+- Forums (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Members Only (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum/forum-16.html)
+--- Forum: General Chess Chat (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum/forum-3.html)
+--- Thread: Council meeting (/thread-909.html)
Re: Council meeting - David G Congalton - 11-03-2014
The principal reason behind the proposed fees for grading junior games is to have the discussion.
For the 2011-12 season the breakdown of results processed for grading was as follows –
The adult results were:
Congress 6,574
Club 3,195
Club Allegro 2,084
Outside 1,441
Allegro 2,260
League 7,524
League Xtra 1,038
League Alleg 1,350
So that is 19,772 "adult" results for the Main List, 5,694 for the allegro list.
Over 18,000 junior results were processed - at no charge. Incidentally, the last time there was any charge for a secondary event was in 2009. The fee rules were also changed then – i.e. if 75% of an event which contains J14-J18 is under 14 then it would be free.
"Adult" games includes juniors playing in such “adult” events.
There are two results in a game.
I would like to see some sort of nominal value put on the grading of junior events in an official way. This would be useful for a few reasons, including applications for funding junior events where a cost breakdown is required.
As has been expressed elsewhere, there is a feeling that there is no benefit to junior organisations or schools to affiliate to Chess Scotland. At the moment the grading service and other available services and benefits are provided free (with the exception of insurance). Does this make them worthless or just taken for granted?
By introducing junior grading fees to the list of fees, I would perhaps be opening the door to free or reduced rate junior grading being one of the benefits of affiliation to Chess Scotland. However, I would consider this to be a matter for discussion by the junior board.
No income from junior fees is included in the proposed budget for 2014-15. The sum of £556 is the total attributable to income from adult allegro events.
It is not my intention to actually charge these junior fees in the coming season (2014-15) but I would like to see the discussion take place and an amount included in the fees list. Essentially all fees would be waived.
If I were to continue in the role of finance director I would propose publishing a list of the beneficiaries of this and the amounts in my annual report to the AGM.
I do hope we can have a healthy, sensible discussion on Sunday about fees and spending in general.
Gary McPheator Wrote:It does seem a rather strange time to introduce a grading fee for under 14's when there is possibly going to be a root and branch change to how Chess Scotland is funded. Would it not be prudent to keep the present system of fees as they are until it is decided whether to go with a new funding model or not?
The two are not mutually exclusive and I anticipate the question of whether all juniors would be required to take compulsory membership in order to have games graded will be raised.
Re: Council meeting - Ianbrownlee - 12-03-2014
David G Congalton Wrote:The two are not mutually exclusive and I anticipate the question of whether all juniors would be required to take compulsory membership in order to have games graded will be raised.Thanks for that David Roughly just under 50% of all graded games were juniors which is much larger than I thought. Compulsory membership by juniors would be a nightmare however for organisers handling a large amount of juniors checking to see if they are current members or not. For clarity for myself and others i'm hoping for answers for other questions I asked. I also strongly believe other methods of fund raising should be explored like the example set by Andy Muir with his simul idea by our stronger players
Re: Council meeting - StevieHilton - 12-03-2014
First of all I wish the council meeting well on Sunday.
As someone who will not be present at the meeting, I still have a number of questions about matters affecting our association.
The idea of compulsory membership of the association is not an option. I intend to fight such an idea with every breath I have. They tried to introduce this in 1993 and it was soundly defeated then.
I have suggested this time and time again but it keeps getting ignored. I am suggesting that a professional fundraiser be employed on a commission basis by CS. This would allow our officials to concentrate on the work they were elected to do, rather than having to spend their time fundraising, whilst noble in itself, takes vital time from their remits.
I would urge CS and the membership to consider this proposal most urgently, especially now with the disappearance of the Government Grant
Re: Council meeting - amuir - 12-03-2014
Is grading juniors under 14 that important ?
I played competitive chess from 1969-1972 against all the other top juniors in Scotland whilst being under 14 and ungraded. It's the quality & quantity of competition that is the most important in junior development not a number. Players can be selected based on no. of junior tournaments won.
