makes much sense.

Magazines and advertisers are necessary to our hobby. What would
contesting be like if the results were never published for anyone but the
contesters?

Having just failed to renew my CQ subscription, perhaps, I had better
give that some more consideration. But I do think its high time that the
magazines get back on track as to what the subscribers want.

-- 
Jay Townsend, WS7I  < jayt at iea.com >



-- 
Jay Townsend, WS7I  < jayt at iea.com >


--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com