Page 10 of 27

Re: ECF Finance meeting 2018

Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:40 pm
by Chris Goodall
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:24 pm
Chris Goodall wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 7:40 pm
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 7:12 pm
The UK Chess Challenge and 4NCL are prepared to require the players who play in their events to have membership at the relevant level (or pay the appropriate surcharge), because in their belief the above tasks contribute positively to the success of their events. They understand that many of these tasks require resources - both human and financial.
Paying money to a mafia boss can contribute positively to the success of your restaurant, in that the mafia won't then burn it down. That doesn't mean the mafia provides you with an essential service. Not burning it down is something you could do perfectly well by yourself if you were given the opportunity.

How many title norms even get achieved by British players, arbiters and organisers in a typical month? I've got a store room at work from which I send out little computerised widgets every week, and I'm sure a title norm weighs less than a little computerised widget, so can I volunteer to send them to FIDE in my spare time? I'll keep a list of them on a website, for transparency. On this forum, if you like.
The jobs you have listed are done by the International Rating Officer.
Oh, it's already done by a volunteer? You're telling me that the UKCC and 4NCL pay money to you so that you can keep it and then instruct a volunteer to do some work? Something about that doesn't make sense.

Re: ECF Finance meeting 2018

Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:49 pm
by LawrenceCooper
Chris Goodall wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:40 pm
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:24 pm
Chris Goodall wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 7:40 pm

Paying money to a mafia boss can contribute positively to the success of your restaurant, in that the mafia won't then burn it down. That doesn't mean the mafia provides you with an essential service. Not burning it down is something you could do perfectly well by yourself if you were given the opportunity.

How many title norms even get achieved by British players, arbiters and organisers in a typical month? I've got a store room at work from which I send out little computerised widgets every week, and I'm sure a title norm weighs less than a little computerised widget, so can I volunteer to send them to FIDE in my spare time? I'll keep a list of them on a website, for transparency. On this forum, if you like.
The jobs you have listed are done by the International Rating Officer.
Oh, it's already done by a volunteer? You're telling me that the UKCC and 4NCL pay money to you so that you can keep it and then instruct a volunteer to do some work? Something about that doesn't make sense.
That may be because the I.R.O. is an ECF role, not a UKCC or 4NCL one.

Re: ECF Finance meeting 2018

Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:58 pm
by Chris Goodall
LawrenceCooper wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:49 pm
Chris Goodall wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:40 pm
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:24 pm


The jobs you have listed are done by the International Rating Officer.
Oh, it's already done by a volunteer? You're telling me that the UKCC and 4NCL pay money to you so that you can keep it and then instruct a volunteer to do some work? Something about that doesn't make sense.
That may be because the I.R.O. is an ECF role, not a UKCC or 4NCL one.
In what sense would the IRO role change if it were a 4NCL role, or a UKCC role, or a completely independent role? What value does the ECF add to the excellent work of the IRO, for which three cheers?

Re: ECF Finance meeting 2018

Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:12 pm
by LawrenceCooper
Chris Goodall wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:58 pm
LawrenceCooper wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:49 pm
Chris Goodall wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:40 pm

Oh, it's already done by a volunteer? You're telling me that the UKCC and 4NCL pay money to you so that you can keep it and then instruct a volunteer to do some work? Something about that doesn't make sense.
That may be because the I.R.O. is an ECF role, not a UKCC or 4NCL one.
In what sense would the IRO role change if it were a 4NCL role, or a UKCC role, or a completely independent role? What value does the ECF add to the excellent work of the IRO, for which three cheers?
I wasn't saying it would, I was merely explaining something that you said doesn't make sense.

Re: ECF Finance meeting 2018

Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:36 pm
by Chris Goodall
LawrenceCooper wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:12 pm
Chris Goodall wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:58 pm
LawrenceCooper wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:49 pm


That may be because the I.R.O. is an ECF role, not a UKCC or 4NCL one.
In what sense would the IRO role change if it were a 4NCL role, or a UKCC role, or a completely independent role? What value does the ECF add to the excellent work of the IRO, for which three cheers?
I wasn't saying it would, I was merely explaining something that you said doesn't make sense.
And still doesn't. If it could be a non-ECF role without anyone noticing the difference, then the ECF can't point to it to justify the money they charge the 4NCL and UKCC, any more than they can point to the cleaners at the 4NCL and UKCC venues. The cleaners are also non-employees of the ECF who provide a service to the 4NCL and UKCC, so what's the difference?

Re: ECF Finance meeting 2018

Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:45 pm
by Roger de Coverly
Chris Goodall wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 2:37 pm

What is actually the point of finishing 9th in an Olympiad? Is it prestige?
That's somewhat higher than the football team managed in recent events.

I think there was a thread once which compared the respective performances.There had been a longish run of Olympiad and European performances equivalent to not even qualifying or going out at the group stages.

Financing the national teams has a long history. It didn't use to involve tapping the membership as it was covered by sponsorship and grants from UK governments. That's in plural because the Welsh and Scottish devolved governments have also supported national chess teams.

Re: ECF Finance meeting 2018

Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:51 pm
by LawrenceCooper
Chris Goodall wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:36 pm
LawrenceCooper wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:12 pm
Chris Goodall wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:58 pm

In what sense would the IRO role change if it were a 4NCL role, or a UKCC role, or a completely independent role? What value does the ECF add to the excellent work of the IRO, for which three cheers?
I wasn't saying it would, I was merely explaining something that you said doesn't make sense.
And still doesn't. If it could be a non-ECF role without anyone noticing the difference, then the ECF can't point to it to justify the money they charge the 4NCL and UKCC, any more than they can point to the cleaners at the 4NCL and UKCC venues. The cleaners are also non-employees of the ECF who provide a service to the 4NCL and UKCC, so what's the difference?
I confess that I have absolutely no idea what you are on about or what point you are trying to make so I will have to leave it to someone who does.

