Why do we pay such a high cost of license

[VK2AAH]

Hi Jack,

I don't know anything about the UK model of spectrum management & licensing so can't comment on that, however there is nothing to prevent a future government from privatising spectrum management here. It could happen & there would be some in government who philosophically believe that it should be user pays, and I mean 100% cost recovery. If "you" don't want to pay it you wouldn't get the service- no spectrum monitoring, interference investigation, fully outsourced regulation etc. It is a case of "be careful what you wish for". The ARRL are very active in performing the leg work our ACMA field officers do. I suspect that is because the FCC will not do it. Would the WIA ever be in a position to have "field officers" doing interference investigations & the like? They could charge a fee for the service... but then if people are complaining about a $75 annual fee they are hardly likely to cough up their hard earned to a WIA outsourced/privatised service, are they?

I'd shut up & pay the $75... oops, I just did!

Cheers


Richard
VK2AAH

[VK2AXL]

I'm in the same situation as Rob. I pay above average for my Australian ticket, but get my UK one free. So after averaging out, I'm doing OK.

The ARRL is not such a good example for us to follow. They have many people and many $$$s and can do much more than the WIA could. Thats the problem with having a big country with few people. Although many would say thats actually a good thing

I'm still curious. Do amateur repeaters (or indeed CB repeaters) fund themselves? Or do they need some of our $73 to keep them going?

[VK7ZGK]

I can't believe that you people have so much time spare to spend hours debating a miniscule $74 dollars a year. get a life. regards Graham VK7ZGK

[VK2AXL]

You found the time to read it.

What are internet forums for? If not for people with to much time on their hands to debate matters of little importance.

Actually that sums up an average day on 40m

[VK2AAH]

Jack,

I couldn't answer your question but they do have to recover costs- whether that means the tax on a repeater would cover the cost of administration I have no idea, however remember that the "tax" on a land mobile repeater in a high density area runs into the $000s and they don't "cost" any more to administer. What that reflects is the relative value of the spectrum... so does income from those services help to subsidise low value services like AR?

I've got to agree to some extent that arguing here about the cost of AR licenses is not going to achieve much, and a letter writing campaign for free licenses without the endorsement of the WIA could do more harm than good- but I respect his democratic right to do it. Trying to unite amateur radio license holders on anything such as this would be an impossible dream.

Cheers

Richard
VK2AAH

[VK5BJE]

If we don't contribute a reasonable amount for a licence (that is, permission to operate on the airwaves) then the cost of administering our service is shifted to the general tax payer. In my view that is unfair. I think we are fortunate indeed to have the privileges we enjoy (every day in my case) and user pays is a reasonable approach to calculating the cost.

I hope we never have a 'free' licence.
Cheers

John Dawes
VK5BJE

[VK7DR]

High Cost....????

Bwahahahaha!

At least it's sixty dollars a year of my money which stays in the country and doesn't put people out of a job.
You want everything cheap - you already get everything cheap - at the highest human cost possible.

Stop whinging!

[VK2AXL]

I've got to agree to some extent that arguing here about the cost of AR licenses is not going to achieve much, and a letter writing campaign for free licenses without the endorsement of the WIA could do more harm than good- but I respect his democratic right to do it. Trying to unite amateur radio license holders on anything such as this would be an impossible dream.

Trying to get hams to agree on anything is like herding cats

Any representation to anyone about the license fees should be headed by the WIA. One wonders if the original poster ran it past the WIA before posting on here. Maybe this was an attempt to gauge general opinion.

If you ask on the web about license fees, you'll get a load of people who are happy with it and a few who suggest we should pay more.
Using such agruments as....
1. Its only x cents per day
2. We're lucky they dont charge commercial rates
3. Its cheaper than my other hobby of golf / italian sportscars / warplane racing / something else unimaginably exspensive
4. Go away poor person

But if you ask hams in person, you'll get a few who are happy with it and a load who wish it was cheaper.
Making claims of...
1. I'm on a pension
2. The rate of increase is far greater than inflation
3. Other countries are all cheaper
4. When I was a boy... (insert story of an entire evenings entertainment for less than one and sixpence)

I cant understand why there is such a big difference between the web view, and the non-web view.

[VK2ZRH]

First: define "high cost".

The whole 'argument' put forward by Tex, and followed-on by many posters, hinges on this definition (ask an economist, or even a student of economics, how it's defined).

Posted in the interests of focusing the debate.

73, Roger Harrison VK2ZRH

[VK4BLP]

I personally think the licence fee is higher than it should be, and should be reduced, at least to those with a Commonwealth Health Card, i.e. Aged Pensioners and the like.

I agree that we need to ensure that we don't get dropped to no licence fee and fall in to the CB area where we have no backup for interference that ACMA provide for us, but at the same time it should be done as true cost recovery, not padded out to make more than what is needed.

I suggest a annual fee of around $30 - 45, certainly less than $50 as a reasonable amount to make it worth their while to collect every year.

I'm only 52 myself, so my suggestion of reductions to aged pensioners and the like, won't benefit me for quite some time yet !

Understandably CPI increases will still occur so eventually it won't stay down at this or current prices forever.

[VK3ALB]

First: define "high cost".

The whole 'argument' put forward by Tex, and followed-on by many posters, hinges on this definition (ask an economist, or even a student of economics, how it's defined).

Posted in the interests of focusing the debate.

