CQ Magazine-We need them and they need us!

Posted: August 3, 2014 in Uncategorized
cq_magazine
 
CQ Magazine has been published since 1945. Its parent company CQ Communication Inc. has published over thirty paperback books covering all aspects of amateur radio.
 
Its no secret that CQ Magazine is having delivery problems. CQ Editor, Richard Moseson W2VU has publically commented on these issues. As depicted in the many forums on QRZ and Eham.net, many of us feel like we are not getting quite what we paid for. CQ Magazine itself is changing. They are eliminating some individual publications and rolling them into CQ Magazine.
 
Looking back over the years, Amateur Radio has lost many publications and vendors due to lack of support and increasing costs. The entire publishing world is being impacted by rising distribution costs. When is the last time you got a Time magazine or Newsweek in the mail?
 
As Hams, we have lost venerable publications such as 73 magazine (1960-2003), Electronics Illustrated (1959-1961),Ham Radio (1968-1990) Radio News (1917-1971) World Radio (1971-2008).  Do we need to lose CQ Magazine and add them to this growing list?
 
Losing CQ Magazine would be a tremendous loss and a loss that can and should be avoided. CQ Magazine provides not only a top notch magazine, they also sponsor many contests such as the CQ World Wide 160 meter contest, the CQ World Wide WPX Contest, the CQ World Wide RTTY Contest, and the CQ World Wide CW and SSB contests. They provide for several award programs including the WAZ or Worked All Zones award.  What would happen to the CQ Halls of Fame if CQ Magazine were to fold.
 
The bottom line is that CQ Magazine needs us and we need them!   We can help them by renewing our subscriptions and helping their bottom line. I plan to renew my subscription and I will select the Zinio option as I like to read CQ Magazine on my Ipad. This also avoids the late/missed delivery problems and reduces CQ Magazine’s distribution costs. We should all channel our anger/frustration over missed issues into supporting them through this particular challenge and help this ongoing concern. CQ Magazine is not a charity but without subscribers they cannot continue. Can we afford to lose another venerable Amateur Radio publication?  I think not.
 
What do you think?
 
Advertisements
Comments
  1. Robert WD8NVN says:

    I cancelled CQ Magazine in early 2013 for alot of reasons. I do not participate in the Worked All Zones program; I do not run in their contests; I think the DX Marathon, that CQ sponsors, degradates the world of DXing, by trying to create a 365 day radio contest; Hunting 3077 all counties? I don’t think so; and most articles of general and special interest seemed like old news.
    Unfortunately, that magazine when I did subscribe, was not worth the price of $31/ year. I am very happy to see CQ Magazine make a return, however, I can not see any reason today to resubscribe hardcopy or digital. Please convince otherwise…

    • Paul says:

      While I agree that losing another radio-based magazine would be bad, the trends don’t predict a strong future for radio-oriented periodicals… at least not in the printed sense. Back in the day, I remember looking forward to both Radio Electronics & Popular Electronics….. Gizmo Column, Circuit Circus, etc… Then they combined them into Electronics Now, which had a decent run, but eventually came to an end as well. In the last fifteen years, we’ve lost Popular Communications, Monitoring Times, 73 Magazine, CQ VHF, & The World Scanner Report, just name a few.

      The radio hobby as a whole has seen major changes, thanks in-part to the advance in technology (i.e. Cellular Telephones, Internet, and Smart Devices – PC’s / Tablets, etc…). Ironically, the very technology which enjoys its existence thanks (in-part) to our hobby has also played a factor in the demise of our hobby. I think the radio hobby culture, if it is ultimately going to survive the ‘long-haul’, will have to redefine itself, in terms of application & use in the modern ‘connected world.’ Demonstrating the value of communications, that is not network dependent, to the younger generations, would be a good start.

      After nearly 35 years in this hobby, I would like to see more interest in it. Perhaps more projects, solid & concise equipment reviews, brainstorming & concepts for new radio-related applications, just to name a few. It would be nice to see the essence of Popular Communications & CQ VHF combined into its own separate digital publication, rather than an addendum or codicil to CQ. There is enough above 30 MHz to warrant it. That being said, the publishers can’t ignore the bottom line. Food for thought.

