On QRZ.Com, K3UD frequently reports on the number of licensed radio amateurs. Comments on the latest item, “ARS FCC License Numbers 4th Quarter 2007, A Look At The Trends,” took a turn when WW3QB reported:
I looked up ARRL membership for a few years (from annual reports).
1996 – 175,023
2000 – 164,106
2004 – 151,727
2006 – 148,641I would expect the ARRL membership to reflect some percentage of “active” hams. But the trend is clear.
To which, K1RFD replied:
Attributing this decline to things the ARRL has (or hasn’t) done certainly makes for lively discussion, but I suspect the trend is mostly due to two other, more mundane factors.
The first may be a decline in the number of active hams, both in real numbers and as a percentage of total licensees. Inactive hams aren’t likely to keep a yearly League membership going. Those numbers might be very close to the number of active U.S. hams.
But the biggest reason is probably the overall state of magazine publishing in the 21st century. If you were to look at other organizations that have a magazine subscription as their primary benefit, you’d probably see the same trend. For example, according to journalism.org, subscriptions to traditional news magazines have been on a downward slide for decades, and the average subscriber age has been going up.
I think K1FRD is probably right that a big reason for the drop in ARRL membership is because amateurs no longer have to rely on magazines for their information about ham radio. The flip side, of course, is that it’s too bad that the main reason these guys joined at all is to get QST.
Even so, you can’t really blame them. The only thing that most members see from the ARRL is QST and a raft of solicitations for this fund or that. And if they can get pretty much the same technical information off the Internet, why should they continue their ARRL memberships? The ARRL has been saying all along that your membership fee is for more than just QST, but they obviously haven’t done a great job of selling that.
Don’t get me wrong. I think that we do need a national association representing amateur radio, and in the absence of any other viable national organization, I think the ARRL is it. But the ARRL has to do better at attracting and retaining members.
Someone else commented that looking at what the NRA was doing would probably be a good idea. Benchmarking the ARRL against the NRA would be an interesting and very useful exercise, I think. We should find out what the NRA, and other similar large, membership-based organizations are doing right and doing wrong, then figure out how the ARRL can benefit from this knowledge.
I diagree, if this is REALLY how you feel, and your a member right now… let them know how you feel and what you’d like to see them do, they really value the opinions of Hams, both Members and non-members,
kc0ydz
take a look at my QRZ Profile picture
And I realize that I am going to get a lot of sh** over this, but it is my opinion
Well, if you’re going to use the NRA as a model, the first step would be to convince hams that the government is about to take their radios away. ;)
By the way, I just went and signed up. I was an ARRL member years ago, then I went through a period when I was inactive so I didn’t maintain my membership. Now that I’m somewhat active again, I decided it made sense to sign back up.
Dan KB6NU
I think your idea that the AARL should benchmark itself or hire an outside consulting company to benchmark it to say the NRA is a great idea. I too have been a ham since the early 70’s and have recently gotten bitten by the CW bug … I love our hobby and still find it interesting and fascinating ………. HOWEVER ……… I see too many “nostalgia” type articles, etc in the ham radio press as opposed to hard hitting articles focused on the newer digital technologies, etc. Rather than build from the ground up a new national ham organization …… I’d say the ARRL should be the basis of a re-birth for our declining hobby/service. How can we get this moving ?
73,
Lou
[email protected]
You mean there’s more to ARRL than the litter box liner magazine they put out? I join, then let it lapse, then rejoin.. I go through phases when I lose interest in ham radio, then get back into it. My ARRL membership somewhat follows that. The biggest problem is that I see ARRL and QST as an organization/magazine for old farts. I’m in my mid 30’s, and my primary interest isn’t HF and wire antennas. Or contests. There just isn’t a lot of things in the magazine that interest me. I want in depth articles on things like digital voice, microwave, ATV, ideas for fun stuff for clubs to do, stuff like that.
Ha!
Our school ham radio club has a subscription to that magazine and it is lame!!! They really need to put some cool stuff in there for younger people. I got into my ham radio club at school cause my granpa and uncle have a ham radio and it will give me something to do at my dads atv store.
I see QST as a nice to have, but not essential printed magazine.
Frankly, I’m still weighing whether to sign up for an ARRL membership.
I’d rather have QST online for download as a PDF, with access to all previously made digital editions.
PDF is easier to search, zoom and can be downloaded to phone / laptop for reading while travelling.
ARRL currently says the QST (print) is valued at $21 (annual). For a digital PDF only membership only, I would expect all the magazine’s costs of printing, handling, and postage to be removed from membership fees. The membership fees are constantly growing, but this should reduce the annual cost by perhaps as much as $10 (they still need revenue for the content itself).
While sewing mild discourse, I’ll include a plug here to significantly reduce the lifetime membership for Digital only QST subscription memberships, to about HALF the current $1225, accessible Worldwide. What, did I attack a staple cash cow? Not really. And if I did, I honestly don’t care. There is no essential difference in being a member in the domestic USA, or living abroad, as long as delivery of communications is only by email (no postal mailings), and QST is being downloading as PDF via Internet, not posted to one’s physical address. I personally value a lifetime ARRL membership at USD$650 with access to ALL QST editions online only, no physical mailings, Perhaps it’s reasonable to limit this USD$650 to anyone 50 years and over, and initially living in the USA (for the convenience of verifying their age), but after approved, lifetime access worldwide. Sorry, but by the time I’m 70 (ARRL’s current “senior” rate), I’m certainly not going to invest $750 into any subscription with the name “lifetime” attached to it!
Seriously, if ARRL offered a Digital PDF download QST, lifetime membership for anyone over age 50, currently living in the USA for USD$650, I’d sign up. What about you- anyone who has hesitated for lifetime, or has let their annual membership lapse and taken pause to restarting. If YOU were offered the same at USD$650, would YOU sign up, too? Yes, that’s still a lot, but I feel ARRL lifetime membership is worth that much, to me, and I’d save to make that investment.