Re: Council meeting - Alex Gillies - 12-03-2014
Is grading juniors under 14 that important ? YES and there is a fair volume of them and others who will agree. I'm sure you can filter the grading to confirm number of J14 & under - but its a lot.
I think the positive volume is at heart of the issue it is a high volume for no fees. In fairness the SJC (and by this I also mean other junior organisers) seem completely open to the idea of starting to introduce nominal fees , the SJC real objection seems to be against compulsory affiliation, although I would like to know what the pros and cons of this are on both sides.
What David G and David D outline seem to make sense. It seems this did not appear from the outset and whatever did was heavily misinterpreted by SJC. It would also be good if SJC etc suggested a proposal and timescale as it will impact them the most
I don't believe SC intentions were anything other than honourable - perhaps the SJC and other junior organisers not affiliated should have been consulted better on the issue - Either way if we can get unresolved issues clarified we should be able to get this it back on track.
SJC do a lot for U14s - if we can replicate that through to U18 we would be doing well as it falls off a cliff. SC SJC - don't really care who does - I would like to see some of the volume being retained and I realise that is not an easy task.
Re: Council meeting - robin moore - 12-03-2014
Just to say to Ian's point six on the previous page, juniors have to be a member of ChessScotland if they wish to play for Scotland.
Re: Council meeting - Derek Howie - 12-03-2014
David Deary Wrote:Derek,
Your second paragraph sounds a little like what you suggested in you first sentence.
Absolutely. However I couldn't find the smiley link to add a cheesy grin to it show I wasn't being completely serious. Has this been removed?
David Deary Wrote:Fundamentally, I believe this is a debate that CS needs to have along with the debate around compulsory membership.
Two totally different things and the fact that the HJD is talking about compusory membership is frightening. If this is something that you believe should be discussed then you should have detailed that prior to your election. It is something that I could never vote for. However that should not derail the subject of fees and should be deferred to a later date.
David Deary Wrote:You asked for my view:
Am I in favour of all scottish junior organisations being affiliated to CS? Yes, definitely, I would hope that all junior organisations see it is a mutually beneficial arrangement. Part of my efforts this year has been talking to all junior organisations to try and get them on-board. For instance, I have spoken to NEJCA and they reserve their position until more details are available on this proposal and the matter has been discussed at the Home Junior Board.
Again, irrelevant to the subject of grading fees. I'd need to understand the benefits of affiliation before commenting further but do have some reservations but will not get into those at this point, and best to leave to a separate thread.
David Deary Wrote:Am I in favour of junior games being charged for grading? Yes, I am of the view there should be a nominal amount per player per game charged. As the grading system is a service provided by CS, I think this view is fairly universal amongst players and organisers in Scotland but I could be wrong.
As I also mentioned yesterday I share a lot of the views on here. I share your fear wrt to schools chess and spoke to a coach who goes into a primary school and teaches on this subject last night. My view is that if the regional league/association is affiliated then schools within that catchment area should be covered by the affiliation of the regional body. My view is that the council proposal should be passed to the Home Junior Board for further consideration however the others on council may not agree with me.
Thanks. This is why I was looking for your views. Some interesting ideas. My initial thoughts are that I don't have a problem in principle with a nominal amount for tournaments organised by chess organisations, but I don't regard 25p as nominal.
The problem with your suggestion on the regional league being affiliated is that what happens if it isn't? It would be best to omit schools chess and similar where incurring any cost may be problematic and prohibitive.
I agree that Council should certainly get input from those who regularly run junior chess events, (including the main junior organisations, school chess events and more ad-hoc, one-off events) as they would know the issues far better than many who will attend Council.
Re: Council meeting - Derek Howie - 12-03-2014
David G Congalton Wrote:At the moment the grading service and other available services and benefits are provided free (with the exception of insurance). Does this make them worthless or just taken for granted?
I look upon it as being one of Chess Scotland's contributions towards meeting their responsibililty to develop chess at junior levels in Scotland.
Re: Council meeting - Derek Howie - 12-03-2014
David G Congalton Wrote:I anticipate the question of whether all juniors would be required to take
compulsory membership in order to have games graded will be raised.