  2. Dave Gomberg says:

    The Internet has changed all forms of publishing more-or-less totally and forever.
    Book publishers now must publish electronically to boost the bottom line. Soon books may be near-obsolete.
    Newspaper publishers are losing out to a combination of TV and the Internet.
    In fact, there is even reason to speculate and wonder about the future of TV.
    Magazine publishers face a similar problem.
    They must find a way to lower the cost of creating content and lower the cost of distributing content.
    It is not our job as subscribers to prop them up with subscriptions.
    If we have a job, it is to help them adapt to the new way things are done.

    Historically, amateur radio has depended on the collaborative work of hams to design and build radios.
    We may be headed back to that model. Software-defined radio offers the possibility of hams working
    together to create radios. The times they are a-changing….

    • n6pse says:

      Dave, thank you for sharing your views with us. Yes publications are changing. Some are worth subscribing and some are not. I think CQ Magazine in its entirety is worth saving and I hope others will consider renewing too.

  3. Ken WB2AMU says:

    The loss of CQ Magazine would be so significant in so many ways to the hobby, not only as a second ham radio magazine but also a major sponsor of some of the biggest contests in ham radio. That being said, the current non-delivery of the magazine is not an overnight event – the problem has been brewing for about five years. The publisher did not make adjustments soon enough in spending and was spread too thin with four publications (one is on-line). I wrote for CQ VHF for the past ten years and also worked with Gordon West for a VHF propagation book published by CQ. About six years ago, we started realizing that there were financial problems with the magazine. I think that the purchase of Worldradio Magazine was an ill-advised move as it did not give CQ any added advantage to the market. The past five years have seen a change with regards to hard copy magazines and the availability of advertisers. This change has caught many by surprise, including CQ. I can tell you that I saw copies of the July 2014 issue on the CQ table at the ARRL convention. I should have bought one but I though that I would be getting a copy eventually by mail…this did not happen yet. I think that they have no money to mail issues out at this point. Perhaps some worldwide radio organization will pick up the CQ WW – it will be expensive to tabulate and check scores as well as print certificates. A lot can happen…….

  4. n6pse says:

    Hi Robert. I want to see CQ survive. I’m not a fan of the CQ Marathon but I enjoy most aspects of the magazine and I want to see WAZ endure for the ages. For those reasons, I will renew the digital format and encourage others to do the same!

  5. Ken WB2AMU says:

    Roger on all, N6PSE. It has been a very frustrating period of time for the writers of CQ and CQ VHF. Most have not been paid for over five years. A number are owed amounts in excess of $4000 each. A number of us go on, knowing that payment is not coming anytime soon but at some point, the light at the end of the tunnel is reached…there is no money at all to pay anyone. With a number of subscribers dropping out, that hurts available funding. I was very surprised to see CQ at the ARRL convention with three people, the ad lady, the editor and the publisher. They only had the June and July issue of CQ on the table and some calenders. I am really not sure what the game plan was. I had eroneously thought that as they had hard copies of the July issue, they would be sending them out soon…Wrong! It seems like they may have some hard copies but no money available to mail the issues. The editor asked me if I was still “on board”….I said that I was but did not have anything of interest to write at this point.

    They have blown time sensitive information like hamfest dates and contest dates by being a month late or more. By the way, hard copy magazine sill seems to resonate with hams as I have gotten more responses for an ad placed in the hard copy magazine than in the digital format. If CQ falls apart by the end of this year, it will be a major disaster for the CQ WW in October and November. It costs a lot of money to check logs, print results and print certificates. I would bet that it could exceed $20,000 or more for one CQ WW to be scored. I admire your approach in continuing to support CQ by means of their digital version. However, please keep in mind that they are not paying authors now either…I know this from an article that I wrote that appeared in the CQ Plus digital edition in February – no payment received, nor do I expect to receive any. Perhaps the best scenario would be for CQ to sell out to another interest to run the magazine. I am not sure though if someone would be willing to take on the liabilities of missed issues and missed author payments.

    I believe that as I saw July issues on the table at the convention two weeks ago, they apparently do not have either the proper number of copies to send out or they do not have postage to mail these magazines out. The end may be here, I think….we will see what happens in August and September.

    • n6pse says:

      Ken, I really hope that CQ can survive. It’s heartbreaking to read that writers and contributors such as yourself have not been getting paid. If they can stay afloat and move to a digital only publication, that could greatly ease their distribution costs and subscriber headaches. While I’ve been frustrated a time or two with late and missed print issues, I deeply want to see them survive.

      As you write, it might be too late. Let’s hope that they can sell or get an infusion of cash and muscle and keep things going. Thanks for sharing your insider’s perspective with us.

