Club memberships required to use (aka Pay to play)

[gortex2]

This is why my rpeeaters are not published in the open. Myself and my friends spends alot of money on maintenance, equipment and tower fees. It comes from my pocket. If my friends give me somecash towards it then fine but its not about that. I can see a club having a site thats costs and dues would help keep it at a good site vs a garage repeater. At one point a site we were in housed a 220 rpt for the local ham club. My agreement was donate to our electric bill annually. Somehow bills need paid. 

[nokones]

3 hours ago, gortex2 said:

Maybe you should let American Tower and Crown castle know this because they dont care if its HAM or not. Its still $X per foot on the tower per month with liability and all the other stuff. 

And that is another reason why Clubs have membership dues to cover those expenses for having a repeater at a remote site and pay the American Towers of the world for the space and services for housing the repeater at their sites. A couple of my GMRS Club's have repeaters at commercial remote sites and have to pay monthly lease payments for the space and services.

[SteveShannon]

3 hours ago, gortex2 said:

Maybe you should let American Tower and Crown castle know this because they dont care if its HAM or not. Its still $X per foot on the tower per month with liability and all the other stuff. 

Yeah, it’s just not true. It would be great if it were. In fact I think radio manufacturers should be required to give their radios to hams. 

[DONE]

1 hour ago, SteveShannon said:

Yeah, it’s just not true. It would be great if it were. In fact I think radio manufacturers should be required to give their radios to hams. 

Huh?  American Tower, Crown Castle and the others give discounts for ham??? When did that start?  I know of a couple sites that they bought that the previous owners had extended low rent leases for hams that carried over.  But at least in once case, when that lease finally expired, they went to full rent of over 1K a month and then tried to force the repeater owner to have their antenna removed by one of their 'approved' tower contractors at a cost of over 5 grand.  They ended up abandoning the antenna system

 

 

[UncleYoda]

2 hours ago, SteveShannon said:

Yeah, it’s just not true.

also @gortex2  I saw your replies this morning and didn't think I'd respond.  But I decided it is tangentially related to the thread topic.  So, I'll take a stab at further explanation.  Nothing here will be citing regs or legal precedence, so if that is what you expect, just skip this.  I do not have a repeater and do not intend to research or see any personal benefit from researching the legal issues; I'll leave that to those involved.

 

I know people on both sides of the issue.  I know at least one (maybe another) who pays for some of his HAM repeater tower usage.  He doesn't take donations that I know of, and it isn't a typical club (there is a loose organization that is the primary user).  And I've been told or heard discussions by several hams all the way back to when I started that the repeater tower owners can't charge for HAM usage.  Similar to what 935 said above, I know of one club repeater on a commercial tower on the coast where emergency use by non-profit organizations is a major factor.  [Emergency use and public benefit are the main reasons HAM is supposed to be non-commercial/non-profit.]  And this tower owner, according to club members, told them they would not be allowed to do any maintenance on the cable and antenna and that when it fails they're done.  The tower owner wants to sell the space to commercial users that pay (or pay more).  The way it was stated by the club members is the tower owner did not want it there because they could not charge for it (or maybe charge as much as the commercial users).

 

It's possible that the differences in the two views is how things are being stated.  It is true, at least in my area, that repeater owners can't charge HAMs to use their repeaters.  All the HAM repeaters I am familiar with are open to any licensed HAM, except an individual who has been singled out and banned but that's off-topic.  I have seen listings for private HAM repeaters on Repeaterbook but I have never used or had any further info on those.  Although clubs maintain many of the repeaters, I don't know of any (other than those private ones) where club membership is required for use.  So, since the repeater owners can't charge users, the repeater owners may be telling the tower owners they can't pay or can't afford the full commercial fee.  But I also know of cases where a prospective repeater owner told the tower owner the tower owners weren't allowed to charge for allowing installation of HAM repeaters.  No reg/law was ever cited in any of what I heard as far as I recall.

 

That's different from GMRS where private, members only repeaters are common.  But even with GMRS, I've never seen or heard what the fees actually are.  Most of us pay dues (if we choose) without knowing what the costs of operation are.  If it is all non-profit, the financing should be made available.  I don't know if understanding the differences in this between HAM and GMRS would be helpful or just add to the confusion.

