So Mike, What is the other reason for not living in VK: Too many rabbits or Brown Snakes or that you can now get Budweiser on tap in a pub?
Thanks. Rick. W5RH > On Aug 30, 2020, at 10:05 AM, Ravi Patrick Ratnala via BVARC > <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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
________________________________________________ Brazos Valley Amateur Radio Club BVARC mailing list [email protected] http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org
