I wrote back in May about the ARRL’s plan to raise dues. Well, three days ago, members received an email from president Rick Roderick, K5UR, informing us that the board has voted to increase the dues and by how much. Here are some excerpts from that message:
- “I’m writing to let you know that they made the tough, but necessary, decision to increase the regular membership dues rate to $59 a year starting January 1, 2024 (see 2024 Dues Rates). Additionally, we have chosen to separate the printed, mailed magazine from regular membership.” This last sentence is the kicker. Starting in January, there is going to be an additional $25 charge if you want print versions of QST or On the Air magazines. And, this charge will apply, even if you are a current member.
- “We know from the survey results that most of you will find the new rate reasonable, or even ask why we didn’t set it higher.” The new rate may be reasonable, but seriously, how many are going to ask for an even higher dues increase? Get real, Rick.
- In justifying the dues increase, K5UR writes,“There is no other organization that is working harder to advance a vision that allows any citizen to explore, develop, and practice radio communications and radio technology [his bold, not mine].” I think that you could make a casethat ARDC is working just as hard as the ARRL, and not only that, has the potential to be an even better advocate for amateur radio.
As I wrote earlier, I have no problem with a dues increase, but I’d feel a lot better about it, if I thought that the ARRL had a strategy for increasing membership. Yesterday, KY4ID, started a Reddit post on the dues increase. It included this graph from the 2022 ARRL Annual Report:
Keep in mind that this drop in membership is still a holdover from the last dues increase. I can only imagine how much membership will drop after this new dues increase kicks in.
Anyone got any new ideas?
As I’ve said, I’m not that concerned about the dues increase personally, but what really worries me is that there doesn’t really seem to be any original thinking at the ARRL about how to actually increase membership. I know this isn’t an easy problem to solve, but having a strong membership is the key to all of the ARRL activities. The ARRL would have a lot more influence if they could boast of having 200,000 or 300,000 members.
There are smart people on the ARRL board and on staff. They need to make this their top priority.
The Reddit post had a few interesting ideas on how to increase membership. ItsBail, one of the subreddit moderators wrote, “I feel the ARRL needs to stop putting all their eggs in the boomer basket. They need to spread out into other STEM related hobbies and plant seeds. Put their social media accounts to good use (National Parks twitter is a good example of using social media to their advantage). Update their very much antiquated website and VEC dept. Stop focusing on the so called ‘haters’ for making suggestions or dismissing them as just complainers.”
Stargazer12am had another interesting take. They wrote, “Personally, I’d like to see people opt out of the mailing portion and invest the difference into their local club. Even if not a member of local clubs, the sponsorship approach (if done on a grand scale) would generate more interest and involvement in the art of amateur radio. ARRL membership would probably wouldn’t take as much of a hit in the long run if we do our part to help locally stir interest and promote a community of hams.”
I retired recently, and one of my retirement projects is going to research association membership issues and see if I can’t contribute some new ideas on how to combat membership decline. As I’ve mentioned before, I am also a member of the local Rotary Club, and Rotary Clubs have also seen similar membership declines. There must be something that we can do.
Kate P. says
I’m at the tail end of the Boomers (second quarter 1964), and you are right. I think I was the youngest person in my club for a long time, until they some younger people with kids. They’re also very involved with the Scouts. But there was a huge gap between myself and the older guys in the group.
Josh AJ9BM says
ARDC has a great deal of potential, and I really hope they can be strong leaders for an open future for amateur radio. But, based on what the Open Research people have run into*, as well as anecdotes I’ve heard from other friends, it sounds like ARDC is run less like a professional foundation and more like an informal fund.
This seems to be a really poor way to manage the proceeds from selling off the community’s most valuable resource**. More importantly, that attitude doesn’t give me confidence that ARDC is interested in understanding what’s best for amateur radio. To be fair, ARRL has the same kind of problem, but in a more East Coast kind of way.
I fear that we’re still at the “Be the change you want to see in amateur lobbying you want to see in the world” stage of building our advocacy org for the 21st century.
* I’d include a link to documentation of this behavior here, but that would likely get spam trapped. Search for “ardc ori update on a troubling situation” and you should find it on w5nyv’s blogspot.
** For those unaware, ham radio was allocated a huuuge block of IP addresses in the 80s, which became invaluable. The sale of that generated a great deal of cash, which seems reasonable now that IPv6 is a plausible option moving forward. One could easily argue that our most valuable resource is spectrum, but we can’t sell that off without shooting ourselves in the foot. Or maybe it’s the friends we made along the way.
Dan KB6NU says
Keep in mind that the blog post that you point out is W5NYV’s version of events. ARDC’s version is different.
Having been an ARDC employee for nearly two years, I can assure you that they’re doing their best to be good stewards of the foundation’s endowment and advance amateur radio. The grants program is definitely not being run as an “informal fund.”
There are always going to be some who don’t agree with the way that an organization is run, and being a relatively new organization, ARDC is still finding its way in some respects. Having said that, I stand by my comment that ARDC “has the potential to be an even better advocate for amateur radio.”
Bob K0NR says
ARDC is both a work in progress and a great organization.
I encourage anyone that wants to understand what ARDC is doing to review the information on ardc.net and attend the regular community update meetings.
Judge for yourself.
I am a volunteer serving as the Chair of the Grant Advisory Committee for ARDC.
Bob K0NR
John Thacker says
It’s past time for ARRL to “trim the fat.” Too many employees doing very little, other than begging for money. I can’t renew my membership and pay additionally for QST magazine to be delivered. I’m out when my renewal date comes up. They don’t really want to hear what members think, that’s one reason the membership is so low, compared to the number of active amateur radio licenses. They need to review their purpose and mission statement. Changes must be made. Their SE Director seems to be the only one that understands the current condition of ham radio and what it needs to continue.
Dave New, N8SBE says
Rick, K5UR lost my interest a while ago when he allowed that he considered a portion of our membership not worthy of listening to. Something about ‘stupid questions’ or some such.
I adhere to the philosophy of ‘there is no such thing as a stupid question’. A leader that espouses the opposite is not thinking clearly.
ARRL stomped on their own foot when they pointed out that they had only raised due twice in 22 years. That’s an issue right there. They should have raised dues essentially every year or every other year, in keeping with the current inflation rate. Waiting ten years or more between dues increases, just shocks the membership unnecessarily. Better to ‘boil the frog’ slowly.
Goody K3NG says
I criticize ARRL a lot these days, but raising dues is a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” sort of thing. If ARRL had implemented some reasonable increase each year, the ‘zed and other forums would be on fire once each year with everyone complaining about members having “fixed incomes” and “ARRL employees driving BMWs”. I do sense there’s some cognitive dissonance within the League leadership on ARRL’s standing in the amateur radio community and with the FCC. No, Rick, no one is saying “Take more of my money, please!”
Goody K3NG says
The ARRL dues increase was predictable and 100% financially justifiable. However, it definitely will result in a drop in membership, and I actually wonder if it will result in a net loss in membership revenue for some time. The graph above is frightening. That is a precipitous drop in membership just over a few months, before implementation of this announced dues increase.
ARRL is preserving amateur radio’s past and ARDC is enabling its future. It may be unfair to compare the two in this way as ARRL provides a lot of different services, but that’s how I see it. ARRL needs to reinvent itself, from the ground up. One has to ask, if I were to build a new amateur radio advocacy organization, would it look like and do what ARRL does today? It’s doubtful. ARRL’s governance structure is a product of its radio relay days, its public service PR a relic of the 50s.
A concern I have with ARDC is that the nest egg from the sale of AMPR IP space isn’t going to last forever. (Can more space be sold before the value of IPv4 drops due to IPv6 adoption?)
The Reddit post regarding STEM (I’d change that to STEAM) and “planting seeds” is dead-on correct. This opportunity is being squandered. Compare a QST magazine with a Make magazine. I know QST doesn’t encompass all of ARRL or amateur radio, but I think the comparison yields some good information. ARRL needs to be engaging STEM audiences and doing things that result in more than a QST blurb,
The phrase “be the change you want to see” really resonates with me. It’s a bit of a challenging, and perhaps chilling statement. I’ll admit it’s easy to criticize ARRL. I often ask, what could *I* be doing?
Invigorating and leveraging local clubs is a common answer, however I think this is a dead end. Most clubs these days have one or two over-worked “spark plug” members leading things and the rest of the organization is low energy, low participation. With the Internet, organizations tied to a specific geographical area are a thing of the past. Participation in local organizations (outside of amateur radio), across the board everywhere, has declined in the last decade or two. I would not focus time on associations and solving the membership issue. It’s a larger trend that just can’t be bucked.
Individuals doing things to make change is great, but it’s one individual and it’s not replicate-able.
What’s the answer? I tend to agree with KE9v (https://ke9v.net/2023/07/26/unsolvable.html) that the ARRL problem just may well be unsolvable. Perhaps we need a new organization, one built from the ground up with specific focus groups with people with expertise, with groups like STEAM engagement, maker/hobbyist engagement, FCC / regulatory, public relations, and media production? I’m not talking about a new ARRL or ARRL 2.0. This is starting with a blank piece of paper.
