[CQ-Contest] CQWW results

[Jeff Maass]

I think I see a solution to *all* of the complaints 
about CQ Magazines' running of the CQWW contests:

    Allow *only* CQ Magazine subscribers to participate
      in the CQ-sponsored contests (CQWW, WPX, 160, etc.).
      QSOs with all other stations are invalid, and 
      penalized.


Advantages:

  1) A few more contesters will subscribe to CQ Magazine
      so they can continue to participate. More $$ for CQ
      Magazine.

  2) All participants will receive the results by mail.
      No need to pretend to maintain a CQ contest presence
      on the web (cost savings).

  3) The severe decrease in participation will take the
      load off the poor contest volunteers processing
      logs.

  4) Plaques and certificates can be sent in a timely
      manner, since the volunteers' time has been freed
      up, and falling participation has greatly decreased
      the number of awards to be sent.

  5) The Expense of sending awards will be decreased (since
      there are fewer of them to send), so CQ Magazine gets
      to keep more $$.

  6) Fewer contesters will need to make a decision between
      traveling to DX for CQWW CW and having Thanksgiving
      with the family.

  7) As participation and interest spirals down, the number
      of pages in CQ Magazine for contest coverage can
      decrease, allowing space for more advertisements and
      articles reviewing handhelds and describing obscure
      new digital modes. 

;-)

73,  Jeff  K8ND



> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com]On Behalf Of N7MAL
> Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 7:50 AM
> To: k1ep.list at gmail.com; Simon Pearson; Art RX9TX
> Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW results
> 
> 
> Ed you said:""I don't subscribe to CQ mag, so I never know how I do.  Has the 
> contest become a marketing ploy for subscriptions?""
> Well if that is their plan it's not working very well, at least by me. I gave 
> up years ago. I still participate in their contests and submit my logs but 
> that's it. A month, or so, ago I received a Certificate from a 2002 contest. It 
> took 3 years to get here. (I'll bet it only takes them 3 minutes to cash a 
> subscription , or advertiser's, check) 
> If I get a Certificate from them fine but from my point of view I'm supporting 
> fellow contesters by participating in a CQ Contest not CQ Magazine.
> 
> 
> MAL              N7MAL
> BULLHEAD CITY, AZ
> http://www.ctaz.com/~suzyq/N7mal.htm
> http://geocities.com/n7mal/
> Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
> It's already tomorrow in Australia
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: Ed K1EP 
>   To: Simon Pearson ; Art RX9TX 
>   Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com 
>   Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 21:17
>   Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW results
> 
> 
>   At 8/1/2005 09:44 AM, Simon Pearson wrote:
>   >Art, RX9TX wrote:
>   >
>   >> number of received logs, 2005:
>   >
>   >[...]
>   >
>   >> Russian  DX  -  2579  (+570  logs this year, and this number increases
>   >> CQWW SSB - 4092
>   >> 
>   >> Wonder how long will it take for RusDX to overcome CQWW numbers :)
>   >
>   >Another couple of years, and I'm sure the number of logs received in 
>   >the Russian DX contest will have overtaken the number of logs 
>   >received in CQWW. And that will be *great* to see! :)
>   >
>   >Personally, I love Russian DX. There are so many mults to be had, so 
>   >much activity, high rates for the entire contest (even from G! ;)) 
>   >and the principles within the RDXC committee totally beats that of 
>   >CQWW.
> 
>   Not only that, you receive a rather nice color booklet with all the scores 
> and data, your UBN data is emailed directly to you, and you receive an 
> invitation by email to enter the contest the following year.   I don't 
> subscribe to CQ mag, so I never know how I do.  Has the contest become a 
> marketing ploy for subscriptions?
>