73, Roger Harrison VK2ZRH

Also, as I said before the "cost" comprises two components - a Tax and a Charge. I don't know what they are but I expect only one of those components makes it's way to the ACMA. The other probably goes into the big bucket in Canberra. Asking for a reduction or removal of the cost without solid justification is unlikely to achieve a positive result.

[VK1TX]

Jack,

I couldn't answer your question but they do have to recover costs- whether that means the tax on a repeater would cover the cost of administration I have no idea, however remember that the "tax" on a land mobile repeater in a high density area runs into the $000s and they don't "cost" any more to administer. What that reflects is the relative value of the spectrum... so does income from those services help to subsidise low value services like AR?

I've got to agree to some extent that arguing here about the cost of AR licenses is not going to achieve much, and a letter writing campaign for free licenses without the endorsement of the WIA could do more harm than good- but I respect his democratic right to do it. Trying to unite amateur radio license holders on anything such as this would be an impossible dream.

Cheers

Richard
VK2AAH

Well Richard,
Keep paying for your licence, BUT you have missed the point.
Why are we VK's so special that we are so privileged to have to pay such a high price?

I am only comparing our costs with those of the USA, UK, NZ and Japan.
BUT I see you failed to answer my statement regarding the Pensioners and the disabled Amateurs , why can't they have a discount?
As far as the WIA forget about them ,they don't care as they are doing quite well with the system that's in place now.
They are very happy with the status Quo ( I think that's how you spell it).
All I am saying and read my lips "WHY DO WE HAVE TO PAY SUCH A HIGH PRICE"

[VK7ZGK]

f you bunch of tight wads object to paying a paltry $75 then i suggest that you move to a country where there is a free license and stop whinging

[VK2AAH]

Tex,

I will, and I don't think I missed your point at all. You just don't want to face the realities of what your proposal is likely to result in. Each country has its own way of funding spectrum management... comparing overseas models doesn't help because ACMA has to be run within the Australian funding model, not the UK's or NZ's.

It isn't a question for me to answer... could I suggest that you take that up with your local Federal MP rather than seeking a freebie? Maybe the ACMA could offer pensioner discounts on AR licences (only). What discount do you expect? 50%? 25%? The best thing that could happen is that such a proposal be filtered through the WIA's ACMA relations group... but no matter what proposal is put forward you can bet some will be dissatisfied. It is the Amateur Way.

Cheers

Richard
VK2AAH

[VK2AVR]

Our licence is cheap! $75 a year.. that's 10% of the cost of an entry level rig, or equivalent to buying a new radio once every 10 years.

Compare that to running a car, where the cost of rego+ctp is around $1000 a year.. 75 bucks is nothing. 75 bucks is 1 tankful of petrol which will last 1-2 weeks if you drive your car regularly.

If it's too much for pensioners to handle maybe we should start a "sponsor a senior" program in amateur radio. Although I would not be contributing for those that piss and moan about high costs demanding something should be done, just those who are grateful for a contribution so they can continue enjoying their hobby.

Everything in Australia is highly priced. Fact of life.

[VK3BSF]

I believe we don't pay enough...the cost shud be about $100 for non senoir card holders and $75 for others..ACMA can up their services for that sort of fee such as seriously looking at Plasma TV and other forms of interference.

[VK2AXL]

From wikipedia-
Reductio ad absurdum - is a common form of argument which seeks to demonstrate that a statement is true by showing that a false, untenable, or absurd result follows from its denial,or in turn to demonstrate that a statement is false by showing that a false, untenable, or absurd result follows from its acceptance.

My other hobby is motorcycles. My bike costs waaaaay more every year than my ham ticket. So my ham ticket must be to cheap. Ta-da!!!

Less than ten years ago (I'm only guessing that time period as I know it was after I moved to this house) the ACMA, or ACA as was, put out a short questionaire asking amateurs if they thought moving to a free license was a good idea. This was almost certainly around the time that the VHF marine band dropped its annual fee. I recall that the overwhelming vote was to keep paying as amateurs were afraid they would lose interference backup when needed.

Does anyone else remember this? I know my short term memory is shot but my long term is excellent. I remember submitting my vote. It was also around the time we had the questionaire about the soon-to-be foundation license.

So the ACMA (ACA) have considered the possibility of a free ticket already. Fact!
And therefore must have considered how the administrative process would deal with such a scenario.

Again, I'm not arguing one way or the other. I'm just trying to add a fact.

[VK2AXL]

Some quick web research shows a few mentions of the ACAs proposed free amateur license. Requests for discussion were dated as early as 2003, but the main hoo-hah was in early 2005.

One comment, which may or may not be accurate, said that the ACA had stated there would be no interference protection at all. So its no wonder the idea didnt get much support.

[VK2HRX]

To look at it another way 15,000 amateur licenses @ $72 each = a little over a million dollars a year. Anyone who has better handle on the number of licenses etc feel free to update/correct my math.
$1M would have to be 5 or so full time jobs at ACMA looking after us amateurs.

So as a group do we get our monies worth?

[VK4DU]

To look at it another way 15,000 amateur licenses @ $72 each = a little over a million dollars a year. Anyone who has better handle on the number of licenses etc feel free to update/correct my math.
$1M would have to be 5 or so full time jobs at ACMA looking after us amateurs.

So as a group do we get our monies worth?

ACMA do not get the whole $72....