I think Tom Frenaye has answered Jim Boehner's original question. We tested two messages: one with an environmental theme and the other with a "reduce clutter" theme. They pulled exactly the same response rate -- which was not high enough to give us concerns about advertisers -- so we're going ahead with both. As Jim Weaver has observed, at this point our advertisers are quite happy with QST. In general, the simpler the dues structure the better, Dave K1ZZ ________________________________ From: arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org on behalf of Jim Weaver K8JE Sent: Sun 2/3/2013 8:42 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:21497] Re: QST Position Question As I recall from discussions in A&F during the early days of planning for digital QST, concern was expressed by Dave over the possible negative impact of the digital vehicle on advertising in regular QST. I believe we directors on The Committee were encouraged to be patient while this possibility was evaluated. I assume from the appearance of the "test market" "Go Green" document that an assessment has been made and that the result was either neutral or positive. Am I correct, Dave? Will you please provide a brief summary of the basis for the apparent decision? It is obvious that QST is not running short of ads thanks to the work of our advertising staff, but have there been signs that a meaningful number of advertisers are soft on a possible conversion to the digital format? Tnx, Jim Jim Weaver, K8JE Director, Great Lakes Division 5065 Bethany Rd. Mason, OH 45040 Tel. 513-459-1661; e-mail K8JE@arrl.org ARRL: The reason Amateur Radio Is Members: The reason ARRL is ________________________________ From: arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org [mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] On Behalf Of Tom Frenaye Sent: 03 February, 2013 11:29 AM To: arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org Subject: [arrl-odv:21496] Re: QST Position Question In arrl-odv:21189 last Nov 7 2012, K0GW asked - Also, the announcement says "Go Green! Go Digital-Only. ARRL members may choose to opt-out of the mailed, print edition of QST at any time. Complete our online opt-ou <http://www.arrl.org/qst-print-edition-opt-out-form> t form <http://www.arrl.org/qst-print-edition-opt-out-form> ." I thought we were not going to advertise the opt-out. I have a problem when ODV is advised to do something (be quiet about the opt-out feature), only to have it announced or promoted by HQ in direct contradiction to what we've been asked to do. This doesn't help anyone. WJ1B responded in arrl-odv:21191 - I should have mentioned that we are testing this messaging on the test email to determine how members respond. We may carry the same "Go Green" message into the larger email depending on comments and response rate to the test. At this point, please feel free to tout the digital only option for QST. It's been on the website since launch. We are trying this since we are below are original projections of 5% - 15% take rate on digital only. We are closer to 1% so we wanted to see what effect this type of message might have on increasing the print opt outs. It does save us money if we don't have to sent a paper QST. We just don't want to have everyone do it at once or our advertising sales model will be upended. Tom At 10:50 AM 2/3/2013, jfenster@pacifier.com wrote: I seem to remember some of the cost of going to Digital QST would be offset by a reduction in the number of print versions of QST which would reduce the cost to print and mail (albeit a farily small $ amount). Thus, I believe we should have one or the other or charge some differential if a member wants both. Then, of course, there is the cost of maintaining a data base of who wants what and the cost of managing the process and charging for the extra issue...ad nausium. Comments? 73 Jim K9JF > In regards to the Print QST and Digital QST- > > > > I remember our original position, that members were to continue to receive > the print QST and have an option to access the digital QST. If they > wished > to no longer receive the print edition, they would need to call HQ to stop > the mailings. However, we were not going to "push" this option. > > > > I received copies of emails "Go Green: Get Digital QST Only", with an opt > out form, from ARRL. > > > > I do remember that this was discussed very briefly at a previous board > meeting, but I'm not sure if there was a resolution. > > > > So, what is our board position on this presently? Should we be neutral > and > not say anything to members about this option and just let the Go Green > e-mails speak for themselves? Or should we be proactive and encourage > this > option? > > > > On a somewhat related note, I have received questions as to when Digital > QST > will be available for Android devices as a dedicated App (like IOS). They > make the argument that the android sales are outperforming the IOS series. > > > > Thanks! > > > > '73 de JIM N2ZZ > > ARRL Vice Director > > Roanoke Division > > (IPhone 5 user!) > > _______________________________________________ > arrl-odv mailing list > arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org > http://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv > James E. Fenstermaker K9JF Director, Northwestern Division American Radio Relay League (206) 930-9372 _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org http://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv ===== e-mail: k1ki@arrl.org ARRL New England Division Director http://www.arrl.org/ Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444