ECF Funding - An Attempt to Take Stock

[Richard Cowan]

True, but many people break even at the moment, or have aspirations of doing so. It's in their own hands so to speak, so the motivation is totally different from a league.

[Sebastian Stone]

Irrespective of funding options, the reason it would be good for the ECF to have contact details for all chess players is because the ECF could let chess players know directly about things such as changes to game fee or funding rather than relying on it filtering down via a cascade of league and congress organisers or people who are active on forums (a tiny minority of chess players). However diligent such people are, word of mouth is less good than direct contact

And the ECF could receive feedback or set up on-line polls to understand the views of all chess players directly; not just from the minority who are active in running leagues, congresses and those involved in chess politics.

Even if league and congress organisers do a great job in consulting Members, often the vote is binary (yes or no) and so information about the strength of support for an option (80% support or 51%) from a league can be lost. Some people cast votes in proportion to the extent of support they have heard on an issue but I'm not sure that all leagues and congresses have time to undertake a rigorous democractic process of consultation in this way. So if the ECF could communicate with players directly, it would help it get better feedback on what chess players want.

What I require from the ECF is "grade my games and leave me the hell alone" so I hardly want to give them my contact details.

QUESTION:

Over the course of the debate I've seen a lot of talk about league chess (which I assume is between clubs) and congress chess.

Where does Internal Club Competition fit into this and how much would your two tier membership fee charge to grade players who just play in their club championship?

Example. My club (Sidmouth) has run a 1/2/3 (depending on the vote at the biannual AGM debate!) division all play all tournament for years.

[Richard Cowan]

That is diametrically opposite from what I want from the ECF. If I just wanted that, I'd not join the ECF and just continue with my (free) Yorkshire grade

[Sebastian Stone]

That is diametrically opposite from what I want from the ECF. If I just wanted that, I'd not join the ECF and just continue with my (free) Yorkshire grade

You want the ECF not to grade your games and harass you?

[Richard Cowan]

No, I want the to grade my games, run tournaments, provide me with infomation, fundraise, support (and maybe run) tournaments, be more professional and yes, be more commercial. Just offering grading to the average player is not enough. The ECF needs to do more, some of these other activities may even make money / generate sponsorship interest / encourage more members.

[Alex Holowczak]

Where does Internal Club Competition fit into this and how much would your two tier membership fee charge to grade players who just play in their club championship?

Well, I assume it's graded, and it's not a team event. So it'd count as a congress, I guess, since that's a generic term used to scoop up anything that's not a league (team event). Therefore, your £6 pay-per-play would cover it if you're not an ECF Member.

[Sebastian Stone]

Where does Internal Club Competition fit into this and how much would your two tier membership fee charge to grade players who just play in their club championship?

Well, I assume it's graded, and it's not a team event. So it'd count as a congress, I guess, since that's a generic term used to scoop up anything that's not a league (team event). Therefore, your £6 pay-per-play would cover it if you're not an ECF Member.

Now that is interesting.

So, if my club were to dump league chess and just play it's internal club competition we'd pay less money than if we paid grading fees.

Assuming we pay the congress rate of grading fee atm.

[Roger de Coverly]

Irrespective of funding options, the reason it would be good for the ECF to have contact details for all chess players is because the ECF could let chess players know directly about things such as changes to game fee or funding rather than relying on it filtering down via a cascade of league and congress organisers or people who are active on forums (a tiny minority of chess players). However diligent such people are, word of mouth is less good than direct contact

Not really an option pre Internet of course. There are at least a couple of ways you could set this up almost immediately. The first is that you ask club secretaries for help, the ECF know who they are and how to contact them because they are in the Year Book. The club secretaries then give the information on individual contact details to the ECF. Alternatively you invite players, probably routed via the grading pages to give you this info directly. Just after the publication of new grades is a good time to do this. Even if it didn't do this, it could at least circulate club secretaries and those for whom it officially had an email address. In the Regan days, this was done from time to time, I don't know whether I received his missives as a Club Secretary or as a Direct Member.

So fine, the ECF wants to improve its communication with chess players ( note I said chess players not members). However it doesn't use the channels it already has. Would charging players per head (thereby dividing them into members and non-members) change this, or if it did, why doesn't it (the ECF) do what it can already?

[Alex Holowczak]

Where does Internal Club Competition fit into this and how much would your two tier membership fee charge to grade players who just play in their club championship?

Well, I assume it's graded, and it's not a team event. So it'd count as a congress, I guess, since that's a generic term used to scoop up anything that's not a league (team event). Therefore, your £6 pay-per-play would cover it if you're not an ECF Member.

Now that is interesting.

So, if my club were to dump league chess and just play it's internal club competition we'd pay less money than if we paid grading fees.

Assuming we pay the congress rate of grading fee atm.

At the moment, you pay the Club Internal rate, which is something like 18p per halfresult.

If you had an internal competition, you could pay £6 for it, yes. You are correct in what you say, but twas ever thus and you still play in team competitions.

[Roger de Coverly]

No, I want the to grade my games, run tournaments, provide me with infomation, fundraise, support (and maybe run) tournaments

Be careful about wanting the ECF to run tournaments. The ECF's turnover exceeds the VAT threshold so entry fees would be subject to VAT. It's more VAT-effective for events to be run, as at present, by independent third parties.

[Alex Holowczak]

No, I want the to grade my games, run tournaments, provide me with infomation, fundraise, support (and maybe run) tournaments

Be careful about wanting the ECF to run tournaments. The ECF's turnover exceeds the VAT threshold so entry fees would be subject to VAT. It's more VAT-effective for events to be run, as at present, by independent third parties.

The case in point being the British Championship. It has been discussed elsewhere that separating junior chess into a charity might be an option. I'd have thought it wise to run the British as an independent event to avoid VAT liability. (Even then, I'm not sure if it comes below the threshold - I don't actually know what the threshold is!) The BICC could run the tournament, and just appoint Dave and Alex to run it as they do now.

[Richard Cowan]

Maybe so, but the ECF can take advantages of economies of scale to "provide" things to tournaments to be run independently, or another branch of the ECF could be set up to facilitate this. See my comments in the other thread (the long one ; ) )

[Roger de Coverly]

So it'd count as a congress, I guess, since that's a generic term used to scoop up anything that's not a league (team event). Therefore, your £6 pay-per-play would cover it if you're not an ECF Member.

It struck me that if a county organised an all play all amongst the top players in each club, then that's a "congress". The same would apply you ran the same thing for the second best players etc. You might even agree to play on the same night and travel together. It rather breaks down as a means of avoiding membership charges if you have to use substitutions.

[Sebastian Stone]

At the moment, you pay the Club Internal rate, which is something like 18p per halfresult.

If you had an internal competition, you could pay £6 for it, yes. You are correct in what you say, but twas ever thus and you still play in team competitions.

Wouldn't that involve another charge?

[David Shepherd]

Andrew

Thanks for your reply above which made much sense the following link is interesting re charity status http://ebunews.blogspot.com/2011/03/cha ... ridge.htmlcertainly on an individual club basis

The link relates to a bridge club that has just received charitable status.