TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] Orion in Contests

To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Orion in Contests
From: "Ron Notarius WN3VAW" <wn3vaw@fyi.net>
Reply-to: tentec@contesting.com
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 15:43:38 -0500
List-post: <mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
Ken asks, why would Ten Tec be low rated?

Because the simple fact is that based on market share, ie sold equipment
over the last 15 years or so, and allowing for dead, unused, and shelved
rigs, Ten Tec equipment is out numbered.  (Whether or not that should be the
case being a whole 'nother story -- whoever said life was fair?).  Less
people using it means less input.

There is also a FALSE impression out amongst many of the amateur masses that
Ten Tec gear is either poorly made, flimsy, substandard, etc. & so forth.
And sad to say, many of those who prefer other gear love to promote this
mis-perception rather than face the simple fact that today's Ten-Tec
equipment is equal or superior to comparable (or even supposedly superior)
equipment from other manufacturers.  Heck, we've argued that very point, ad
infinitum ad nauseum, with regards to eHam.net reviews right here for years!

Reminds me of the time when somone here in Pittsburgh spread the rumor
around that the Argosy was secretly being made in Mexico.  Didn't matter how
many facts you countered that with, the rumor held and convinced quite a few
that they'd rather buy a TS-430 or similar rig instead.  (And yes, that's
illogical... refusing to buy a supposedly "non-American made" rig by buying
another rig made in Japan, but logic had nothing to do with it...)

73, ron wn3vaw

"People hear what they want to hear,
And Disregard the Rest..."
"The Boxer," Simon & Garfunkel, 1970

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Brown" <ken.d.brown@verizon.net>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2003 3:35 PM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Orion in Contests


>
>
>Repeated Low Band Monitor <a
>primary 160/80/40 magazine> indicated a similar trend, tho TenTec
>was ranked much higher than expected, which is not surprising as to
>owners who want the very best as to ultimate receiver performance.
>
"much higher than expected" ??? My expectation would be that Ten-Tec
would be rated very high by 160/80/40 meter operators who want top notch
receiver performance. Who expected Ten-Tec gear to get a low rating?


_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec


_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>