Andrew Paulson -- Candidacy for ECF President

[Andrew Paulson]

I had a (very, very) full day of meetings and Skype calls yesterday with Chris Mattos, Mohammed Amin, David Sedgwick, Andrew Farthing, Adam Raoof, Phil Ehr, Claire Summerscale, and Alex McFarlane. And in preceding days with Stewart Reuben and Stuart Conquest. I have also read attentively the comments and corrections and criticisms here on the EC Forum. It is true that I have not organically grown up from the ECF and therefore am not quite as steeped in the history and marinaded in the lore as you might expect of a President. But I am getting up to speed on currently contentious issues and some have suggested that a fresh start is not such a bad thing. These conversations online and in person are filling in gaps in my understanding and highlighting obstacles to progress that we will need to overcome. I suggest that you contact these colleagues (and others) whom I've had a chance to talk to and take advantage of their more direct impressions of my candidacy. I am happy to Skype with anyone who wants to get into more detail about an issue (Skype: ampaulson). I will be available for pub meetings in London (and the north, if someone will organise a group interested to meet up) on October 10th and 11th, just before the AGM. Once again, thanks for the kind reception and let's continue talking.

[JustinHorton]

You're right that I shouted 'all'. But I would underline that this is an ideal. The plan would be entirely opt-in!

So "will" and "ALL" turn out not to mean what they do in fact mean.

Assuming that I'm not going to get an answer as to how much research went into the all-English-chess-that-is-not-all-English-chess plan, let's try something else.

a commercial director will be appointed or elected and paid to find the revenue and manage the sponsoring partners.

How much will this commercial director be paid? Will they be full-time? How do you propose this is accommodated within the present ECF budget - or do you envisage some alternative source of funding?

[Carl Hibbard]

I'm having trouble with posting; I get a message that there cannot be three embedded quotes. How to evade this?

It's a limit/setting in this software which has never come up before so I will probably leave it as it is for now.

[Roger de Coverly]

There's a separate thread about the Paris Grand Prix at
http://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=5797
which touches on issues related to this topic.

The voting membership at ECF meetings are a law unto themselves, but if confused as to the issues, could I suggest the following points for consideration?
(1) a translation of the management speak in the election address into concrete objectives or proposals. Up to a point this has been established with as an example ALL only meaning only those where the ECF has rights.
(2) a consideration of the desirability of the proposals.
(3) whether the objectives and promises made by Agon and AP and those speaking on its behalf have been delivered.

It seems to me that particularly in terms of presentation, the Chess Casting model hasn't been accepted and that organisers continue to use DGT transmissions, pgn4web, HD webcams, multi-core Houdini etc. There's been a relatively consistent look and feel to the websites for the Grand Prix and World Cup, but FIDE appears to be the driving force.

[NickFaulks]

Jonathan,
I think I disagree with you there. If someone came forward with a proposal to give the 4NCL £20,000 let's say to call itself the Barclaycard 4NCL. I don't see any reason not to accept. Of course it is is not always as simple as that, what if the offer came from Rothmans, people might be unhappy about endorsing a cigarette company. Those issues have to be worked through, but surely the 4NCL should be open to the idea of a commercial sponsor.

I've come to this late, but am amazed that the comment above slipped through without challenge. Does anyone really still believe that Barclays is less venal than Rothmans, and has done less damage to the UK population?

[John McKenna]

Nick, with respect, banks may be a danger to wealth but tobacco is a danger to health. Ergo, I think the latter has done more direct damage to certain individual members of the UK population.

[PeterFarr]

Well Barclays hasn't caused so many people to die of lung cancer.

It also hasn't done as much damage as RBS or Lloyds to the public purse.

Probably it's as venal as Rothmans.

But it's all rather besides the point if there aren't any major sponsors queuing up at the moment.

Also I imagine its more likely that sponsorship would come from somewhere a bit mire niche - thinking back to Phillips & Drew, & Duncan Lawrie as examples, rather than a major consumer brand.

[John McKenna]

Agree with most of what you say above Peter, but be to be fair Lloyds were persuaded - some say mainly by George Osbourne - to take over certain other banks that were in much greater difficulties. As a consequence they, Lloyds, required a government buy-in to their share capital with public money. At least that's how I remember it.