[marcspaz]

I wasn't going to post about this... but then again, I'm surprised I waited this long.  I was wrong when I posted in a different thread that you can't charge a fee for repeater use.  I never had the desire to, and while I am sure I have read the rule before, I just forgot the details.  It's as plain as can be that you can charge for repeater use.

 

95.1705 (f)(3)(ii) states a station may be shared "...On a non-profit basis, with contributions to capital and operating expenses including the cost of mobile stations and paging receivers prorated equitably among all participants;..." meaning you can charge people for use as long as you are not profiting, and everyone is charged (about) the same. 

 

Reimbursement to break-even for expenses is fine.  Profit is not.

[SteveShannon]

1 hour ago, UncleYoda said:

also @gortex2  I saw your replies this morning and didn't think I'd respond.  But I decided it is tangentially related to the thread topic.  So, I'll take a stab at further explanation.  Nothing here will be citing regs or legal precedence, so if that is what you expect, just skip this.  I do not have a repeater and do not intend to research or see any personal benefit from researching the legal issues; I'll leave that to those involved.

 

I know people on both sides of the issue.  I know at least one (maybe another) who pays for some of his HAM repeater tower usage.  He doesn't take donations that I know of, and it isn't a typical club (there is a loose organization that is the primary user).  And I've been told or heard discussions by several hams all the way back to when I started that the repeater tower owners can't charge for HAM usage.  Similar to what 935 said above, I know of one club repeater on a commercial tower on the coast where emergency use by non-profit organizations is a major factor.  [Emergency use and public benefit are the main reasons HAM is supposed to be non-commercial/non-profit.]  And this tower owner, according to club members, told them they would not be allowed to do any maintenance on the cable and antenna and that when it fails they're done.  The tower owner wants to sell the space to commercial users that pay (or pay more).  The way it was stated by the club members is the tower owner did not want it there because they could not charge for it (or maybe charge as much as the commercial users).

 

It's possible that the differences in the two views is how things are being stated.  It is true, at least in my area, that repeater owners can't charge HAMs to use their repeaters.  All the HAM repeaters I am familiar with are open to any licensed HAM, except an individual who has been singled out and banned but that's off-topic.  I have seen listings for private HAM repeaters on Repeaterbook but I have never used or had any further info on those.  Although clubs maintain many of the repeaters, I don't know of any (other than those private ones) where club membership is required for use.  So, since the repeater owners can't charge users, the repeater owners may be telling the tower owners they can't pay or can't afford the full commercial fee.  But I also know of cases where a prospective repeater owner told the tower owner the tower owners weren't allowed to charge for allowing installation of HAM repeaters.  No reg/law was ever cited in any of what I heard as far as I recall.

 

That's different from GMRS where private, members only repeaters are common.  But even with GMRS, I've never seen or heard what the fees actually are.  Most of us pay dues (if we choose) without knowing what the costs of operation are.  If it is all non-profit, the financing should be made available.  I don't know if understanding the differences in this between HAM and GMRS would be helpful or just add to the confusion.

I agree with much of what you said. 
Ham radio clubs or ham radio repeaters owners definitely can be charged for tower space. They can be charged for power usage. They can be rented space for the rack. They’re subject to all the same charges any other tenant is. 
But exactly as you say ham radio clubs can’t charge for access to repeaters by amateur radio operators. 
In some cases the landlord/tower owner might donate their power/tower/facility space to a charity, like a 501c3 ham club. The club I’m secretary of isn’t charged for tower rent, but we have our own meter and pay monthly for energy usage. Our landlord could change that if they wanted and we’re painfully aware of that. 
 

[nokones]

23 hours ago, marcspaz said:

I wasn't going to post about this... but then again, I'm surprised I waited this long.  I was wrong when I posted in a different thread that you can't charge a fee for repeater use.  I never had the desire to, and while I am sure I have read the rule before, I just forgot the details.  It's as plain as can be that you can charge for repeater use.

 

95.1705 (f)(3)(ii) states a station may be shared "...On a non-profit basis, with contributions to capital and operating expenses including the cost of mobile stations and paging receivers prorated equitably among all participants;..." meaning you can charge people for use as long as you are not profiting, and everyone is charged (about) the same. 

 

Reimbursement to break-even for expenses is fine.  Profit is not.

The radio clubs I am a member of are 503 C something Non-Profit Orgs and cannot make a profit. 

[DONE]

2 hours ago, nokones said:

The radio clubs I am a member of are 503 C something Non-Profit Orgs and cannot make a profit. 

