John Robinson Trust

[Sean Hewitt]

I read newspapers.

It must be true then!!

[Matthew Turner]

We all know that most chess players are not very interested in the England Men's Team or who is representing England at the U16 Olympiad, but this is not the point. Most tennis player don't know who the England number two is (there was a nice guy called Tim or Tom or something some time back). Similiarly most bridge players don't know who the England team is. However, if you are a serious (or not so serious) Tennis player or bridge player you have to be a member of the national federation - 'coz that's the rules'. We have to get away from the idea that we will only give the ECF 67p if they promise (and really mean it - no fibs) to give us 68p back.

[Matthew Turner]

Ernie,
There may be fierce debates, but they are in a different league. I am trying to remember figures and I apologise in adavance if the are wrong, anyone who can validate or correct them would be welcome. I think bridge raises about 1.5 million a year from membership fees, the ECF get about 60,000 from game fee.

[John Philpott]

A few comments on recent posts.

Ernie Lazenby wrote

A breakdown of the office costs would be a big help.

I do not have the relevant paperwork with me at work, but I have a distinct recollection that the accounts presented at the ECF AGM included, in addition to the statutory 7 or 8 pages filed at Companies House, a detailed income and expenditure breakdown for each main area, one of which would be Management Services within which the office costs fall.

Matthew Turner wrote

I think bridge raises about 1.5 million a year from membership fees, the ECF get about 60,000 from game fee.

Game Fee income in 2006/7 was £52,120, but the ECF is in effect operating a hybrid system so also relevant was the income from direct members of £45,471. In contrast the EBU raised £375,645 in membership fees in 2006/7. Its overall turnover was about £1.6 million, with the balance being made up of organising bridge competitons and congresses (£619,092) and supplies of goods and services (£615,784). The ECF's total turnover was £319,394.

Ernie Lazenby wrote

There are some big problems in Bridge not least the cost of having to be a member of the national organisation. There is a fierce debate going on in Bridge similar to the one in chess

Yes indeed. There is, however, a delicious irony here. A couple of days ago my attention was drawn to one of the key elements of the strategy proposal for the future of the EBU and chess within England.

"The annual EBU membership subscription is abolished, being replaced by a per person “Pay
to Play” fee which applies to most club player sessions for most individuals."

In other words, the plan is to move away from a fixed individual subscription and adopt something which sounds remarkably similar to Game Fee.

For some reason the phrase "Down with the bridge prevention tax" springs to mind.

[Matthew Turner]

John,
Many thanks for that correction. One can easily see that the EBU raises hugely more than the ECF from members. We could say that the EBU raises 1.5million and the ECF £300,000 so five times as much. There are quite a lot of caveats to add to this, we should probably take out the government grant? and I suspect that the ECF's hybrid system is much less cost effective at raising revenue. We also have to account for VAT, which the EBU doesn't pay (I think) because it is a 'gambling' game. I also suspect that more people play chess than bridge, but again I could be wrong.
In the end the inevitable conclusion to draw is that "Chessplayers are getting it on the cheap!"

[Roger de Coverly]

I also suspect that more people play chess than bridge, but again I could be wrong

Looking at the bridge website for my local area (Berks/Bucks) seems to imply the opposite in that there are more towns/villages with bridge clubs/sessions than there are chess clubs.

Also if you look at the events, many of them seem to take place on weekday afternoons. This seems to imply that the target audience is the retired generation or non-working spouses. The "weekday afternoon" social & leisure activity is not one that chess clubs have ever sought to address.

The number of paying members to the English Bridge Union seems to be about 25000.

This blog entry could be published here - just replace bridge by chess!
http://dcrcbridge.blogspot.com/2008/05/ ... osals.html

[Paul Stimpson]

Matthew,

In the end the inevitable conclusion to draw is that "Chessplayers are getting it on the cheap!"

I think that statement requires a little more research first!

The average cost to enter a Congress in Chess is between £25 to £30 pounds. Factor in travel, Accommodation etc then the cost is substantial.

The cost to enter this years Essex Open Tennis tournament is £14 Pounds for adults.

When you consider how much it costs to hire a court these days this appears very good value for money. Also if you are affiliated to a club then it doesn't cost you any membership fees to belong to the LTA. If you see what the LTA do for the sport then the ECF has a lot of catching up to do!

Just asking for a membership fee to make everything great without laying down a plan for what you propose to provide is not enough. Direct membership was the saviour 17 years ago, it never fully took off, can you wonder why?

