[50mhz] Re: QSL's

[Peter Markavage]

Of course, way way back in time, postage for QSL's either $.01 or $.03
per card at least when I started. Now they're $.26 each, post card size
or $.41 if they're larger. This also doesn't take into account the cost
of cards, or if you enclose the card in an envelope (that's $.41) or if
you include a SASE which is another $.41. Today, that nostalgic "feel and
smell" of collecting cards can hit the pocketbook in a big way.

Pete, wa2cwa

On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 15:40:28 -0400 "Mark Walton" <wmwalton3 at comcast.net>
writes:
> Jon,
> 
> I am with you 100%.
> I became a ham when I was 13 yrs old. There are when I look at those 
> old
> cards and read the station description, it takes me back to another 
> time
> when ham radio was the most exciting and challenging thing in my 
> world.
> 
> Mark
> K3MRK
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: 50mhz-bounces at mailman.qth.net 
> [mailto:50mhz-bounces at mailman.qth.net]
> On Behalf Of Jon Pearl - W4ABC
> Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 3:33 PM
> To: 50mhz at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [50mhz] Re: QSL's
> 
> 
> Some of my most prized possessions are my QSL cards.  Each one is 
> unique; 
> from the handwriting and the ink that the other ham used to 'pen' 
> his 
> remarks, to their texture and smell.  Old cards are akin to the 
> music you 
> listened to in your youth.  They take you back to another time and 
> place. 
> They make you smile.
> 
> I've got cards that are bi-fold and tri-fold, to one's that contain 
> pictures
> 
> of trains, planes and spaceships.  Some cards are sprinkled with 
> glue and 
> sparkles.  Many of my favorites contain glossy picture's of long 
> lost 
> friends who I'll never have the opportunity to QSO with, again.
> 
> Like anything else that we place great value on in our lives, those 
> things 
> that others share with us that 'they' prize, will be thought of, all 
> the 
> more dearly.
> 
> While exchanging 'paper' via the Internet does have a tangible 
> purpose, 
> there shouldn't be too much head-scratching as to why the act gets 
> little 
> respect.  Any commentary containing the words "I QSL via electronic 
> means - 
> only" seems non sequitur.  For many eQSL'ing has all the odor of 
> being 
> ahhhhh 'thrifty' rather than being more efficient.
> 
> 
> For many - QSL'ing via the mail, has for a long time, gone beyond 
> the simple
> 
> check box in the log book.
> 
> 
> 
> Fraternally,
> 
> 
> Jon Pearl - W4ABC