Junior High School 22?

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by WA7ZBO, Sep 17, 2016.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-2
ad: L-Geochron
ad: HRDLLC-2
ad: Left-3
ad: L-MFJ
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: abrind-2
  1. K1OIK

    K1OIK XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    I saw him at an ARRL hamfest 2 years ago. He was selling a Ranger for $100, looked perfect. I said I would buy it but I need to go to my car to get my money. When I got back he had looked up a Ranger and found out he was selling it too low. He tried to up the price claiming it was for children. I said I would resell it and said the profit would benefit MY students. He refused until his wife reminded him a deal is a deal.
     
    NK2U likes this.
  2. N7WR

    N7WR Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duct.....well you know the thing
     
    NK2U and K1OIK like this.
  3. WA9SVD

    WA9SVD Ham Member QRZ Page

    If it is a scam, then it is wrong and unethical (to say the LEAST) for QST to STILL run the ads!:mad: I mean, for years they didn't run antenna ads because they were inflated, but at least the many companies involved were (semi) legitimate, even if misleading.
     
  4. N2UHC

    N2UHC Ham Member QRZ Page

    More correctly, they didn't run antenna ads with claims of gain, because the claimed gain in some of the ads was getting outrageously inflated.
     
  5. WA9SVD

    WA9SVD Ham Member QRZ Page

    I think in "times gone by," many of the manufacturers were basing claims on isotropic dBi (theoretical) gain figures, rather than dBd or gain over a dipole, the only realistic measure. By not specifying their "reference" thy did get over 2 dB additional gain; although, as you said, some claims were apparently wishful thinking, or marketing dreams) , rather than based on any facts or actual measurements.
    Once manufacturers began stating realistic gain figures based on an identifiable reference (i.d. dBi OR dBd) QST began to accept the advertising again.
     
  6. WA1UIL

    WA1UIL Ham Member QRZ Page

    Its clear that the ARRL has to APPROVE of this charity if it continues to publish advertising like in August QST (pg110) issue. The only question is the definition of "approve". If they approve it solely because the check clears and turn a blind eye to the rest then the ARRL is just as guilty if there is some shady charity hocus-pokus there. They may be publishing the current ad today because "well,we always have for many years" and everyone thinks the earlier advertising employees did in fact do research on RC of JHS22. Either way if people have called and spoke to JHS22 and found a dead end then there certainly needs to be some accountability. RC of JHS22 may indeed have been a legit operation in the past but from the pics not too recently. Oh, and like the FCC, the IRS is a bit under staffed as well
     
  7. KV6O

    KV6O Ham Member QRZ Page

    The ARRL doesn't approve of 501.c's. The IRS does. The IRS needs to take action, it's really no business of the ARRL's to decide if they are a charity or not from a legal perspective.

    Deceptive ads are nothing new. Buyer beware always. Feel free to let your thoughts be know to your ARRL Section Manager. I think a continually running, plainly deceptive ad deserves some pushback from the membership, IMHO.
     
  8. W3WN

    W3WN Ham Member QRZ Page

    No, "it is clear" that ARRL has no legal authority whatsoever to "approve" this vendor, or any other vendor, be they a charity (IRS 501(c)(3) or not) or a for profit company.

    The ARRL advertising staff can simply accept or deny the sale of advertising space. Acceptance of an ad does not imply "approval" of the organization, nor does denial of the ad imply "disapproval" of the organization. Of the item or items being offered? Yes. But not of the organization.

    Now, that said...

    Is there something fishy with the JHS 22 organization? That's a real good question. There have certainly been enough questions raised in recent years to warrant a look. (For one, if memory serves, isn't the original JHS 22 now operating under a different name, and the current school designated JHS22 is a completely different one? For another, if memory serves, didn't the "teacher" behind this ARC retire from teaching a few years back; and if so, how does he still have a connection to the student ARC he left behind when he retired? And that's just two questions off the top of my head)

    So, one would think that a good investigative reporter could look into this, and find out the answers.

    So why hasn't one? (And there are enough hams in the media today *cough*N2RJ*cough* who have connections to someone who might find the story intriguing enough to purse)
     
  9. W4NNF

    W4NNF XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    I don't know a thing about the JHS 22 business other than what I have heard about it for years. And, I gotta say, I've never heard much good about it. I'd be happy to find out that's all wrong, of course.
     
  10. W5INC

    W5INC Ham Member QRZ Page

    Used car salesman with that BR5-49 phone number does come to mind.

    Didn't "old" issues of QST have some fine small print legalese inserted into QST's Hamads section, stipulating adds placed into this section/QST(?) had to be vetted by the ARRL for honesty?
     

Share This Page