CFC Membership Stats

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: CFC Membership Stats

Would you mind explaining this in more detail (legitimate question - I'm not arguing).

I understand that you are not arguing but juniors pay enough. Whether juniors pay $0.50 for rating fees or $3.00 or if they get to pay $24 instead of $36 to the CFC it really doesn't materially change the bottom line. The problem with junior chess 2.5 years ago was that it was just a cash cow in some people's eyes. We made a conscious decision to make sure that we returned what we collected back to the juniors. People complain less when they are getting value for their money.

I think the same approach will work for adult chess.

[John Brown]

Re: CFC Membership Stats

Vlad;
How do you return what you collected back to the adults? Please elaborate.

[David Ottosen]

Re: CFC Membership Stats

I understand that you are not arguing but juniors pay enough. Whether juniors pay $0.50 for rating fees or $3.00 or if they get to pay $24 instead of $36 to the CFC it really doesn't materially change the bottom line. The problem with junior chess 2.5 years ago was that it was just a cash cow in some people's eyes. We made a conscious decision to make sure that we returned what we collected back to the juniors. People complain less when they are getting value for their money.

I think the same approach will work for adult chess.

I mean what are you saying when you say juniors are paying nearly $250 membership? I honestly didn't understand what you mean there.

[David Ottosen]

Re: CFC Membership Stats

I understand that you are not arguing but juniors pay enough. Whether juniors pay $0.50 for rating fees or $3.00 or if they get to pay $24 instead of $36 to the CFC it really doesn't materially change the bottom line. The problem with junior chess 2.5 years ago was that it was just a cash cow in some people's eyes. We made a conscious decision to make sure that we returned what we collected back to the juniors. People complain less when they are getting value for their money.

I think the same approach will work for adult chess.

I mean specifically this: "many juniors pay a membership of $225 plus the $24 so they can finance the WYCC team so their real cost is over $250." What juniors are paying over $250 in membership fee?

I will however have to argue that "if they get to pay $24 instead of $36 to the CFC it really doesn't materially change the bottom line". There are a substantial number of junior members, and each of them paying an additional $12 would have a very material impact on the CFC bottom line.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: CFC Membership Stats

Up 4.4%. Not bad. Especially in a year where there was no Canadian Open.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: CFC Membership Stats

Hi,
I have also been suggesting this for years. Since CFC's membership main (only?) benefit is the ratings, we should scrap memberships and increase the rating fee. Instead of $3.00, make it $6.00, or whatever the value would be calculated to be. It would be a huge relief for every member and organizer not to have to deal with membership renewals.
Alex F.

The CFC ratings are not the only benefit. In fact, they are our most expensive benefit. We probably should be looking for ways to automate the task.

Another benefit is the relationship with FIDE and management of that relationship.

[Roger Patterson]

Re: CFC Membership Stats

Junior chess had some serious problems when I arrived as the masters rep a few years ago. I think those problems have largely been fixed. In effect many juniors pay a membership of $225 plus the $24 so they can finance the WYCC team so their real cost is over $250. That is what it costs to run the junior programs. If the adults paid that level of fees then we would be able to do the same type of things for them that we are doing for the juniors. I don't think anyone would like that option.

.

Using the EF in the CYCC as a justification that juniors pay so so much, therefore, a reduced CFC membership is justified, just doesn't hold water. There are what, 200-250 juniors at the CYCC? Compared to how many juniors active in the CFC scholastic programs? And of course there is the counter example of those adults who pay $200 for a Can. Open fee.

The CYCC fees are a separate issue from the pricing of junior memberships.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: CFC Membership Stats

The CFC ratings are not the only benefit. In fact, they are our most expensive benefit. We probably should be looking for ways to automate the task.

Another benefit is the relationship with FIDE and management of that relationship.

The CFC rating is a service not a benefit. Otherwise the rating fee would be round zero.
The FIDE-CFC affects probably <20% of members.

The real CFC membership benefit is the magazine but due to its irregularity its value goes down. (The nice article about Sarwer is spoiled with a future tense of his participation in a Millionaire tournament - something like 3 months outdated stuff)

[Peter McKillop]

Re: CFC Membership Stats

I mean specifically this: "many juniors pay a membership of $225 plus the $24 so they can finance the WYCC team so their real cost is over $250." What juniors are paying over $250 in membership fee?

I will however have to argue that "if they get to pay $24 instead of $36 to the CFC it really doesn't materially change the bottom line". There are a substantial number of junior members, and each of them paying an additional $12 would have a very material impact on the CFC bottom line.

I think Vlad is referring to the fact that every year two or three hundred juniors' parents pay $x to enter their children in the CYCC. As Roger Patterson has already pointed out, it's not clear why Vlad thinks a tournament entry fee should be linked to an annual membership fee.

