That’s a nice deal!  I’d grab a 7300 myself if I could get that deal now.

And on cheap HF radios:  I paid $579 for my FT-891,  brand new.  Fantastic 
radio with a “full” 100 watts.  It’s become my go-to travel / field rig.

And since I’m here, +1 against another arbitrary administrative agency money 
grab.

73, N5OL

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 30, 2020, at 9:15 AM, Keith NM5G via BVARC <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > Oh, and only a $1000 for an HF radio???
> I bought a repack IC-7300 from MTC for $1000, tax and shipping included.  
> Plus, I got a $100 rebate check from Icom a month later.
>  
> 73, Keith NM5G
>  
> From: BVARC <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Michael Amos via BVARC
> Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2020 5:19 PM
> To: BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB <[email protected]>
> Cc: Michael Amos <[email protected]>; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [BVARC] FCC Proposes to Reinstate Amateur Radio Service Fees
>  
> I agree however lets look at the more damaging picture here.  How many 
> possible new hams will turn away with the thought of having to now pay $65 to 
> get his/her first license instead of the $15 to take the test.  All those 
> kids whose dreams were smashed.  I know it’s only $50 but for that parent who 
> is a little skittish about paying the government MORE money, that might be 
> the turn-off.
>  
> Also, don’t forget that once the government gets that running again…. What’s 
> to stop them from increasing it? Where is the end to this?  Picture paying 
> $100, $200, or more to just renew.  And what are they going to do with the 
> money?  Maybe help track down illegal transmitters on the bands? Like those 
> folks playing nasty recordings with vulgarity, etc? OR, maybe they could put 
> a halt on trying to take away the frequencies that are already there. How 
> about crack down on manufacturers that produce RF splattering equipment to 
> the general public. Or, even better, how bout pushing the power companies to 
> do a better job keeping their lines from generating so much RF you cant even 
> hear the NATURAL static.
>  
> Just my soapbox. Sorry for opening it…  Oh, and only a $1000 for an HF 
> radio???  Lol   😊
>  
>  
> Mike – KG4NDS
>  
>  
> From: BVARC <[email protected]> On Behalf Of JP Pritchard via BVARC
> Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2020 5:01 PM
> To: 'BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB' <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [BVARC] FCC Proposes to Reinstate Amateur Radio Service Fees
>  
> Okay KJ, I get your humor and I even hear your logic. But the question is Why 
> charge such a fee? Sure, it’s not a lot of money for many of us, but for a 
> lot of amateurs who are retired, or who’ve lost their job thanks to Covid-19, 
> there’s always somebody looking for another 50 bucks or another 25. New hams 
> face a bunch of expenses already, for new gear, etc. It’s like a lot of the 
> permit fees a person is asked to pay. Why are you charged these fees? Mostly 
> it’s just government at one level or another looking for another source of 
> revenue. The FCC is already clearing billions of dollars by selling large 
> chunks of spectrum to the wireless business. Another 50 bucks will mean 
> nothing to Uncle Sam, but may have meaning for someone who’s just scrapin’ by.
>  
> JP
>  
>  
>  
> From: BVARC <[email protected]> On Behalf Of KJ Anderson via BVARC
> Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2020 4:51 PM
> To: BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB <[email protected]>; 'john Parmalee' 
> <[email protected]>
> Cc: KJ Anderson <[email protected]>; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [BVARC] FCC Proposes to Reinstate Amateur Radio Service Fees
>  
> Here’s how I see it:
> $1000 for an HF radio
> $1000 for a second/backup/whatever spare HF radio (most of us don’t have just 
> one decent radio, be honest)
> $5000 for a modest tower, concrete, etc.
> $2000 in an actual antenna, feed line, rotator, etc.
> $1000 for two cars fully installed with mobile VHF/UHF radios and antennas
> $500 for a gas generator and battery backups (some of us)
> $300 a year for field day supplies, the camping trip, food, conventions, etc.
>  
> If the FCC bills us $50 every 10 years (your license is now good for 10 years 
> due to the 2019 rule change), I’m not sure I can stay in this hobby any 
> longer, the costs of the FCC will make this hobby too cost prohibitive for 
> me….
>  
> A bit of tongue-in-cheek for a Saturday afternoon.
>  
> 73!!
>  
> KJ5EMP, KJ in Cypress
>  
> -------------------------------------------------
> KJ Anderson
> 253-380-2636
> www.linkedin.com/in/scrumnerd
>  
> From: BVARC <[email protected]> On Behalf Of JP Pritchard via BVARC
> Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2020 3:18 PM
> To: 'john Parmalee' <[email protected]>; 'BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB' 
> <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [BVARC] FCC Proposes to Reinstate Amateur Radio Service Fees
>  
> I’m new to this game, but as far as I am aware, the FCC does very little to 
> support amateur radio, with the exception of allowing hams to use certain 
> frequencies. This would appear to be nothing more than a money grab, having 
> nothing to do with cost of administration, (since it sounds like most of the 
> administration is automated). They certainly contribute very little to 
> enforcing their own rules. I don’t mind paying for a toll road if I’m a user, 
> but a toll road requires constant upkeep and upgrades. I don’t see the 
> parallel to amateur radio. I hope the ARRL gathers its forces against this 
> proposal (to the extent that its bylaws allow) and supports all ancillary 
> efforts to kill this effort. That’s just my initial thought on the matter. 
> Tell me why I’m wrong.
>  
> 73, K5JPP, JP
>  
>  
>  
> from: BVARC <[email protected]> On Behalf Of john Parmalee via BVARC
> Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2020 2:27 PM
> To: [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]
> Cc: john Parmalee <[email protected]>
> Subject: [BVARC] FCC Proposes to Reinstate Amateur Radio Service Fees
>  
> FCC Proposes to Reinstate Amateur Radio Service Fees
> 
> 08/28/2020
> 
> Amateur radio licensees would pay a $50 fee for each amateur radio license 
> application if the FCC adopts rules it proposed this week. Included in the 
> FCC’s fee proposal are applications for new licenses, renewal and upgrades to 
> existing licenses, and vanity call sign requests. Excluded are applications 
> for administrative updates, such as changes of address, and annual regulatory 
> fees.
> 
> The FCC proposal is contained in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in MD 
> Docket 20-270, which was adopted to implement portions of the “Repack 
> Airwaves Yielding Better Access for Users of Modern Services Act” of 2018 — 
> the so-called “Ray Baum’s Act.”
> 
> The Act requires that the FCC switch from a Congressionally-mandated fee 
> structure to a cost-based system of assessment. In its NPRM, the FCC proposed 
> application fees for a broad range of services that use the FCC’s Universal 
> Licensing System (ULS), including the Amateur Radio Service that had been 
> excluded by an earlier statute. The 2018 statute excludes the Amateur Service 
> from annual regulatory fees, but not from application fees.
> 
> “[A]pplications for personal licenses are mostly automated and do not have 
> individualized staff costs for data input or review,” the FCC said in its 
> NPRM. “For these automated processes — new/major modifications, renewal, and 
> minor modifications — we propose a nominal application fee of $50 due to 
> automating the processes, routine ULS maintenance, and limited instances 
> where staff input is required.”
> 
> The same $50 fee would apply to all Amateur Service applications, including 
> those for vanity call signs. “Although there is currently no fee for vanity 
> call signs in the Amateur Radio Service, we find that such applications 
> impose similar costs in aggregate on Commission resources as new applications 
> and therefore propose a $50 fee,” the FCC said.
> 
> The FCC is not proposing to charge for administrative updates, such as 
> mailing address changes for amateur applications, and amateur radio will 
> remain exempt from annual regulatory fees. “For administrative updates [and] 
> modifications, which also are highly automated, we find that it is in the 
> public interest to encourage licensees to update their [own] information 
> without a charge,” the FCC said.
> 
> The FCC also proposes to assess a $50 fee for individuals who want a printed 
> copy of their license. “The Commission has proposed to eliminate these 
> services — but to the extent the Commission does not do so, we propose a fee 
> of $50 to cover the costs of these services,” the FCC said.
> 
> The Ray Baum’s Act does not exempt filing fees in the Amateur Radio Service. 
> The FCC dropped assessment of fees for vanity call signs several years ago.
> 
> Deadlines for comments and reply comments will be determined once the NPRM 
> appears in the Federal Register. File comments by using the FCC’s Electronic 
> Comment Filing System (ECFS), posting to MD Docket No. 20-270. This docket is 
> already open for accepting comments even though deadlines have not yet been 
> set.
> 
> ________________________________________________
> Brazos Valley Amateur Radio Club
> 
> BVARC mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org
________________________________________________
Brazos Valley Amateur Radio Club

BVARC mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org

Reply via email to