Re: ECF Finance meeting 2018

Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:58 pm
by NickFaulks
Jonathan Rogers wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 2:46 pm
I don't fully understand Nick's reference to getting our money's worth from the national team last year.
I most certainly did not say that. I said that if you measured the value of the off-budget assistance given to players in the European Individuals by results, then the results achieved by Jones and McShane could be seen that way.

Re: ECF Finance meeting 2018

Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2018 10:00 pm
by Mike Truran
Because if I was an ECF member, you'd be telling me that I obviously appreciated the ECF's services or I wouldn't be paying for them.
But you're not an ECF member. You don't pay for the ECF's services, and you clearly don't appreciate those services. That's entirely your choice, but it doesn't make your opinions about the ECF particularly relevant.

Like Lawrence, I confess to being entirely confused about your cleaners post. But I'm happy to remain in my state of confusion.

Re: ECF Finance meeting 2018

Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2018 10:01 pm
by Roger de Coverly
LawrenceCooper wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:51 pm
I confess that I have absolutely no idea what you are on about or what point you are trying to make so I will have to leave it to someone who does.
In the past the IRO has been a volunteer post. To the extent that the work gets done at no expense to the ECF it's equivalent to sponsorship or patronage.

As a national chess federation there's a list of minimum functions that the ECF has to ensure are carried out. International rating is one of them.

Re: ECF Finance meeting 2018

Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2018 11:03 pm
by Chris Goodall
Mike Truran wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 10:00 pm
Because if I was an ECF member, you'd be telling me that I obviously appreciated the ECF's services or I wouldn't be paying for them.
But you're not an ECF member. You don't pay for the ECF's services, and you clearly don't appreciate those services. That's entirely your choice, but it doesn't make your opinions about the ECF particularly relevant.
Nonsense. You don't have to pay the mafia before you can have an opinion about the mafia, do you. You don't have to contribute to your church collection to have an opinion about the Church of England.

Re: ECF Finance meeting 2018

Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2018 11:22 pm
by Alex Holowczak
Chris Goodall wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:40 pm
Oh, it's already done by a volunteer? You're telling me that the UKCC and 4NCL pay money to you so that you can keep it and then instruct a volunteer to do some work? Something about that doesn't make sense.
In terms of the financial cost:
- The IRO is a member of staff at the ECF Office. So you might argue that it uses Office resources; and membership fees pay for the Office.
- FIDE rating, titles and licensing all require payments to FIDE.

In addition to that, an honorarium is paid to the ECF Grading Administrator. When grading files get sent off to the ECF, he is paid to process them, produce lists and other things.

You might argue that should the IRO be taken out of the Office that it be subject to an honorarium like with ECF Grading. It used to be - but then it was subsumed within the role of the Office. It sounded to me like you were willing to volunteer to do it for nothing, but that wouldn't get around the fact that we have to pay FIDE for some of the services the ECF relies on them to provide.
Chris Goodall wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 11:03 pm
Mike Truran wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 10:00 pm
Because if I was an ECF member, you'd be telling me that I obviously appreciated the ECF's services or I wouldn't be paying for them.
But you're not an ECF member. You don't pay for the ECF's services, and you clearly don't appreciate those services. That's entirely your choice, but it doesn't make your opinions about the ECF particularly relevant.
Nonsense. You don't have to pay the mafia before you can have an opinion about the mafia, do you. You don't have to contribute to your church collection to have an opinion about the Church of England.
I think you're right, you don't have to be a member of those organisations in order to hold an opinion about them. But equally, you can't expect the people running those organisations to take that opinion particularly seriously. There are no mafia bosses who are very bothered about what you or I think of them.

Re: ECF Finance meeting 2018

Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2018 12:06 am
by Chris Goodall
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 11:22 pm
Chris Goodall wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:40 pm
Oh, it's already done by a volunteer? You're telling me that the UKCC and 4NCL pay money to you so that you can keep it and then instruct a volunteer to do some work? Something about that doesn't make sense.
In terms of the financial cost:
- The IRO is a member of staff at the ECF Office. So you might argue that it uses Office resources; and membership fees pay for the Office.
- FIDE rating, titles and licensing all require payments to FIDE.

You might argue that should the IRO be taken out of the Office that it be subject to an honorarium like with ECF Grading. It used to be - but then it was subsumed within the role of the Office. It sounded to me like you were willing to volunteer to do it for nothing, but that wouldn't get around the fact that we have to pay FIDE for some of the services the ECF relies on them to provide.
Presumably those payments to FIDE are the reason Gold membership is dearer than Silver, though?

If it's a piece of work that can actually be parcelled up and outsourced, then I'm absolutely willing to do it for nothing. Let no-one say that I just whine about the ECF and don't put my money where my mouth is.

Re: ECF Finance meeting 2018

Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2018 12:14 am
by NickFaulks
Chris Goodall wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 12:06 am
Presumably those payments to FIDE are the reason Gold membership is dearer than Silver, though?
Why not check the numbers? Then you wouldn't have to presume.

Re: ECF Finance meeting 2018

Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2018 12:24 am
by Roger de Coverly
NickFaulks wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 12:14 am
Why not check the numbers? Then you wouldn't have to presume.
The logic is somewhat suspect though. If the ECF believes in the principle that the most active players should pay the most to support the ECF, it doesn't implement it terribly well.