Now the 501C3 status is an interesting situation with tower owners. 

Because of the non-profit status, the tower owners can DONATE the tower space for an agreed to amount that is in line with standard rates and take that as a write off on their tax liabilities.  I don't know that any of them actually do that, but there is no reason they couldn't do it other than the paperwork involved. 

 

[wqnd300]

I am part of a club actually still holding the old non w fcc license. We actually do volunteer events, unlike these stuck-up people who try to make a club while doing nothing with it besides try to turn gmrs into amateur radio while trying to charge to use the repeater.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

[OffRoaderX]

4 minutes ago, wqnd300 said:

 

EDIT: never mind.. I don't even know why I bother.

Edited July 18 by OffRoaderX
I don't even know why I bother.

[nokones]

One of the Clubs, I am a member of has an Emergency Services Group Team that provides services during community events such as marathons. We also are required to have the FEMA NIMs training certificates.  The Group holds training classes and exercises every quarter and are prepared to provide emergency response to serve the community with emergency communications if necessary to relay information to the first responders in case of a catastrophic failure of the emergency reporting system infrastructure.

[wqnd300]

EDIT: never mind.. I don't even know why I bother.

It's ok. Go back to promoting Chinese radios

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

[WRHS218]

I won't be a member of any club that would accept me as a member...

[marcspaz]

55 minutes ago, wqnd300 said:

It's ok. Go back to promoting Chinese radios

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk
 

 

I guess you don't know that every GMRS radio (including made by American owned companies) is made in China or Chinese territory? 

[BoxCar]

9 hours ago, marcspaz said:

 

I guess you don't know that every GMRS radio (including made by American owned companies) is made in China or Chinese territory? 

No, but almost no radios are manufactured in the US.

[nokones]

5 minutes ago, BoxCar said:

No, but almost no radios are manufactured in the US.

Is anything manufactured in the US these days except for some, not many, Goodyear Tires and Mickey Thompson Baja Bosses, and some off-road parts and accessories for Jeeps?

[nokones]

9 hours ago, wqnd300 said:

It's ok. Go back to promoting Chinese radios

 

My take is Randy really doesn't endorse or promote any product. I think he tries to be objective as much as possible and just report the facts in a short amount of time. Yes, his videos may be leaving some facts out but if the videos were any longer most of you wouldn't have the attention span to endure a longer video.  

[WRXB215]

12 hours ago, OffRoaderX said:

I don't even know why I bother

Because...because...

OK, point made.

[SteveShannon]

12 hours ago, marcspaz said:

 

I guess you don't know that every GMRS radio (including made by American owned companies) is made in China or Chinese territory? 

Garmin is made in Taiwan.  At least the one I have is.  China might think it has a claim to Taiwan, but at least right now they’re separate politically and philosophically.

[UncleYoda]

DIscussion is off-topic.

[WRXB215]

2 hours ago, SteveShannon said:

China might think it has a claim to Taiwan, but at least right now they’re separate politically and philosophically.

And I pray China doesn't treat Taiwan the way they treated Hong Kong.

[SteveShannon]

23 minutes ago, WRXB215 said:

And I pray China doesn't treat Taiwan the way they treated Hong Kong.

I agree, but it’s a different situation.
HK went from being a British colony to being basically given to the PRC by the British. 
Taiwan has considered itself the rightful government of China (Republic of China) since 1947, and thus part of China. The PRC considers Taiwan as being part of China also, but obviously disagrees about whether they’re the rightful government. 
The United States has implicitly (and occasionally explicitly) stated that they would protect Taiwan from PRC aggression. 
Nobody except Taiwan is in a position to negotiate away Taiwan’s independence, but a change in philosophy by an incoming U.S. president could signal less commitment to protecting them which would result in a takeover by the PRC. 
I worked in Taiwan and grew to love the people there. I would hate to see them betrayed by our government. 

[WSCN901]

On 7/18/2024 at 8:33 AM, nokones said:

Is anything manufactured in the US these days except for some, not many, Goodyear Tires and Mickey Thompson Baja Bosses, and some off-road parts and accessories for Jeeps?

Idiots... the US manufactures many, many idiots per year.

[WRXB215]

14 minutes ago, WSCN901 said:

Idiots... the US manufactures many, many idiots per year.

I'm not sure whether to laugh or cry.