I have said it before and I will say it again, if local counties put on leagues and congresses which 90% of players are happy with I can't see the logic that gets them to move over to full membership of the ECF without firm benefits. Withdrawing the grading will not be enough. Counties can do this (Ratings), it's not rocket science.

[Sean Hewitt]

I have said it before and I will say it again, if local counties put on leagues and congresses which 90% of players are happy with I can't see the logic that gets them to move over to full membership of the ECF without firm benefits. Withdrawing the grading will not be enough. Counties can do this (Ratings), it's not rocket science.

I agree. But if the membership fee is set at a sensible level (say, £10) then I think grading will be enough. I think most would decide that its not worth the aggro of setting up their own rating system for ten quid.

[Sean Hewitt]

Its possible the NCCU/northern federation would do it for a lot less than £10 and our local grader does it for free now.

You miss the point Ernie. I could provide a national rating system for £2 per player. Any county could do it locally for free.

But the ECF needs players to fund its other activities. It needs to sell grading for more than it costs to produce them. However at £10, I dont think most players would grumble (although some would of course ).

[Paul Stimpson]

Sean,

I think most would decide that its not worth the aggro of setting up their own rating system for ten quid.

Actually most of the grading work is done in the counties anyway, it's only the central processing and national publication that is done by the ECF, AFAIK.

There are plenty of clever people in English Chess who I am sure could either have this outsourced to some IT consultancy or have someone do this for them, heck perhaps we could even hire Richard and Howard on consultancy fee's, and Carl for the publication on a website! Heck they do it for free at the moment anyway!

If John Upham can develop an online chess management system, and I use my own similar PHP database driven system for junior chess in Essex, then I can't see that it would be aggro as you put it.

It needs to sell grading for more than it costs to produce them

I thought you weren't in favour of a chess prevention Tax

[Sean Hewitt]

I did not miss any point.

As someone who ploughs quite a bit of my own money into local chess I dont think I fall into the Mr Grumble category.

If you didnt miss the point, then I don't understand the relevance of how much it would cost another body such as the NCCU to produce a grading list.

[Sean Hewitt]

It needs to sell grading for more than it costs to produce them

I thought you weren't in favour of a chess prevention Tax

You thought right. Game fee is a direct tax on playing, therefore it prevents people from doing so. That is why I object to game fee on principle.

Thats not to say that the ECF doesn't need funding - it does. That is why a membership scheme, at an appropriate level of subscription, gets my vote. If I had one

[Matthew Turner]

In response to Roger De Coverley's comments that there were more bridge clubs in his are than chess clubs and that the EBU had 25,000. This does not necessarily invalidate my assumption that there were more chessplayers than bridge players. For instance over 70,000 players took part in the UK Chess Challenge this year. That means over 70,000 players played at least one game of competive chess, I doubt bridge could claim that number. The question really is why are adult clubs so bad at recruiting from a very large pool of players.

[IM Jack Rudd]

In response to Roger De Coverley's comments that there were more bridge clubs in his are than chess clubs and that the EBU had 25,000. This does not necessarily invalidate my assumption that there were more chessplayers than bridge players. For instance over 70,000 players took part in the UK Chess Challenge this year. That means over 70,000 players played at least one game of competive chess, I doubt bridge could claim that number. The question really is why are adult clubs so bad at recruiting from a very large pool of players.

A case in point from Somerset: Wellesley Park primary school in Wellington has a fantastic number of chess players. I used to be an arbiter at junior tournaments in Somerset, and Wellesley Park would usually provide about half the players.

This hasn't exactly translated into high membership figures for Wellington chess club.

[John Upham]

This hasn't exactly translated into high membership figures for Wellington chess club.

I'm fairly familiar with some 20 or so local clubs attitudes towards Juniors. They range between :

We don't wan't them : they are too disruptive and none of us are CRB cleared in any case

to

I don't care if they turn up : someone else can look after them

to

We have a healthy junior side to our club and are looking to increase it whatever the old duffers think

I am a member of four clubs and all of the above attitudes have been observed. Moreover, within the same club a range of attitudes exists.

There is a club close to me which has gone the whole hog to become a chess creche : I'm told club nights can be mayhem.

Choices are out there. Clubs should decide if they wish to portray themselves as Junior friendly. Don't just claim it but then act differently.

Children will not enjoy themselves if they are being told to be quiet every five minutes or not to play 5 minute chess as it damages the clocks.

At Camberley we got out of our way to kepp them happy and have at least two adults who enjoy looking after them. These are rare resources that need to be valued.