[CQ-Contest] Encouraging Casual Participation in Contests

Sun Apr 30 14:00:04 EDT 2017

Remember, that ~$500 was only for 400 of the 1000 cards needed; that is, the
cost involved in getting domestic cards (stations or QSL managers).  The
other 600 cards, via DX stations, could easily be another $1000 depending on
international postage and how much in terms green stamps or equivalent are
included for return postage.

That the cost may be spread out over years is not the point.  That it is
more palatable that way is also not the point.  Yes, that's how finance
works, and while it makes it appear to be less painful in the short run, in
the long run it still costs the same or more.

However... It doesn't matter.

I received a PM from W5VX on the subject.  While it would be poor manners
(like I need any excuses) to quote him in full in a publicly distributed
email, his real issue is not the cost of getting WPX (which his original
email implied); he even said so in his reply.  His real issue is the actual
cost of the ARRL awards these days, such as the fees for QSL bureaus and
other services, as compared to what they were (or in most cases weren't)
back in the 'good old days'. That, and the overall cost of QSL'ing these
days.

Which does make one wonder a few things.  Such as why a discussion of the
potential costs of WPX, an award sponsored by CQ Magazine, would involve
costs that the ARRL imposes -- on ARRL awards.  Or how one can complain,
with some legitimacy, that the cost of QSL'ing is higher than ever (and it
is, primarily due to postage costs), and yet complain about the relatively
small cost of getting an award electronically compared to the costs of the
physical cards.

So the bottom line appears to be that there will still be costs involved,
even if the cost of doing "business" electronically is a lot lower than
doing it "the old fashioned way."  

Now if one wants to lament that "the old fashioned way" is no longer cost
effective, I'll join the chorus.  It is.  But things change, whether we wish
them to or not.  Criticizing the reasonable alternatives, though, won't
bring them back.

73, ron w3wn

-----Original Message-----
From: Adam Mercier [mailto:adam at kenbrio.com] 
Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2017 10:03 AM
To: Ron Notarius W3WN
Cc: Bill Parry; lu5dx at lucg.com.ar; cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Encouraging Casual Participation in Contests

Taking your math at face value, let's assume it's $500 for the physical
cards.  That figure makes the $120 seem less of a big deal.  However....

It's not a question of total cost, but the distribution that becomes
staggering.  How long have you been working on getting those cards? 5 years?
10? 20?   When you gradually distribute the $500 across a significant span
of time, it becomes more palatable.  That's how credit cards and banks
operate.  But if you balance that against a 1-time expense of $120, that
$120 is much more painful.

My 2 cents...

Adam, KM7N 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 29, 2017, at 15:38, Ron Notarius W3WN <wn3vaw at verizon.net> wrote:
> 
> Bill,
> 
> I agree in principle that a quantity discount would be nice to have.
> Especially if you're submitting 1000 cards at $.12 each...  Namely 
> $120
> 
> However, let's keep things in perspective.  If you have to request the 
> physical 1000 cards from the domestic and DX stations, how much will 
> it cost you to obtain them?
> 
> Let's say 400 of those cards are from US stations or US managers.  So 
> that's 400 letters sent at about $.49 each for first class postage... 
> That's $196 right there.  Plus cost of cards and envelopes.  And if 
> you have an SASE in with each, that's $392 just for postage.  Easily 
> can be another $100 for envelopes and cards.  So you're looking at 
> about $500.  For the domestic 400 cards, we haven't even gotten into the
other 600 DX cards.
> 
> Suddenly, that $120 doesn't look too bad, does it?
> 
> 73, ron w3wn
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf 
> Of Bill Parry
> Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2017 9:37 AM
> To: lu5dx at lucg.com.ar; cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Encouraging Casual Participation in Contests
> 
> I am a big supporter of LOTW and have used it extensively for award 
> submission.  The WPX award is not one of them. I would like to use it 
> for the WPX but the cost is not acceptable. If I were to apply 1000 
> Prefixes at
> $.12 per LOTW QSL, the cost is just too much. Using LOTW for some 
> awards just doesn't work financially, nor is sending 1,000 QSLs in for
checking.
> There needs to be a different method of applying for these awards that 
> require a lot of QSLs such as WPX.
> 
> Bill W5VX
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf 
> Of Martin LU5DX
> Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 10:43 AM
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Encouraging Casual Participation in Contests
> 
> Absolutely great idea.
> 
> TBH, LoTW should become the standard solution for issuing credits for 
> other awards. National and local Clubs, Groups, could take advantage of
it.
> 
> We've been talking about this type of solution with LU1FAM and LU5FF.
> 
> The ARRL could charge a small fee to those institutions using their 
> LoTW service to validate the credits.
> 
> Win-Win solution!
> 
> 73,
> 
> Martin LU5DX
> 
> 
>> El 26/04/2017 a las 11:23 a.m., Pete Smith N4ZR escribió:
>> We all agree, I think, that casual participants are a critical part 
>> of the total workable population in contests. I spent the first 40 
>> years of my contesting career working contests as a quick and 
>> relatively easy source of award credits, and I suspect a large 
>> majority of the stations in any contest are doing some variation on this.
>> 
>> There is a reasonably simple and straight-forward way to encourage 
>> more of this, potentially yielding more people for us to work.  We 
>> need interconnection between CQ and ARRL contest databases, so that 
>> any contact that is in both stations' log in a given contest can be 
>> claimed for ARRL and CQ award credit without going through the QSL 
>> card process.
>> 
>> I'm not underestimating the programming effort involved, I hope, but 
>> surely some combination of volunteer and professional staff 
>> involvement can get it done. It could start small - perhaps a pilot 
>> involving the CQWW open log database and DXCC. Imagine the value 
>> added to LOTW if it were the hub for this process, and the potential 
>> increase in DXCC fees. Surely, this is a win-win proposition.
>> 
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> 
> 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest