[OKDXA] Charge for LoTW Upload ??

Fri Mar 24 18:12:07 EDT 2023

Jeff,

I  have shared these comments before but here goes.  As far as I know it
was an unwritten policy of the ARRL that dxpeditions should not charge for
QSL's.  There was one German station in particular that they refused to
recognize QSLs from his dxpeditions.  They pretty much held this until LoTW
came along.  With LoTW this issue became fuzzy.  The dxpections found they
made more money by holding the upload to LoTW until they had milked
everything they could out of the regular QSL mode, be it OQRS or direct.
In other words they said we are qsling everyone through LoTW just not
right away.  When the rebels started their "Pay to Play" campaign, it seems
everything changed.  I think they caught the DXCC desk off guard and got
away with it. I talked with Norm at Hq at the time and he seemed to think
it was too late to do anything about it.  Now it is a "free for all".  The
problem is only going to get worse if we don't do something.  Hams are
willing to pay whatever the cost for that ultimate New One.

The DXAC is currently reviewing the DXCC rules.  They are mostly focussed
on the requirements for an entity but I'm sure they would like to hear your
comments.  With your permission, I'll share them with the DXAC.

Coy

Coy C Day, N5OK
20685 SW 29
Union City, OK 73090
H(405) 483-5632 C(405) 448-2368
n5ok at arrl.net

On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 4:39 PM Harrop, Sierra, W5DX via OKDXA <
okdxa at mailman.qth.net> wrote:

> Hey folks,
>
> I'll inquire on Monday with my colleagues that handle LoTW if there is an
> official policy on that. I would be inclined to think there may not be,
> because who would have anticipated a radio amateur to monetize a QSL
> process that involves no direct cost? Cards and stamps cost money, I've
> included green stamps with a card request from a faraway place, but LoTW is
> a service provided by ARRL at no cost to the amateur community.
>
> I can tell you it is against the spirit of what we want LoTW to be, and we
> would discourage the practice. I'll report back what I find - but know that
> you have the attention of someone within ARRL HQ Staff who shares your
> concerns.
>
> 73,
> Sierra
>
>
> Sierra Harrop, W5DX
> she/her/hers
> Public Relations and Outreach Manager
> ARRL  The National Association for Amateur Radio®
> 225 Main Street, Newington, CT 06111-1400 USA
> O: (860) 594-0289
> sharrop at arrl.org
> www.arrl.org
> linktr.ee/sierraharrop
> Join ARRL and be a part of the global ham radio community!
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: okdxa-bounces at mailman.qth.net <okdxa-bounces at mailman.qth.net> On
> Behalf Of D. Boyer via OKDXA
> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2023 5:23 PM
> To: Jeff Martin <jeffk5we at gmail.com>; Oklahoma DX Association <
> okdxa at mailman.qth.net>
> Subject: Re: [OKDXA] Charge for LoTW Upload ??
>
> Jeff,
> I am in 100% agreement with you, and yes, I am old also.  DXing is a
> gentleman’s pursuit - at least it used to be. Gentlemen don’t overcharge
> for QSL cards.
> I, too, would also be interested in hearing the ARRL policy regarding
> this, or at least ARRL‘s thoughts……..
> Tnx for your leadership on this topic 👍
>
> 73
> Craig
> W5CCP
>
> Sent from my iPhone 13PM
>
> > On Mar 24, 2023, at 3:57 PM, Jeff Martin <jeffk5we at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Good Afternoon OKDXA...
> >
> > In light of the recent trend of DXpeditions holding back LoTW
> confirmations in an effort to gain more contributions, or even charging a
> fee for LoTW upload of your QSO info, I ask your opinion:
> >
> > Are you in favor of charging for a LoTW upload?
> >
> > Was this the original intent of ARRL when LoTW was created, that you
> would have to pay for an upload?
> >
> > I know we have at least two members of this list, Coy and Sierra, who
> have some experience with ARRL and ARRL DXCC recommendations. What are your
> opinions? What is the official ARRL position regarding DXpeditions
> requiring payment for LoTW uploads?
> >
> > The reason I am asking... In addition to just noticing recent trends
> regarding QSL policy of DXpeditions, I recently have had communications
> with two upcoming DXpeditions regarding support. One criteria for support
> we always look at is the group's QSL practices. Here are some recent
> examples:
> >
> > * For a donation of $15(USD), or greater we will process your LoTW
> > from the island (automatically)
> > * Express LoTW  via OQRS $4.00(USD) LoTW processed within 48 hours.
> > * Bureau QSL: Bureau cards are available for $3(USD)..
> >   ((Until recently it was standard practice to offer free bureau cards
> > - That's another subject...))
> > * OQRS Direct QSL+LoTW: via paypal $15 *OQRS Bureau QSL: via paypal $3
> > *Express LoTW via OQRS $4 *Direct QSL:  via PayPal $5.50(USD)
> >
> > Maybe I am old school, or maybe just old... I recall when the phrase
> "The final courtesy of a QSO is a QSL Card" meant something... Here's my
> opinion, for what it's worth, probably 2 cents or less... hi...
> >  A DXpedition should expect a small payment for a direct QSL card to
> cover the cost of the QSL card and postage. Today, $3 should be enough via
> paypal. Voluntary contributions over that amount are welcomed, but not
> required. It's been a long standing tradition that bureau cards could be
> requested for free. I understand there is some cost associated with sending
> bureau cards, historically this has been an accepted part of DXpedition
> expenses. I've paid it myself on my DX trips. I am in favor of maintaining
> this tradition, for the good of DXing...
> >  The ARRL established the LoTW system in part to help with the rising
> cost of QSLing. I doubt it was ever intended that DXpeditions would charge
> DXers to do a simple file upload of their QSO info to LoTW. (Please correct
> me if I am wrong.) I am not in favor of charging money for a LoTW upload.
> >  Everyone is aware of the increasing costs associated with going on a
> DXpedition. Soliciting support is fine. Asking for voluntary contributions
> is fine. I am in favor of voluntary contributions, with an emphasis on
> "voluntary". In most cases those going on a DXpedition expect to pay their
> expenses. Some help from the audience is nice, but not required or
> expected. Requiring support by excessive or restrictive QSL practices is
> not in the true spirit of DXing. This recent trend is not in the best
> interest of DXing...
> >
> >  So, OKDXA members, what do you think? I am trying to determine club
> policy, our criteria for support, and how to respond to requests for
> funding. What are your feelings regarding DXpedition QSL practices? Are we
> too out of date with the time, too old-school? I hope not...
> >
> > 73 & Gud DX,
> >
> > Jeff Martin - K5WE
> > OKDXA President
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > OKDXA mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/okdxa
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:OKDXA at mailman.qth.net
> >
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email
> > list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> OKDXA mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/okdxa
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:OKDXA at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> ______________________________________________________________
> OKDXA mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/okdxa
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:OKDXA at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html