Reader Letters

Mar 20, 2001 12:00 PM

Let’s improve our position in the marketplace
I appreciate and agree with the article you put together for MRT (“Radio Dealers Don’t Communicate,” Point-of-Sale Perspective, Bob Urian, February 2001). Certainly we have become a low-brow, low-tech industry made up of has-beens and wash-ups. As a 28-year-old sales rep for a very successful radio company, I am taken aback by the inept attitude of most dealers. I joined this industry because of the unique opportunity to sell mobile data and wireless data solutions. I work hard to position this company as a leader in wireless innovations. I agree that the lack of communications has turned us into a commodity market, just like cat-5 cable and fiber optics. This is an industry I used to be a part of, and it went from high profits to a complete commodities market. I agree we need to communicate more (or at all) and come up with a market strategy that plays on our strengths as a leader in wireless solutions. I am up for whatever we can do to improve our position in the marketplace. Let’s add value back to our customers and win their loyalties through service; they will pay for it.

—Hudson Denney
Diversified Electronics
South Carolina

Dealers are fiercely independent
I read your excellent and accurate article in February's MRT (“Radio Dealers Don’t Communicate,” Point-of-Sale Perspective, by Bob Urian). I am vice president of the Illinois Mobile Radio Dealers Association and, while we are an organization of radio dealers, we do little to improve the market position of the small businessman or enhance his (or her) way of doing business. We have dealt with statewide tax issues and had some successes that benefited all radio dealers in Illinois. We also participated, as a group, in the SMR-WON organization that fought, unsuccessfully, NEXTEL's cozy arrangements with the FCC. These were all focused, single-issue fights. We are much like the Indians of the frontier days: We each have our local strengths, but because of fear of showing both cheeks of our ass to the competition, we have never formed meaningful relationships within our industry that deal with broader issues. We are also, like the Indians, a fiercely independent bunch. Being in the same room with the competition makes us itch.

At our annual meeting of the IMRDA last Saturday, President Neal Ragan took a vote on those interested in having seminars on business related items such as learning PowerPoint for more effective presentations and having demonstrations on new business software for the radio industry. The approval was unanimous and we are going to have two meetings a year rather than one. This is a small but forward step.

Those of us who hearken from the days of iron men and wooden ships still find joy in hearing the "kerchunk" of a repeater kickback after a new installation. We delight in finding out the range and even hedge it a little by always picking a high spot to key up. Even though the NEXTELs of the world are scattering towers like rice at a wedding, we still find pleasure in our businesses the big money boys will never know.

Thanks again for your article. Count me in and keep me posted if you find enough interest to start a national organization.

—Dennis L. Carter
President
Rock River Service
Rockford, IL

Other dealers agree with February “POS Perspective”
I loved your article in MRT (“Radio Dealers Don’t Communicate,” Point-of-Sale Perspective, by Bob Urian, February 2001.) One thing I think you failed to mention was how the manufacturers push for territories but don't worry about those cataloged places that just sell the boxes. It is fine with the manufacturers because they make the money anyway. Just thought I would let you know that other dealers agree with you. Let me know if you get some kind of association together

—Dan Shepherd
President
Vincennes Electronics
Vincennes, IN

Smoking doesn't belong in MRT
I don't know why you didn't edit out Mr. Schwaninger's comments about smokers being some king of "victims" (In the Public Interest, November 2000). He, like most smokers, is in a state of denial, and his "thoughts" about smoking have no place in a journal about mobile radio.

I am a communications dispatcher, and it took me years to stop the chain-smoking of my co-workers during our 12-hour shifts.

Kindly discontinue my subscription.

—Steven Scher
New York

Unlicensed microwave secondary to licensed radios
Thanks for the article in Mobile Radio Technology on unlicensed microwave ("Unlicensed Microwave: Blessing or Curse?," Stephen Bartlett, October 2000). I feel it’s important to fully educate radio technicians on the planning, installation and operation of these devices.

One thing I have not seen in any article regarding these devices is their secondary status to licensed radios, especially in the 2.5GHz bands. Unlicensed spread spectrum devices operate under Part 15 of the FCC Rules and therefore cannot cause and must accept harmful interference to and from licensed users.

Here’s the problem. Unlicensed spread-spectrum radios can operate from 2,400MHz to 2,483MHz under Part 15 of the FCC rules. Video links licensed under both FCC Parts 74 and 90 can be found from 2,450MHz to 2,483MHz. As the unlicensed links hop between 2,450MHz and 2,483MHz, they can cause interference to the wideband video links. This interference is typically seen as horizontal "hits" jumping up and down through the video signal.

When the licensed users finally track down the interfering transmitter, which is usually a difficult task in itself, the unlicensed users are usually mystified how their "interference free" devices can be causing any problems. The unlicensed users are usually very upset when they learn that their transmitters must be turned off to cure the interference—even if the licensed user constructed their facilities after the unlicensed user. Per the FCC rules, Part 15 devices are not, and cannot be, given the interference protection that licensed users have.

As a Part 74 frequency coordinator, I am concerned about the interference to licensed users as many of these Part 15 devices are installed by marginally qualified users who either don’t know or understand the FCC rules. I suspect the manufacturers and sales representatives of these devices "forget" to tell potential clients of their secondary status, fearing that information could "blow the sale."

You did a wonderful job at pointing out some of the interference issues between Part 15 spread-spectrum devices. Unfortunately, you forgot to mention their secondary status to licensed links. Help me get the word out.

Installing roof-mount antennas on new vehicles
I’d like to read/hear how two-way mobile installers have coped with the challenge of installing and wiring roof mount antennas on some of the 2001 automobiles containing "cloth-over-foam-glued-to-the-roof" liners, e.g. Ford Crown Victoria.

—Richard Shima
FM Communications
Mayfield Heights, OH
Rshima@att.net