No news is bad news

[JustinHorton]

Its as plain as night following day that it was far too early to have been making such announcements.

Maybe, Ernie, but did anybody actually say so at the time?

[John Upham]

Maybe, Ernie, but did anybody actually say so at the time?

I suspect that Martin Regan is best placed to clarify this issue.

[Sean Hewitt]

Justin I think its self evident that it was too early. How would anyone other than those involved know at the time of the press release that the basics were not in place at that time to fulfill what was being said.

I like to think that I am fair minded. Do we know that the basics (ie a contract or heads of agreement) were not in place at the time of the press release?

[JustinHorton]

Justin I think its self evident that it was too early. How would anyone other than those involved know at the time of the press release that the basics were not in place at that time to fulfill what was being said.

Well, up to a point Ernie, but I am a little suspicious of things that are self-evident and yet which nobody actually said. So, for instance, you say....

"Some of us had an inkling earlier in the year..."

but did you say so?

It doesn't invalidate your point if you didn't - but perhaps it reduces its strength a little.

[Carl Hibbard]

Justin I think its self evident that it was too early. How would anyone other than those involved know at the time of the press release that the basics were not in place at that time to fulfill what was being said.

I like to think that I am fair minded. Do we know that the basics (ie a contract or heads of agreement) were not in place at the time of the press release?

Clearly we don't but speculation is going to persist if no statement is forthcoming

Andrew or Fregus may know that answer of course, if they are allowed to comment that is

[Matthew Turner]

I think the majority of us felt that the 'Holloid deal' was doomed to failure, but we didn't want to say so because we could be accused of undue pessimism, or worse, scubbering the deal. The signs have been there from the start for anyone who bothered to do some research. Quarter of a million chess sets were just too many for a company of Holloid's size to produce for free. OK so perhaps Holloid had a plan we didn't know about, but whatever the situation Holloid would obviously want to get publicity for their most generous donation. As soon as you see that there has never been a single mention of the Chess For Schools project on the Holloid website, you know the whole thing is a fairytale.

[JustinHorton]

Actually Justin I did have quite a bit to say earlier this year. I contacted the CEO and pointed out that much of the confusing posts on this forum (then an official ECF forum) coming out of an ECF official were causing negativity and perhaps someone needed to get a grip and clear the air with some to the point factual information. It was clear to many people that there was a lot of grey areas and a great deal of what was being said did not add up. Regretfully the CEO did not reply to me but two directors contacted me privately to express agreement and they were concerned that that the confusion originating from an ECF official was not helpfull.

I find it astonishing that the ECF did not take positive action to deal with the confusion at a time when this forum was an official arm of the organisation. At the AGM the President announces that the forum has cost the ECF sponsors and action is taken to disassociate the ECF from the forum.

Fair enough although the point stands that the press release doesn't seem to have been criticised by anybody at the time, and it seems to me that in this particular matter (if no other) there is a certain amount of Monday-morning quarterbacking going on.

For my part I'm glad that I never wrote a blog post saying anything about this great project - I meant to, but never found the time...

BTW I notice we still have no evidence, not one jot, not even the tinest shed, that any sponsor walked away because of this forum.

Shed? (Shard?)

To be scrupulously fair, there was the tiniest jot (see one of Mr Christie's postings) but it would be fair to say that that is all there is and it is a somewhat less than convincing tiny jot at that. I would personally be amazed if this forum had had any effect on any potential or actual supplier or sponsor at all.

Anyway, talking of blog posts, I propose to write something on the subject for Thursday.

[JustinHorton]

I am not sure how anyone could have passed adverse comment about the press release at that time because no one outside a small number of people had any information to the contrary. On face value it looked good.

Well again, up to a point: but by the same token, it may have looked good to the people from the ECF and it may be unreasonable to attribute to them hidden motives for making the press release. Anyway, unless I'm given further reason to change my mind I won't hold it against them: my problem (on the information I currently have) is what I see as the subsequent disappearing act when things went wrong.

[Carl Hibbard]

All that can be done Ernie is to advertise this forum as far and as wide as possible - the loss of ECF official status was always going to have some effect but then a lot of chess players have never heard of the forum

Or give the individual in question a bit of a slap is the other option

[Carl Hibbard]

Quoting from the latest ECF minutes just published:-

"The President, GW took this opportunity to outline the current situation. The Director at Holloid Plastics who had been driving the project had resigned from the company; their MD had assured GW that they were still committed to the project. However, the outgoing Holloid Director had secured co-sponsors to assist with the costs involved, but he had not passed on this information prior to his departure. As a result replacements were being sought. The company had also suffered production problems, due to breakdown of tooling equipment. Replacements were being sourced from the Far East, with precise time of delivery uncertain."

That extra information is a new one on me

[andrew martin]

I would like to apologise to all the schools who are writing to the ECF asking what has happened to the sets. It is my clear understanding that President Gerry Walsh is currently seeking clarification from Holloid and will make an announcement in the very near future. Until then, I can give no updates.

I would like to assure everyone that a lot of work is going on behind the scenes to make the project run. I am really sorry
for these delays.

Andrew

[Carl Hibbard]

Quoting from the latest ECF minutes just published:-

"The President, GW took this opportunity to outline the current situation. The Director at Holloid Plastics who had been driving the project had resigned from the company; their MD had assured GW that they were still committed to the project. However, the outgoing Holloid Director had secured co-sponsors to assist with the costs involved, but he had not passed on this information prior to his departure. As a result replacements were being sought. The company had also suffered production problems, due to breakdown of tooling equipment. Replacements were being sourced from the Far East, with precise time of delivery uncertain."

That extra information is a new one on me

To be clear on this one, it is quoted direct from the ECF minutes:-

http://www.englishchess.org.uk/organisa ... _nov08.htm

I have also passed a comment on to Fergus just in case on this one

[JustinHorton]

Some commentary

[Carl Hibbard]

Some commentary

Quite a nice write up that one

[David Robertson]

Typical of this guy to engage in his trademark name-calling at my expense again. It's my quote he cites; I'm the 'feud-monger' he sneers at. His opportunistic intervention from afar, only half-grasping the history of this matter, trades on the informed and authoritative efforts of others, including myself, to bring the scandal into the light. His belated parasitic and pompous summary changes nothing.

David
Atticus CC