Again a frightening comment. I would suggest that whoever raises this has no idea about junior chess and the devastating impact that this would have at the grass roots level, which in turn would have an impact on those progressing into adult competitions and club and congress chess in 10-30 years.
Also is it only juniors who are being asked to take compulsory membership or adults as well?
Re: Council meeting - David G Congalton - 12-03-2014
Below is my draft finance report, as it currently stands. As I knew I would be busy with work this week, it was my intention to have a final report published at the same time as the fees and budgets but I ran out of time at the weekend.
However, I think it best to publish this just now, in advance of the meeting, to allow digestion and discussion, rather than have the meeting wait for everyone to read through the document.
Please excuse me if I am unable to respond to any questions quickly. I am particularly busy at this time and am still playing a bit of catch-up on this particular discussion thread.
Audited Accounts for 2012-13
The audited accounts were sent to me in November 2013 to be signed off and returned for the auditor’s signature. This was duly done by e-mail but unfortunately my e-mail disappeared into the auditor’s spam folders. It was only when I chased them up in January that this came to light.
The delay in the publication led to the auditors being approached by Chess Scotland (CS) members with a variety of questions. Had members approached me directly or through other CS officials or members I would have provided them with copies of the audited accounts and answered any questions they might have had. It is unfortunate that the members did not feel they wanted or could approach me and I will try to address this during my remaining time as Finance Director.
The change in the presentation of the accounts also prompted some questions on the accounts and this was to be expected. I have endeavoured to address the questions and hope that I have been able to answer them to the member’s satisfaction.
Essentially the audited accounts were a consolidated version of the two sets of accounts, CS and Championship, which I presented to the AGM in 2013. There was a difference of around £1,000. This was due to the auditors including Championship entry fees for the 2013 event held in Helensburgh, which I had excluded from the 2012 Glasgow Championships account.
Current CS Finances
Through the prudent management of Chess Scotland finances and the huge generosity of a few individuals CS will have a surplus at the end of the 2013-14 financial year as forecast.
This planned surplus was budgeted to take account of the two major events in 2014 which CS will support, the Olympiad and the Glorney.
The recent publication of the regulations for the Olympiad to be held in Tromso has allowed the International Director, Andy Muir and myself to assess and estimate the cost of participation of the Scottish teams and I am happy to report that the swift action of Andy Muir in selecting the team and prompting the players to book flights quickly looks as if it will significantly minimise the total cost involved.
At the present time I am hopeful that being quick off the mark will lead to the final cost coming in around the £5,000 mark for the whole event. This is significantly below the estimates we were looking at in January and I would like to thank Andy Muir for the huge part he has played in minimising the expense.
The biggest event for Scottish Chess this year is undoubtedly the Commonwealth Championships. These have always been planned as a stand alone event with the generous support of our anonymous benefactor largely funding what will hopefully be a fantastic experience for Scottish Chess players.
CS has made two applications for significant funding for the Commonwealth Championships, one of which was a joint application with the Glorney. We are awaiting the outcome of these applications.
As previously stated at meetings I am happy to submit further applications to appropriate funding providers where it is felt there are specific projects that CS could organise.
Future Funding Initiatives
I am currently working on a number of funding initiatives which I hope will be long-term fundraisers for the work that CS does.
Already in place, due to the generous backing of CS members to fund the start up costs, is the start of CS Merchandise. The Chess Scotland Victory pen is now available to purchase for £2. The pen is a quality, metal pen with a twist action and will be available at all events I organise, as well as, hopefully, other events and through the CS website. I would ask all Council members to support this venture and promote it in their regions and clubs.
Funds raised from pen sales will be used to purchase team apparel for the junior international squad.
If the pen merchandising idea is successful I will look at adding other products to the list, with a view to having a small line up of CS goods available for people to purchase with their memberships or as gifts or just to treat themselves.
The junior international squad will also benefit from the upcoming Livingston and Ayrshire allegros. While both events will be run in the normal way, I hope to make a small surplus from entries and also raise some funds on the day towards supporting all of our junior internationalists, with fundraisers like change for chess, where I will ask players to consider putting any loose change they have into a collection bucket during the breaks in rounds.
