FIFA

[Roger de Coverly]

This is almost "not chess", but are there analogies and contrasts between the current issues in FIFA and the state of play in FIDE?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011 ... -live-blog
I think envelopes of 100 dollar bills are unlikely in a chess context.

The stuff about FIFA family is quite parallel to FIDE speak.

I also noted that the decision point for the award of the Football World Cup may move from the current limited number of decision makers to one association one vote. In chess although the award of the Olympiad is relatively unbiased, we've seen in the Presidential and other elections how small federations acting in concert can force decisions affecting the 90% of players they don't represent.

Chess doesn't have any major sponsors to be upset by bad publicity. To what extent would football sponsors ever walk away?

[David Sedgwick]

In chess ...... the award of the Olympiad is relatively unbiased, we've seen in the Presidential and other elections how small federations acting in concert can force decisions affecting the 90% of players they don't represent.

That statement shows an unusual naivety on your part. I have it on normally reliable authority that Ilyumzhinov signed the contract for the 2010 Olympiad in Khanty-Mansisyk before the vote to award the Olumpiad there was held.

Chess doesn't have any major sponsors to be upset by bad publicity.

According to the Karpov camp, that's because it can't attract any while Ilyumzhinov is in charge.

[Alex Holowczak]

To what extent would football sponsors ever walk away?

They never will. The number of people who follow a sport is the thing that determines sponsorship, not the style of its governance. FIDE struggles for sponsors because it's the governing chess, not because it's allegedly corrupt.

[David Sedgwick]

FIDE struggles for sponsors because it's the governing chess, not because it's allegedly corrupt.

So how come a fair number of international businesses sponsored chess in the 1970s and 1980s and far fewer do so now?

[Paul Cooksey]

FIDE struggles for sponsors because it's the governing chess, not because it's allegedly corrupt.

So how come a fair number of international businesses sponsored chess in the 1970s and 1980s and far fewer do so now?

Fischer.

[David Sedgwick]

FIDE struggles for sponsors because it's the governing chess, not because it's allegedly corrupt.

So how come a fair number of international businesses sponsored chess in the 1970s and 1980s and far fewer do so now?

Fischer.

In the 1970s, maybe. However, I doubt whether he had much continuing impact in the 1980s.

[Paul Cooksey]

In the 1970s, maybe. However, I doubt whether he had much continuing impact in the 1980s.

I disagree. The Fischer/ cold war narrative interested a lot of people and gave chess a place in the mass media. It lost this over time. I think you could argue the interesting KK matches helped keep chess in the media, but I don't think raised the profile in the same way.

I think we have to be realistic that chess is unlikely to generate big sponsorship revenues. So we are unlikely ever to see external pressure to improve the international governance.

[Alex Holowczak]

FIDE struggles for sponsors because it's the governing chess, not because it's allegedly corrupt.

So how come a fair number of international businesses sponsored chess in the 1970s and 1980s and far fewer do so now?

The Fischer boom generated media interest which lingered on - but increasingly diminished - into the 1980s.

Look at your local chess leagues and see their decline. The Birmingham League had a Division 10 until 1990, and then it reformed until 1996 when they went from 8 and 6-man teams to 6 and 4-man teams. Fifteen years on, we have 6 divisions. It won't be long before we're down to 5. This shows the decline of chess's popularity in that period, and it's all because it has next to no media coverage. If it has next to no media coverage, it'll have next to no sponsorship.

This is why FIDE's events struggle; they make unrealistic demands for prize money that very few sponsors are willing to put up. The ones that are now sponsor their own events, and thus don't want to sponsor a second event.