  6. N7SMI says:

    A primary problem is that CQ seems to think that the solution to their problems is increasingly poor customer service. “If we can delay deliver just a bit more…” or “Maybe if we don’t pay authors for a while…”. This just aggravates their customers even more. It’s almost inexplicable how boneheaded the organization seems to be administered.

    I’ve been waiting 8 months (EIGHT MONTHS!) for my WAZ certificate. I have chosen to not purchase any CQ publications or participate in any other CQ awards until it arrives and there is some indication that service will be improving instead of getting continually worse.

  7. Ken WB2AMU says:

    Here is a little bit of perspective. This review of CQ came from eHam product review in March of 2006, eight years ago:
    ———————————————————————————

    I subscribed to CQ for a few years in the 1970’s and again in the early 1990’s, and thought I would try it again in summer 2005. What a mistake!

    The issues arrive sporadically. Usually near the end of the cover month, if at all. Here it is March 1 and I have yet to receive the February issue. Based on the comments of others on this topic, this seems to be a common problem for anyone living more than a few hours from the distribution point.

    The content is nearly all advertising and contest results. In the 7 issues I have received so far, there was a total of two interesting technical articles. Apparently the magazine has decided to utilize the very cheapest distribution contractor and then handle the complaints on a piecemeal basis instead of doing it right the first time.

    A couple others have commented that we should “support” CQ Magazine regardless of shoddy delivery and content. “Support” what? CQ is owned by a for-profit corporation, not a church or political party. It isn’t a charity. The ads may indeed partially pay for the magazine, but the subscription isn’t free either.

    In my opinion, unless you like to see pages upon pages of contest results and MFJ ads in the issues you are lucky enough to receive, the subscription price is a waste of money. I am going back to ARRL-QST next time.
    ———————————————————————————————–

    Note that even eight years ago, this complaint plus others at that time in 2006, had the same complaint about prompt delivery. Also, note the opinion stated in the next to last paragraph about whether hams should support CQ Magazine….this writer suggests no!

    As I mentioned in my first post, this was not a problem that was happening overnight for CQ. It stems back eight or more years. There were issues with timeliness and content (more technical articles wanted by some readers and less emphasis on contests).

    This is EIGHT Years ago that this particular review was published. During this eight year period, print media has been taking a beating due to the changing market. CQ has been having issues for years and have not been good to their authors and columnist with regards to payments. So, the bottom line is that CQ did not change its behavior and it lost too many subscribers and advertisers to sustain the required amount of money needed to survive. It has fallen out of viability and sustainability at this point in August of 2014. Even the covers have varied very little over the years with regards to subject…….

    Sadly, there will be a lot to miss and there will only be one ham radio publication. Perhaps this is not what we want or what is ideal for hams, but if CQ had made some adjustments back in 2006 and done a better job, it would be in good shape today.

    Au Revior and 73,

    KEN WB2AMU

  8. Andy UA3AB says:

    I’m subscriber with Zinio and awaiting my August issue patiently:) Will probably renew as long as CQ promise to deliver.

    • n6pse says:

      Hello Andy-my brother from 7O6T! I think continuing to subscribe to the digital edition is the best thing to do. That reduces CQ Magazine’s cost and avoids some of the delivery problems. That is what I have decided to do as well.

      73 my friend,

      Paul N6PSE

  9. Ken WB2AMU says:

    At this point, it appears that CQ is going to go the all digital route…we will have to see how that will work out….

  10. Ken WB2AMU says:

    Another thing to note…..all of the negative reviews that were posted after July 18 on eHam about CQ Magazine have been deleted by eHam. This means that the overall score that was previously 2.8 had now gone up to 3.5! How about that!!

    • Mats SM3LGO says:

      They deleted even earlier reviews. My review from May was also removed. I just stated the true facts: that I paid for three years but did not receive a single copy after December 2013 (and I still don’t get any mags as of September…) Anyone considering buying a subscription from them should have this info before doing so. A three year “DX” subscription is almost $200, I believe for many of us, it is too much money to just “gamble” with.

  11. Dave says:

    If CQ can’t afford to distribute the printed copy they should offer the digital subscription to the subscribers instead. I want CQ to survive but if I they don’t deliver the magazine why should I renew my subscription?

    CQ is the only magazine that I am aware of that charges more for the digital version than the printed copy.

  12. Dave says:

    Update: The digital subscription price is now lower than print edition. It was higher when I renewed last fall.