[NickFaulks]

Nick, with respect, banks may be a danger to wealth but tobacco is a danger to health. Ergo, I think the latter has done more direct damage to certain individual members of the UK population.

One way or another, they both make money by destroying lives.

[Jonathan Rogers]

Jonathan,
I think I disagree with you there. If someone came forward with a proposal to give the 4NCL £20,000 let's say to call itself the Barclaycard 4NCL. I don't see any reason not to accept. Of course it is is not always as simple as that, what if the offer came from Rothmans, people might be unhappy about endorsing a cigarette company. Those issues have to be worked through, but surely the 4NCL should be open to the idea of a commercial sponsor.

I've come to this late, but am amazed that the comment above slipped through without challenge. Does anyone really still believe that Barclays is less venal than Rothmans, and has done less damage to the UK population?

Nick, you have always seemed to know one or two things about FIDE, what is your view of their experiences with AGON?

[PeterFarr]

Agree with most of what you say above Peter, but be to be fair Lloyds were persuaded - some say mainly by George Osbourne - to take over certain other banks that were in much greater difficulties. As a consequence they, Lloyds, required a government buy-in to their share capital with public money. At least that's how I remember it.

Gordon Brown rather than George Osbourne surely, but otherwise yes that's true.

[PeterFarr]

Nick, with respect, banks may be a danger to wealth but tobacco is a danger to health. Ergo, I think the latter has done more direct damage to certain individual members of the UK population.

One way or another, they both make money by destroying lives.

How does Barclays make money by destroying lives? There is no equivalence at all. Ok it repossesses property after loan defaults etc; if it didn't then nobody would ever repay a loan and the Banking system wouldn't exist. It certainly doesn't actively want its customers to default, whereas a tobacco company does want its customers to smoke more.

I'm not saying Barclays hasn't ruined people's lives by doing stupid things - but it's not part if their "business model"

[NickFaulks]

I am in Minsk and only came across this interest string this evening.

Did anybody do anything about contacting Makro and Nigel Freeman for their take on the quality of the bid by Andrew Paulson to become ECF President? Nigel is a particularly good choice as he was born and bred in England.
Makro never responds to emails. But the FIDE Congress finishes before the ECF AGM.
Another person might be Israel Gelfer. I don't know how much, if at all, he has been involved with Agon. He spends quite a lot of time in Engand.
I wouldn't expect a valuable response from Kirsan; that is neither a reflection on the value of the query, nor on him.
If David Jarrett is at all involved, he would have a very valuable opinion.

I doubt that any FIDE functionary would be willing to comment. The last thing they need is to get embroiled in an ECF election.

I was bemused from the start by the Agon agreement, as with Chess Lane before it. I sense some irritation within parts of FIDE that they have signed a huge contract under which Agon was going to find finance for the Grand Prix, and ended up doing that themselves. I cannot tell to what extent, if any, such a view would be justified. Perhaps we shall learn more in Tallinn, the week after next

[NickFaulks]

Nick, with respect, banks may be a danger to wealth but tobacco is a danger to health. Ergo, I think the latter has done more direct damage to certain individual members of the UK population.

One way or another, they both make money by destroying lives.

How does Barclays make money by destroying lives? There is no equivalence at all. Ok it repossesses property after loan defaults etc; if it didn't then nobody would ever repay a loan and the Banking system wouldn't exist. It certainly doesn't actively want its customers to default, whereas a tobacco company does want its customers to smoke more.

I'm not saying Barclays hasn't ruined people's lives by doing stupid things - but it's not part if their "business model"

We'll just have to disagree.

[John McKenna]

Agree with most of what you say above Peter, but be to be fair Lloyds were persuaded - some say mainly by George Osbourne - to take over certain other banks that were in much greater difficulties. As a consequence they, Lloyds, required a government buy-in to their share capital with public money. At least that's how I remember it.

Gordon Brown rather than George Osbourne surely, but otherwise yes that's true.

Thanks for that correction Peter. How remiss of me, but then I have a natural bias.

However, now I must admit that George is trying to do the right thing and 'unwind' the purchase of shares in Lloyds by selling them off.
If he doesn't get back all the money Gordon paid for them may I suggest he bill Mr. B. for the difference.

PS Just heard that Ed Miliband is threatening to "bring back socialism" at his party conference. Would you believe it?!