@richpowers I remember there was something, an admission that Decades were in fact wrongly accused. Either by the FCC or Broadcast Supply or Radioworld. I remember seeing it and Decade told me.
I'm the one that told him about the article.
Wow, that's completely nuts. I do remember reading about BSW being cited for marketing the Rolls transmitter but, for some reason, didn't notice they also included the Decade transmitters in the citation. There are so few Part 15 certified FM transmitters in the US that you have to wonder how that happened. Talk about a lack of attention to detail. I am absolutely flabbergasted. Another thing - why didn't the FCC check with Decade before issuing the citation? Didn't anyone check the facts? I can't help wondering if there's some information that we're missing out on here; it just seems like such a huge mistake to make.
As my fellow Brits would say, I am completely gobsmacked.
I'm sorry, I've spent about the last half hour or so trying to find more information about the aftermath of the situation but the only other mentioned I could find was at https://radioinsight.com/headlines/247044/fcc-report-1-8-operating-from-from-former-site-leads-to-kytes-cancellation/
(January 7, 2023)
"The FCC has issued a citation to Broadcast Supply Worldwide for unlawfully marketing a transmitter that was capable of operating outside of the FM frequency band, did not use a permanently attached antenna or an antenna that uses a unique connector, lacked an equipment authorization, and lacked the appropriate labeling and user manual disclosure and three additional devices that lacked the appropriate labeling and user manual disclosures. If BSW were to continue marketing Rolls HR70 FM Broadcast Transmitter (HR70), the Decade MS-100, MS-100M, and MS-100S it would be liable for significant fines of up to $22,021 per day for each unauthorized model marketed."
I oddly feel guilty about bringing this all up, I really wanted to find conformation that the issue had indeed been cleared up. I'm also a bit puzzled over the fact that BSW was the one threatened with fines and not the manufacturer themselves (Bill of HB had also questioned it in a Radio World commentary).
Does the FCC site still show it as certified on their site when you enter it's certification number?
I'm not going to harp on this matter anymore, but personally "I read it somewhere" is hardly factual information.
It's all bogus accusations to start with. Here's the certifications for the Decade
FCC # MCHMS-100 Canada BETS-1 #1857102155
And the label with certification numbers are on every one on the bottom with the frequency charts.
FCC certifications.... https://fccid.io/MCHMS-100
Canada certification... https://sms-sgs.ic.gc.ca/equipmentSearch/searchRadioEquipments?execution=e2s7&index=2
Here's a picture of the bottom label on every Decade...and the only time the label isn't there is if it's for sale used like on Ebay and someone ripped it off!
These were all bogus accusations by a no nothing FCC rep and Radioworld ran an article about it. It was resolved when the owner of Decade replied. And even if it wasn't the whole article was misinformation as Michel at Decade and now me here am trying to tell you.
This is all misinformation....fake news, and harmful to the Decade business.
And some like yourself will come across this radioworld write up and take this as true.
There's too much misinformation by reporters looking for a story. The article by the author at Radioworld didn't make the effort to validate the accuracy of the story.
@mark Very well! However, when your trying to prove your point it might be best to use an authentic source - fccid.io is just a GitHub database someone created and openly admits it "is not affiliated with the FCC in any way."..
The official database of FCC certification search however does provide an official confirmation of the MCHMS-100 as indeed a certified unit:
https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPY&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=onFdvMBKMIwblghFSUoLkQ%3D%3D&fcc_id=MCHMS-100
These kind of things really bugs me, so I just wrote Paul McLane, editor in chief of Radio World who was also the author of that article..
Dear Mr. McLane,
I’m writing regarding your article from last year: [ https://www.radioworld.com/news-and-business/headlines/fcc-cites-bsw-over-transmitter-certifications ] which suggests that Decade FM transmitters are non-compliant devices. While you did update the article with Decade’s response, it still does not fully clarify the implication that these transmitters are uncertified—when, in fact, they clearly are.
I’m just a hobbyist and have no affiliation with Decade, but I believe it is important to ensure the article accurately reflects the facts. As it stands, your article continues to raise questions about Decade’s legality even today. I hope you will consider updating it further to prevent any ongoing confusion.
Best regards,
R. Powers
https://apps.fcc.gov/oet cf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPY&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=onFdvMBKMIwblghFSUoLkQ%3D%3D&fcc_id=MCHMS-100
It's difficult to take the FCC Part 15 certification process seriously when the Retekess TR-508 is still in the official database. I just looked it up (and not in the .io one). That transmitter has 2 power levels, a removable antenna and can easily be set up to transmit outside of the Part 15 FM band limits.
Canada's process and database is much more accurate. There, the TR508 was initially certified under RSS123 (a low power licensed service) at a power level of 400mw. It's now not even there anymore, so something went on behind the scenes.
While I tend to regard Bill at HB as meaningless noise, particularly around Part 15 FM, Radioworld does indeed need to issue a clarification. Somebody either at the FCC, Radioworld or both got the Decade MS-100 status dead wrong, as it is Part 15/BETS certified in both the U.S. and Canada.
It's difficult to take the FCC Part 15 certification process seriously when the Retekess TR-508 is still in the official database....
I don't know about the Retekess but the Decade has been certified for 28 years.
I tried again to see the FCC certification with the official gov't page and I kept getting an invalid entry. I put the 3 numbers in the first space and the rest in the second and get error.
https://www.fcc.gov/oet/ea/fccid
Why is it so complicated to enter the number on FCC's site?
As for Canada ISED, it won't let you copy and paste with entered info but if you go to the REL look up page as it comes up with the link in my post and enter 1857102155 you will come up with the certifications for BETS.
It'll be interesting to see what reply (if any) you receive. Be sure to let us know please @richpowers!
Incidentally, I purchased another used Decade MS-100 the other day. I offered the seller $35 and he accepted. For that price, I couldn't turn it down. It's the newer model in the metal enclosure, and there is no hole for the power adjustment. That, and the price, were an unbeatable combination. I'd like to have one with a metal enclosure that doesn't have the hole for the power adjustment.
There are quite a few MS-100's for sale online on the various different sites, and many listings have been there for a while. I don't think there's a lot of demand for them; it seems to be a buyer's market.
I'll report back when it arrives.
@mark Are you including the dash?
Put MCH in the first box and MS-100 in the second
You can copy and paste into the sdtess bar
https://apps.fcc.gov/oet cf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPY&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=onFdvMBKMIwblghFSUoLkQ%3D%3D&fcc_id=MCHMS-100
..Incidentally, I purchased another used Decade MS-100 the other day. I offered the seller $35 and he accepted. For that price, I couldn't turn it down. It's the newer model in the metal enclosure..
Damn! What a steal!
Reply already...
---
What? Someone tell me what to say! I dont know anything about the others..
Ok, I replied, but still no squat about the other Decade versions.