  13. Chris NU1O says:

    Eham deleted one of my messages about a product. Nothing I wrote was false but they only want 4 and 5 star reviews.

    TS-590s owners are having terrible problems with the ALC and low power but you’d never know it by reading Eham. If Eham is going to censor messages somebody else will create a business that offers real reviews of products and services and not sanitized reviews.

    I’m not an avid contestor and CQ hardly ever has any technical articles so good riddance! I’m not subscribing just so some can say they kept an amateur radio magazine alive. The free market does work so eventually something else will take CQ’s place but it’ll probably be on an internet site and that’s OK with me.

  14. Luke VK3HJ says:

    I’ve been a subscriber to CQ Magazine for only the past few years, and I enjoy reading it on my tablet.
    As an International subscriber, Digital publications are far more convenient. I also have a Digital only subscription to QST. I really don’t want paper magazines piling up here.
    I have no interest in the one and two-day contests that are on most weekends, but do enjoy the CQ DX Marathon, as it gives me a reason to turn the radio on each day.
    Earlier this year, I took up a 3-year Digital subscription renewal, so hope the publication continues!
    It sounds like it’s time for new management, as it sounds like the current people are losing their enthusiasm.

  15. N0UN says:

    I subscribed for two years in May, then cancelled two months later (late July) after I never received a magazine. Two months? How hard must it have been to send a current (or last months) magazine to a new subscriber? That tells me whatever they are going through is self-inflicted. Too bad as I WAS rooting for them to get it together.

  16. Ken WB2AMU says:

    It is truly bizarre for eham to suddenly after two months to delete over 30 reviews that they consider to be in the guidelines- why did they not delete them when the reviews were written? Sounds like a dictatorship of some sort. Meanwhile, what many people do not know is that CQ is down to a skeleton crew at the office of less than six people total. It has been like this for years. They never did live within their means:
    1) They rent office in an expensive part of Long Island
    2) They were running four publications at the same time
    3) They stopped paying writers for over four years, so many stopped writing.
    4) They would sponsor a party at Dayton for advertisers with money that they did not have for several years (stopped in 2014)
    5) They were not truthful about the real situation
    6) They were not able to turn the corner in getting ads – hence four advertisting managers in 14 months (latest one resigned this week).
    7) They have fallen behind on contest certificants and WAZ awards

    They may hang in there as a digital publication but will have to keep pricing competitive since a lot of stuff is free on the internet.

  17. Doug says:

    It’s hard to feel any love for CQ. CQ Communications embraces the Bizzarro World version of magazine publishing fulfillment. You pay your money and maybe you’ll receive something— or maybe not. And if you make an inquiry, you may or may not be summarily ignored. In what universe is this any way to run a business?

    I had to cancel when they started with the double issue b.s. Been down that road before with 73 Magazine. Six months following the 73 double issue in 2003 they were gone. I expect CQ to follow suit. 73 still owes me money.

    CQ Communications owes me a refund check which was supposed to arrive in 6 to 8 weeks. That was back in April. This bunch gets you coming and going.

    BTW I was a subscriber- on and off- since 1984. They used to be much, MUCH better. The editorial content took a nosedive when Alan Dorhoffer (K2EEK) died. They never got it back. The editor since then seems to be one of a different mindset. The attitude expressed in his Zero Bias editorials is combative, unpleasant, and frequently downright strange.

    I don’t know when or why their business management practices got so bad. It’s really a shame especially when you consider the same people have been running the business side of the company for decades. I suppose desperate times called for desperate measures. The ends justify the means and all that baloney.

    If CQ stops publishing which seems like a possibility at this point we will be left with QST as the only major American amateur radio magazine in existence. Modern-day QST is about as interesting as wallpaper paste. They were also a better publication in days gone by.

  18. WB5OSD Bobby Brownlee says:

    I applied for the WAZ Award in Oct. 2013. As of Aug 2, 2014 no award received. Three
    letters and three landline calls have been for naught. I even sent CQ an legal size s.a.s.e. in hopes they might send my award. Nothing but rude silence.

  19. John, K9MM says:

    Lots of print magazines are in trouble. Many have ceased publication in recent years. What irks me most about the situation with CQ is that they have not been honest with their subscribers about the true situation. Last year they were claiming the problem was that they were switching printers. It shouldn’t be a problem to get a magazine printed unless you owe the printer money. The comment above about how long it has been since they paid any of their writers reinforces my suspicion that the crux of the matter is that that have a very severe cash flow problem. My guess is that they owed their original printer so much that he cut them off. Then they couldn’t find another printer that would take their business without payment in advance. And very possibly they can’t afford the postage to mail the magazines when they are printed. My July issue didn’t arrive until August 16th. I’ve been a CQ subscriber since 1958 and I will stick with them, but I fear the end is not far off. Truly a sad situation!

