If the PAY-Pal account is already set up for the PGCA membership how hard would be to use it for the letters also?

Here is my 2 cents, btw, I did the letters for 9 years. The volume per month varies, anywhere from 20 to 80. The average when I gave it up was about 32 a month. It takes an average of at least 1/2 hour for each letter. The researcher has to pick the mail up, open the requests, send back any that are improper or there are no records, check the data base, do the research, letter and mail. In addition, keep a log, account for the money and report to the BOD at the end of the month. He also has to keep his supplies current as well as postage. Then you may have questions on the content of the letter and deal with errors (yes I made plenty of them).

So, we want to make it easier for you guys to request a letter. Bottom line, it is going to add to Chuck's workload. The amount of time will not change for the research and the letter but the record keeping is going to increase. How about getting your money back on requests where a letter can not be completed. I tried to complete the letters based on the oldest date. What do you do with the on line requests?

I can go on and on but I think you guys get my take on this. Please consider that any additional tasks can add considerable time to the research project.

There could even be a digital option, for those who would like their letters emailed.

Mark, as far as return money for no records it wouldn't happen, The way it would be set up is- Enter S/N here -Click -next - no records available so you can not continue.-with Sorry no records - If available then continue with request, that would make it ez for Chuck on that point, Than it could be a e-mail letter that than can be printed at home. If there was a mistake with it could be fixed and that re sent via e-mail. I think this could be done with all the people we have on the PGCA helping to work out the bugs. Like I said ,I just put it out there to see the what others thought, scott

As a new member this question suprises me! First we a shooting guns that are sometimes more than one hundred years old . Some guns require special shells ie 2/1/2 inch or low pressure or black powder . We have to plan ahead for shells or reloading supplies. We like the old guns the old ammo and all of the old stories and paintings, I really love the memories of my youth and the writings of those before ,I remember so many good things about the post office when my dad worked there years ago . They still sell stamps by the book ,sheet or hundreds , they also have envelopes! If you study your surroundings you may find a mail box within a 40 yrd range of your daily path , many of us have rural boxes with a flag to tell our letter carrier to pick up . My #2 pencil or my bic rarely crash , fail to boot up or load. Maybe I am old fashioned but going to my mail box each day to see if the letter on my 16 has arrived is a little like christmas for a 68 yr old . Thanks for a great job no matter how you choose to do it . Jesse

Scott, there are plenty of false positives in the data base. The most common examples are when you have a repair only but the original order is in a missing book. Another example are the serial numbers in order book 101, they are mostly credits where guns were returned. I would give out the limited info but return the check. I have used Pay Pal (my wife's account) and I understand you can only get a credit for returns. The other issue is when the online request is worked. I use to get phone calls demanding a letter and the request had not even made it to the PGCA mailbox. IMO, the online requests should go to the back of the line which is not going to go over well.

I have given you guys my thoughts on this. If the BOD and Chuck decide to try it, that's fine. I just felt someone needed to point out that we are increasing the work load on the researcher.

BTW, I use to send out email copies all the time if it was requested and I was given an email address. I would still send a hard copy on the bond paper and the PGCA seal.

I agree with Scott. I don't write checks, so I have to go find my checkbook to even write one, PLUS hit the post office for stamps, etc. If I were retired it wouldn't be an issue. In addition to speaking with the Fox guys, you might also speak with Jim Stubbendieck about how he handles the LC Smith letters. He has a system that allows him a really quick turnaround. They also need an online payment system.

Also, in regards to work load for each letter - an online order would reduce the work per letter - no picking up the mail, opening envelopes, or sending a letter to say you can't produce a research letter. You'd just copy and paste a standard email saying the information isn't present. Click of a button and their money is returned. Less trips to the bank, too. The merchant fees would be worth the reduction in hassle and increased letters. Online orders should go to the FRONT of the line.

Given Mr. Conrad's years of experience doing Parker letters, I think we should listen closely to him and if he thinks the electronic changes being purposed will add to Chucks already heavy work load, then it probably will. He is the voice of experience.

Maybe you would have better luck selling this idea to Chuck and the BOD if someone who believes that this will improve the PGCA would volunteer to take on the upfront work of both letter and electronic processing of the requests, doing the accounting, handle returns .... whatever else is required; and then Chuck would be free to do the research and send the completed letters?

I don't know if any of this is even feasible but to volunteer more work to be done by the guys that are already so very underpaid for what they do somehow doesn't seem right to me. :duck:

I get a letter for every Parker I buy, and while I bank online as well as buying a lot online, printing and mailing a letter request isn't so bad. You can buy stamps online or at lots of grocery stores etc and I have a mailbox at my house. If it would add to to the researchers workload I don't think it would be a good idea. If it was available online I would use the service though.