[Steve Douglas]

Re: CFC Membership Stats

Using the EF in the CYCC as a justification that juniors pay so so much, therefore, a reduced CFC membership is justified, just doesn't hold water. There are what, 200-250 juniors at the CYCC? Compared to how many juniors active in the CFC scholastic programs? And of course there is the counter example of those adults who pay $200 for a Can. Open fee.

The CYCC fees are a separate issue from the pricing of junior memberships.

Hi Roger:

(This is not all directed at you but yours was the post I chose.)

There are a lot of different things being tossed about in this thread. They are all related, but very different.

With respect to discounts for juniors, there may be some people who feel it's a moral imperative, but I think it's more the issue that it is a cultural norm in our society that we charge less for juniors and seniors. In any case, it's up to the organizers of events to figure out what they want to charge, and for what. In the case of CFC memberships, I personally don't have a problem with a discount for junior memberships. One of the differences used to be that a junior didn't get the (then printed) magazine.

I do have problems with the $0.50 fee for rating junior-only events. This is where the CFC decided to directly compete with the CMA because they suddenly realized "there's gold in them thar kids".

It doesn't make sense to me for the CFC to be going out of its way to rate junior-only events at a huge discount, particularly since most of these juniors don't show up (and never will) in the membership statistics. It would be simpler to just have a new rating category of "scholastic" and use the CMA rating (or an adjusted CMA rating). If the revenue from these tournaments covers the cost, then that's fine. But I don't think it does.

AFAIK the CFC still charges full rating fees for any juniors in "mixed" events.

I understand David Ottosen's point about adults not liking to play juniors. I'm one of them. John Coleman (who has run a LOT of junior events) recently complained about some of those reasons and was treated quite horribly by some posters here. But on what grounds would you keep juniors out of events they qualify to play in?

Vlad is correct that organizers used junior events such as the CYCC as cash cows to siphon money to cover other expenses. Or that organizers would run high $$$ junior events but deliver a crappy product and leave a bad taste in the mouths of parents.

There are a lot of adult CFC members who do not give a rodent's derriere about junior chess and I understand that. But my observation over the past 15 years is that we've have too many governors who either care about nothing except adult chess, or governors who care about nothing except junior chess.

The CFC has done a good job of finally (finally) making the CYCC relevant after rudely and unnecessarily jerking it away from the CMA. (And now the CFC is being transparent about where the money goes). But at the same time, anybody who thinks the CFC should somehow be competing with the CMA for scholastic stuff, needs to give their head a shake.

As for adult tournaments and opportunities, that's always been in the hands of adults, hasn't it? Various revenue models have been discussed for years. There's also the issue of the portion of the membership fee that's been known to disappear into the provincial associations.

Steve

[Larry Bevand]

Re: CFC Membership Stats

Mike England of PEI said to me over a decade ago, the difference between the CMA and the CFC is that the CFC keeps changing direction...Actually he put it in sailing terms but that was the jist of his comment :)

[Steve Douglas]

Re: CFC Membership Stats

Mike England of PEI said to me over a decade ago, the difference between the CMA and the CFC is that the CFC keeps changing direction...Actually he put it in sailing terms but that was the jist of his comment :)

At my cottage I have a book which defines sailing as (paraphrasing): "going nowhere at high expense while getting very wet".

Steve

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: CFC Membership Stats

I mean what are you saying when you say juniors are paying nearly $250 membership? I honestly didn't understand what you mean there.

The cost of CYCC is $225 ($75 to the organizer, $150 to the youth fund). A junior membership is $24.00 vs. $36.00 for an adult membership. There are a number of players who only join the CFC in order to play in CYCC. In addition there are provincial fees in most jurisdictions. Also on the rating fees many of the junior tournaments are YCC's where the fee per player is $0.50 rating fee and $2.50 to the youth fund. If a junior plays in a regular tournament they pay the regular rating fee at least indirectly through the organizer.

[Tom O'Donnell]

Re: CFC Membership Stats

There are a number of players who only join the CFC in order to play in CYCC.

Anyone who has never played in a slow CFC or FQE event has no business playing in a CYCC, imo. They are national championships and shouldn't be watered down with players who barely know how to play.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: CFC Membership Stats

Anyone who has never played in a slow CFC or FQE event has no business playing in a CYCC, imo. They are national championships and shouldn't be watered down with players who barely know how to play.

When it's all about money, anything can be tolerated that brings in money. Vlad's job, as he so aptly described in another thread, is to do whatever is best for the CFC, not for chess in Canada. So I would recommend forgetting about the 'quality' of national championships and just look at the bottom line.

Vlad is even linking tournament entry fees to annual membership fees (for juniors only, since that helps his case); a Machiavellian plot indeed but he was called out on it by Roger Patterson and David Ottosen. Even here on Chesstalk one cannot fool all of the people all of the time.