    If CQ folds, I think it is very likely that other organizations will step in to continue most of the awards and contests. I certainly hope so!

    • John, K9MM says:

      My August issue arrived on October 9th, almost 2 months after my July issue. CQ says they are working to get back on schedule, but they are still going in the wrong direction.

      • John, K9MM says:

        My September issue of CQ arrived today, only 9 days after the August issue. This is a step in the right direction.

  20. Kevin Hobson WD8MQD says:

    I agree with many of the posts here. The line being thrown out by CQ more than a year ago that they were having “printer issues” rings disingenuous by a large degree at this time. I received my July issue on 16 August. Now on 23 September no sign of the August issue. I echo the comments that the beginning of the end may have been the double-issue caper a few months ago. Well, that did not work too well. All good things must come to an end, they say. I predict CQ will fold , both in print and digital , within one year.

    • n6pse says:

      Kevin, from what I have heard from former CQ staff members and others, I think you are probably right. It would be a shame to see CQ Magazine fold but the indications are certainly on the table and there is plenty of cause for concern. It’s really up to CQ now to communicate with their readers and express a plan and direction. Thanks for your interest in my Blog.

      73,

      Paul N6PSE

  21. Kevin Hobson WD8MQD says:

    Kevin Hobson posting again just as an update to my posting of 24 September. Today is 23 October. I have still not received any further issues. Yesterday just to amuse myself I called their office and left a message on their voice mail requesting to know the status of my subscription and also advising them of the non-delivery situation. I left 2 contact phone numbers which I verbally repeated twice, and I left them my email contact information (again repeated carefully, slowly and twice). Not surprisingly I have received no response. Yesterday I received their email (that I am assuming they are sending to everyone who is on their “subscriber list”) offering CQ calendars for 2015. Quite amusing given their current record. And this morning to my further amusement a google search of complaints against them shows that some people have filed complaints via the BBB and have gotten refunds. Good for them. We all should do so. I tend to disagree with the concept that “we need them and they need us” – a more truthful expression might be “put up or shut up” – those of us who have paid for our subscriptions are now the victims of fraud. It takes a lot of arrogance for a company that cannot deliver their product or act with basic courtesy and return a phone call or message, to send out renewal invitations in the mail (snail mail) groveling that their “product” is “hard to get out the door at times” and seeking our ongoing trust and patience. Needless to say, I will not be renewing. I encourage others to also not renew. Let this sick patient die.

    • Mats SM3LGO says:

      After 10 months and no sign of a single 2014-issue of CQ I contacted the bank that issues the Master Card I use. Indeed, I got a full refund (which I will _not_ spend on CQ calendars…)

  22. KA3ZOF says:

    Einstein is often quoted as saying: “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result” Maybe, it is time management looks elsewhere for inspiration as to how to make their core business profitable once more.

    Like many hams, I’m into photography and computers – I notice that magazines from the UK seem to do well on the magazine racks at our local bookstore – they usually contain a CD or a DVD which provides added content such as beginner, intermediate and advanced tutorials in PDF or video formats, project layouts & software updates/freeware/trial versions or plug-ins for such programs. In at least one case, the publisher makes back issues available as a PDF on their website after 18 months at no additional cost. They struck a deal with their readers – a bit higher purchase price for a few less ads and therefore a bit more content.

    Please note, these magazines make their way into the US on a timely basis – I don’t notice any late/missed delivery problems. While I would enjoy having the option to read the magazine on my tablet – I don’t enjoy proprietary formats so Zinio is out for me. I don’t know if any of these ideas would save CQ but I do know the Brits continue producing quality magazines that sell in this country and presumably their own. They’ve done this by mixing media which appeals to the younger audience and doesn’t alienate their older readers. They provide more content rather than less and yes, you pay a bit more, but it seems people will pay – if they feel they are getting the benefit of the bargain. I have to agree with you – I really don’t want to see another ham related magazine go down the tube – variety being the spice of life it is good to have choices. However, while you correctly noted that CQ Magazine is not a charity – you neglected the flip side of the coin which many of the other readers have already pointed out – their readers are not banks interested in providing interest free loans given the way things have played out. The management at CQ has used up a fair measure of their accumulated “good will/reputation” within the ham community by being less than forthright from the very beginning and because they have abused the other members of their community – this has made it difficult for many hams to rally to their defense because there is a certain sense of betrayal.This is not to say that there haven’t been some impassioned defenses posted on several of the lists to which I subscribe – they certainly came to praise Caesar not to bury him; but if Caesar is going to survive – he’s going to have to stop doing the same things over and over again and expecting a different result He might start with an equally impassioned apology to their reader base in the hope of forgiveness and a second chance.

