Some topics of interest from the International Directors report

[George Neave]

Andy - For my clarity - is CS putting any funds towards the Olympiad? If not, I wonder what is taking priority over this. As I said in my initial post, I understand funds are scarce but would nevertheless like to understand what is given priority over this.

George it's funny how people see things differently. I would prefer there are at least 20 items (with a much wider impact) I would give priority over funding the Olympiad team. It's the harsh reality of the current finances.

To be clear, my question above offers no personal opinion on what I think the priorities should be. You appear to have read into my question that I think Olympiad funding ought to be a top priority. If you re-read carefully you will see that I did not say that.

What I am interested to know is what are the priorities. Perhaps funding decisions are only made on an ad hoc basis and so there is not prioritisation framework that can be tied back to strategy? Perhaps this is because the funding is so scarce that the question is meaningless although I did pick up an earlier comment about building-up a cash reserve which suggests there is some strategy going on that says building a funding reserves is more important than paying flights for players to attend internationals. Why do we need a cash reserve I wonder? Some clarifications would be nice!