[CQ-Contest] WW SSB - the corruptive influence of packet

[Richard DiDonna NN3W]

Well, CQ publications does sell magazines and does 
publish the results.  If one additional person buys 
one mag to check their scores, they've derived a 
benefit.  Same with QST (sorta)...

73 Rich NN3W

--- Original Message ---
From: "Bob Naumann - W5OV" <w5ov at w5ov.com>
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WW SSB - the corruptive 
influence of packet

>NN3W said:
>>> Yes, and the fact of the matter is that the packet 
spotting most 
>likely has the effect of increasing overall 
participation - a benefit 
>to both the sponsor and to contest stations that are 
competitive.  <<
>
>And earlier N7MAL said:
>>> My prediction is the only loser will be the 
sponsor because a 
>majority of the scores will be down. <<
>
>Curious.  You both think that higher activity levels 
or higher scores 
>driven by packet spots are a benefit to the 
sponsors?  This is a 
>puzzling conclusion.
>
>No radio contest benefits any sponsor under any 
circumstances.  They 
>are a losing proposition no matter how you look at 
it.  The small 
>amount of publicity they may get likely does nothing 
positive.  The 
>contests cost a fortune to administer and yield no 
direct benefit to a 
>sponsor.  If the people who do most of the 
administrative work were to 
>be compensated, contests would no longer be 
sponsored.  
>
>73,
>Bob Naumann - W5OV
>_______________________________________________
>CQ-Contest mailing list
>CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-
contest