    It might not hurt if the ARRL looked into this as well – there are people who only have dial-up internet service who would appreciate having access to the added features of their subscription included on a disk.
    Dan

  23. Peter ZL1HD says:

    RIPPED OFF: I helped them out back in 2013 by renewing my sub until mid 2017. The payback? No magazine delivered for the last year despite many unanswered emails. I have also phoned them from ZL a few times only to be given excuses & others blamed for non delivery. Still NO magazine! Soliciting money for Goods or Services then not delivering is a crime in my country as I’m sure it is in yours. It’s called THEFT.

    Get your act together CQ Magazine

  24. Duffy says:

    CQ Magazine continues to lie and hide the truth from subscribers. Remember the combined March/April issue that was to get them back on track? Didn’t happen. How we have another combined issue about a year later. Advertisers are dropping. Subscribers aren’t renewing. Even digital is now late as it used to be mostly just the paper being late. Subscribers who cancel are not getting refunds, but CQ stops sending the magazine. Authors have not been paid for years in some cases. They do not respond to most emails or phone calls, especially when requesting cancellation or refunds. This only reason CQ is having issues in my opinion is that it is poorly run, poorly managed, and they have no idea how to handle a crisis. Cannot send out magazines to people who have paid for them, but they can spend the money to go to Hamcation. I will NEVER give them any money again for magazines or books. Bad businesses need to shut down.

    • John, K9MM says:

      My December 2014 issue of CQ arrived just two days ago. I still believe the crux of their problem is a severe cash flow problem. Whether or not this is a result of poor management is unclear. Online publishing and the dissemination of information on the internet has killed many print magazines and will no doubt continue to do so. But whatever the cause, the fact remains that CQ in its current state is not meeting its obligations to its subscribers, authors and advertisers. I wish them only the best but I am not optimistic about their chances for survival.

      • Paul A. Alpiser says:

        As I mentioned back in December, the radio publication industry is drying up… at least as we once knew it back in the mid-1990’s & before. Whether it be the Internet, changes in the interest & direction of the readership, technology, or simply poor management at the respective publishers, the radio hobby & the publications that surround it are getting to be few & far between. I’ve been away from the hobby for a few years, and in trying to return, it’s apparent that things have changed significantly – unfortunately not for the better.

        Radio Shack is closing their doors, and the CEO of Motorola wants to selloff/shutdown the remnants of what once was a great company, with a legacy that’s roots run deep. GRE, which was once a terrific source of scanners & receivers, and the only real competition to the likes of Uniden is now gone. The face of radio has changed, and either the hobby & its remaining publications adapt, reinvent themselves, and find ways to draw fresh interest, or they die a painful death.

        Don’t get me wrong, I would love to see fresh, young, & enthusiastic people, that are genuinely interested in our hobby, whether it’s Amateur Radio, Scanning Enthusiasts, SWL’s, FM DXing, etc… The question is what would be the ‘magic’ recipe, to draw their attention, and retain their interest?

        With the new narrow banding of VHF-Hi & UHF, as well as all the new digital formats; some of which are proprietary & can’t be monitored, it becomes difficult if not impossible to listen, to much of what was once tunable via a basic/traditional scanner, just 5-10 years ago. On top of that, a new scanner which might ‘hear/decode’ some of those digital formats runs $400-500. The younger generations are already on the Internet, with their computers & smart devices. If they’re even remotely interesting in listening to radio transmissions, they’re more than likely going to elect to listen to an audio stream, and forego the expense of buying a scanner, whose purchase price is more than their car payment!

      • n6pse says:

        Paul, I share your views. One has to wonder about the future of these great technologies and our hobby. As a teenager, I was glued to my scanner. My 16 year old son is glued to Facebook and his gaming PC. Things are so much different. Thank you for your interest in my Blog.

        73,

        Paul N6PSE

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s