English Chess Forum

The lichess forum has some research on this.

https://lichess.org/forum/general-chess ... -investors

Turns out to be Pokerstars in part anyway. Perhaps we knew that already based on the sponsorships.

And just to add an extra layer to the ownership onion, pokerstars is owned by flutter entertainment, formerly Betfair but since they bought up paddy power, skybet, pokerstars and I'm sure more still they created a new conglomerate that is equally as murky and layered as the chess.com ownership structure seems to be.

Are chess24 and New In Chess part of this too, or is that a separate financial mess?

Tim Harding wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 10, 2022 9:59 am

Are chess24 and New In Chess part of this too, or is that a separate financial mess?

chess24, New in Chess and chessable were all owned by the Play Magnus Group which has accepted a takeover offer from chess.com.

Play Magnus Group is a company quoted on the Norwegian stock exchange, so presumbly had a multitude of shareholders.

Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 10, 2022 10:15 am

chess24, New in Chess and chessable were all owned by the Play Magnus Group which has accepted a takeover offer from chess.com.

Hmm, what does that mean for Chess24's live coverage

JustinHorton wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 10, 2022 10:57 am

Hmm, what does that mean for Chess24's live coverage

The chessbomb site was taken over by chess.com and its coverage redirected back to chess.com.

lichess is constituted as a French charitable foundation, so could not be on chess.com's shopping list. I wonder what is next, would Agon or Malcolm's Chess & Bridge be takeover candidates?

Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 10, 2022 11:26 am

The chessbomb site was taken over by chess.com and its coverage redirected back to chess.com.

Don't forget that nxt.chessbomb.com still works. When that goes, it's probably the end of my watching elite chess.

Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 10, 2022 11:26 am

JustinHorton wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 10, 2022 10:57 am

Hmm, what does that mean for Chess24's live coverage

The chessbomb site was taken over by chess.com and its coverage redirected back to chess.com.

Well yes, hence my question, or perhaps better put, my concern.

The 'Play Magnus Group' was mentioned. Hans was at one time one of their ambassadors.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvCpE22z4bI

He is at the Carlsen - Nepo final celebrating reaching 2645.2 and '...my computer is broken.'
What a difference seeing him then and now and how the effect of this whole mess v Carlsen is taking it's toll.

Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 10, 2022 10:15 am

Tim Harding wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 10, 2022 9:59 am

Are chess24 and New In Chess part of this too, or is that a separate financial mess?

chess24, New in Chess and chessable were all owned by the Play Magnus Group which has accepted a takeover offer from chess.com.

Play Magnus Group is a company quoted on the Norwegian stock exchange, so presumbly had a multitude of shareholders.

And is Chessable part of this monopolistic conglomerate too?

Tim Harding wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 10, 2022 3:17 pm

And is Chessable part of this monopolistic conglomerate too?

Chessable has been part of Play Magnus for the last three years.

https://www.chessable.com/blog/chessabl ... s-chess24/

I don't worry too much about a chess.com monopoly, because barriers to entering the market do not seem high.

If they only offer commentary for the mass market, which is not for me, then the Jan/ Peter or Tania/ Peter type of commentary I enjoy will pop up elsewhere.

Paul Cooksey wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 11, 2022 8:22 am

I don't worry too much about a chess.com monopoly, because barriers to entering the market do not seem high.

If they only offer commentary for the mass market, which is not for me, then the Jan/ Peter or Tania/ Peter type of commentary I enjoy will pop up elsewhere.

That may be true, but the rewards are probably quite small, meaning new entrants are likely to be few and far between. I hope you are right though.

Paul Cooksey wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 11, 2022 8:22 am

I don't worry too much about a chess.com monopoly, because barriers to entering the market do not seem high.

If they only offer commentary for the mass market, which is not for me, then the Jan/ Peter or Tania/ Peter type of commentary I enjoy will pop up elsewhere.

Well, I'm not in favour of a monopoly of this kind because it creates a centre of unaccountable power which can be used (for example) to trash the career of a chess player who is suspected of cheating without any real (OTB) evidence.

Worse then their treatment of grandmasters is the fact their whole business model seems to be geared more and more towards the lowest common denominator member - if you ever play an arena tournament, for example, the pairings are done entirely on who has the closest rating matches not actual tournament points so are invariably won by cheats who have sandbagged their ratings to ridiculously low numbers then carve a path of destruction through everyone else in nearby rating brackets.