I wouldn't know (and don't know) but I strongly suspect profits are minimal, if even existent, and that the magazine is supported by advertising their own chess books and products. Combining a chess magazine with other chess-related business is, I think, quite common elsewhere in Europe.Brian Towers wrote: ↑Sat Sep 22, 2018 1:34 pmDoes the magazine actually make a profit? Or is it the case, as in so much in the world of chess administration, that he is doing us a favour because there is no money in it?Jonathan Rogers wrote: ↑Sat Sep 22, 2018 10:03 amIn this instance, it is his position as Editor of CHESS which has taken a hit.
I have been quite taken aback by the nature of his coverage of the FIDE election in his magazine. No room in the magazine has been given, or it would seem even offered, to either of his opponents in order to allow readers a balanced view. Ideally he should not himself be writing editorials on the matter, given his own personal interests, and should have been asking some one else to do so, with his views appearing separately (besides those of his opponents). Of course we do not expect very high standards of impartiality in the closed world of chess as we might do in the BBC, but the CHESS coverage has probably fallen below even our own quite minimal standards.
Fine, if you are a campaigning politician but not if you are editing a chess magazine aimed at a wide, non-partisan audience.
But even if he were making on overall loss from the business, would that really mean that he should be free to be as one sided as he likes when editing the country's leading magazine?