Tom Brooks says
The increase might have been needed, but there are a lot of us who are having to live on a fixed government income. Because of inflation that income has become smaller and smaller. First the FCC decided to increase our license. Then gas when up, this has caused everything else to go up. Now we are told ( not asked) that the membership in ARRL will be going up. I have loved the ARRL, the mag and the help from them. That said, I still have a small income to live on. I have to cut the outgo somewhere and yours is one thing I can do without. What else can I do?
jeff says
I believe that ARRL has shot their own foot off with this “dues increase.” I expect that a large portion of the membership is retired folks on a fixed income that will think twice about $84/year. Lots of people (including myself) do not want to read a “magazine” on a computer screen or tablet. I expect that >20% of the membership will not renew.
I don’t have a problem with this number myself. I just paid about $90 to renew my RSGB membership, however their magazine “RadCom” is significantly better content-wise than QST.
And that brings up another point. QST’s content has been pretty sad of late. “Classic Radio” — don’t care. “Celebrating our Legacy” — don’t care. FIVE PAGES of “A look back” — interesting, but not really useful. *None* of this is interesting a young person. You hardly see a schematic in the magazine any more.
Bob K0NR says
For the most part, there is nothing new here with this dues increase. The macro trends are a very real challenge for print publications and the ARRL is not an exception. At the same time, long-term inflation inevitably raises costs and the recent surge in inflation is particularly troublesome. So the dues are going to have to be raised.
The decline in membership is another persistent problem, especially when measured as a percent of existing amateur radio licensees. The key question is how should an ARRL membership deliver value to prospective members? We’ve all been ‘cussing and discussing this for years and a remedy has not emerged.
Ron O says
An organization I’ve abandoned over the years for a number of reasons. But I’m so old I STILL received both a 20 and 25 year membership certificate.
Recently their board of directors chose to raise membership dues from ? $49 a year to $59 a year. That’s understandable.
What is NOT understandable is removing the print, mailed copy of their flagship magazine, which, frankly, is why many people belong in the first place. I’m not saying I’m one of those people, as I understand what they do as a lobbying group and what that is worth to the hobby and to me personally.
But…..
Many people won’t understand. Some people, like me, see this as going too far. Because it does. YES you get on line access. So what? It doesn’t replace a hard copy, hold it in your hand, put it on the coffee table print copy. Still want that? Cough up another $25 a year so the STATUS QUO from this year now costs $84.
That’s a 70% increase.
And that is likely the straw where we part ways permanently. I can’t support an organization so out of touch with its members, or so bad at math. Because 9% inflation doesn’t justify a 70% increase.
Russell Hines says
Ron O kind of beat me to the punch. And he’s right, many members joined the League because they received QST.
At this year’s Hamvention, I renewed my membership for multiple years in anticipation of a dues increase, even though I had a few years left before my membership expired. At the time of my renewal, a mailed hard-copy of QST was a part of my membership. Sure, I could choose to forgo the hard-copy, or choose the hard-copy, which I have for several years (I’ve been a ham since 1976, so, yeah, LOTS of QST’s).
The point is, it was MY choice. Those were the terms of membership. I understand increasing costs of printing, mailing, etc. But I didn’t change the terms of my membership agreement during the term of my membership, the League did.
A membership agreement is a type of contract. In exchange for my dues, I expected to receive certain services from the League, which included QST magazine, per my membership agreement at the time of my renewal. Try doing what the League did with any other contract, and I’d wager you might find yourself in court.
But this case won’t likely be filed. The difference here is, League members were represented by a membership-elected Board of Directors, THEY made this decision for US.
In short, the Board sold us out.
Sheila Cantrell says
This will not go over well with the membership as a whole. For one thing, the timing is terrible. Not only is inflation at multi-year high, but we’re all having to pay a premium price just to renew our licenses not to mention the same price being squeezed out of new hams too. And now THIS???? What were they thinking? This is only 15 dollars less than a full DOUBLING in the cost of membership when you consider the added price of printed QSTs. Greed doesn’t look good on anyone including the ARRL!
Winston Lawrence says
RIA’s gone (hey, I didn’t agree with everything she said, but I never felt she was two-faced). The ARRL is raising its dues and dropping the print subscription, and I’ve only been licensed for three years so I don’t have a lot of history to go on, but I JUST subscribed for three years, and you (ARRL) can’t keep your word? You have my money, but you are on a countdown timer, and at this point, I Am NOT GOING TO RENEW if you don’t do better. The ARDC DOES seem to get it by funding things useful to amateur radio and NOT just publishing a POTA/SOTA/BOTA/ and what next {UFO-COMMS for extras?] book grab.