I envisage holding at least one CS allegro event per month in towns and cities throughout the country, to raise small amounts towards specific CS causes, as well as promote chess throughout Scotland and provide opportunities for all to play.
Initially, these events will be organised through the body set up to run the Ayr and Inverness Congresses. This is largely to minimise the risk to CS. However, I would hope that the events are successful and supported enough to persuade Chess Scotland to take on their organisation, allowing them to run on a long-term basis as nationally organised events.
Finally, on international junior fund raising and junior fund raising as a whole, I am working closely with the SJCAET to explore areas where we can work together to support and benefit our young chess playing kids.
The SJCAET have been extremely helpful in the past and have already pledged support for the Glorney International later this year. I hope to be able to announce exact details, very soon, of their specific support and also of a joint project with SJCAET to give further help to our Glorney Internationalists.
A further suggested fundraising project has been prompted by the difficulties tight funds have placed on the Scottish Olympiad teams going to Tromso this year. I have to admit this is not my idea but I fully support it, as it seems much more sensible to raise funds for the Olympiad teams throughout the two year period between events rather than leaving fund raising until late in the day when it becomes apparent that the Olympiad pot is not as full as would be liked.
The suggestion is that an Olympiad appeal is featured on the home page of the Chess Scotland website, in a similar (or better) way to the Canadian Chess Federation.
The Canadians have a fund-raising drive barometer (see below). Such a diagram could be implemented into the CS website, with a “donate now” type button. Perhaps this could replace the sensory board appeal button currently in place.
CS Finance going forward
I would like to see some sort of nominal value put on the grading of junior events in an official way. This would be useful for a few reasons, including applications for funding junior events where a cost breakdown is required.
At the moment the grading service and other available services and benefits are provided free (with the exception of insurance). Does this make them worthless or just taken for granted?
By introducing junior grading fees to the list of fees, I would perhaps be opening the door to free or reduced rate junior grading being one of the benefits of affiliation to Chess Scotland. However, I would consider this to be a matter for discussion by the junior board.
No income from junior fees is included in the proposed budget for 2014-15. The sum of £556 is the total attributable to income from adult allegro events.
It is not my intention to actually charge these junior fees in the coming season (2014-15) but I would like to see the discussion take place and an amount included in the fees list. Essentially all fees would be waived.
If I were to continue in the role of finance director I would propose publishing a list of the beneficiaries of this and the amounts in my annual report to the AGM.
I have also proposed raising some fees in line with the current rates of inflation. In the case of grading fees for tournaments not offering a discount to CS members I have proposed raising the fees at a slightly higher rate to encourage offering a CS discount.
I have proposed reducing the fees for under-17’s to the same level as all other juniors in an attempt to encourage all juniors to continue with CS membership throughout their time at school.
Additionally, I have looked to reduce the fees for smaller clubs to assist these clubs to start up and to grow. I have also considered the waiving of fees for start-up clubs but need to fully assess the implications and workings of this with regard to clubs who may amalgamate or change their name.
The current structure and level of fees allows Chess Scotland to provide a core framework for chess in the country. Among the things we provide are
• a modern website which is updated regularly with news and events,
• a grading system that is fundamental to competitive chess is Scotland,
• a membership service which permits players to support the game and the services, as well as reap a few benefits,
• the publication of a bi-monthly magazine which players can enjoy,
• a PVG scheme to provide for the safety of our juniors,
• a directory of qualified coaches
• a structure to train and provide arbiters for tournaments
• a national championships and other major events
There are many more and without the hard work and generosity of people who love the game CS would never be able to come remotely close to doing all it does. The core costs of providing all of this are approximately 65% to 70% of the annual income of the organisation with the remainder split largely between supporting junior and open international participation.
Quite rightly there has been concern about the loss of the government grant and we have had to keep spending under tight control. However, had we received £11,000 from the Government or anyone else, what would we have spent it on and how would that have benefited the long-term future of chess?