Canadian Closed 2011

[Alan Baljeu]

Re: Canadian Closed 2011

If somebody on behalf of the CFC found sponsors for the CFC Closed, that would make the host's job easier.

[Bob Armstrong]

CFC Tournament Coordinator

Hi Alan:

Bylaw # 3 of the CFC:

TOURNAMENT COORDINATOR

8E. The Tournament Coordinator will help to develop and train tournament organizers and directors across the country. The Tournament Coordinator will be responsible for soliciting individuals to bid on and organize major tournaments in Canada, including, but not limited to:

The Canadian Open Championship

The Canadian Closed Championship


The Tournament Coordinator shall have delegated to him/her by the Executive, their obligation under section 1201 of the Olympiad Regulations to appoint the Olympiad Coordinator. The Tournament Coordinator will then oversee and work with the Olympiad Coordinator re the National and Women's Olympiad Teams. [Motion 2010-15]

The CFC has been seeking a volunteer to fill this position since it was created at the 2010 AGM. It can be a governor, or member ( who then becomes a governor ! ).

One of the jobs of this non-executive officer would be to help organizers find sponsors.

Any voluinteer out there?

Bob

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: Canadian Closed 2011

toss the foundation money

It might be possible to use an earned interest for the Closed (and other National championships) without draining the foundation.

[John Brown]

Re: Canadian Closed 2011

Hi Alan;

We already have locations in Toronto, Guelph, Kitchener, Mississauga,Elora,Brampton,Scarborough, Montreal, Trois Rivers, BC has locations, I believe that Alberta is running a championship shortly. You have casinos in a lot of major cities and you have chess players who work in those casinos.
Even Newfoundland has a site to play events.

Everyone thinks you need big money to run a tournament. If we little Organizers need thousands of dollars then you'd see blanks on the Across Canada section of the e-zine.

Where do you think the organizers right now play their tournaments? On the moon?

The CFC just has to approach the organizers who have already run tournaments and see if they would like to run the Cdn Closed.

I personally think the CFC is lazy.

Bob Armstrong posts the CFC needs a TD coordinator or something to that effect. They don't need another position they need the guts so say they don't want to think they just pass want the buck.

There is money in the CFC otherwise they would not be able to run a e-zine, pay a Director ,have a huge Foundation account.

The Executive way back took the Toronto Building Fund and holed it away in the Foundation.

Did we not just sell our building?

If the CFC has no money then dis ban it and let's join the USCF.
They seem to run national championships.

What the CFC needs to do is contact the people who run the existing tournaments and see if they would like to take on the venture based on the abilities that the organizers have. If you are just talking say 15 players then you can run it anywhere even in my apartment which can hold 20 players if I take down the bed.
But are the conditions feasible?

One example that comes to mind is Hart House in U of T. If you get the right contacts you can get the facilities reasonable. If you run it on the off school time mainly in the summer you can have dorms for the players.
So does New College.

Kitchener has a program that supports chess and their club is at City Hall that is a great venue. Waterloo University also has dorms.

Elora a fantastic venue and there are rooms in the hotel.

Do you feel these players should get a free ride to the Cdn closed?
I feel they should get some type of help but not a freebie.

One thing the CFC forgets is that all Organizers have contacts or people who can get them a better deal than any Joe off the street coming along and saying Hey I want to Run a tournament you got any freebies to offer.

You can travel from Toronto to BC with a discounted ticket sometimes for $500.

I can't talk about the other Provinces or Territories but maybe some organizers from those locations can comment.

I think BC is running a tournament over Easter it looks like it will a big place.
Is the Keres Open in a shoe box I think not.
Did Fischer not play a Candidates match at U of BC?

The CFC does not contact Organizers!!! They cry HELP we need a place to run the Cdn Closed.
They have tons of places they just don't want to approach the public organizers. Volunteers is a good cop out when things can't get done.

The CFC has most of the Organizer emails already. I guess sending a form letter to them all must cost thousands of dollars as you say the CFC is broke
or a volunteer does not have time to support the CFC by writing a form letter.
Did we not just award a Volunteer of the Year award at the last Cdn Open? Has that volunteer stopped volunteering ? Now that he has the BIG CERTIFICATE?

The big picture of the CFC has been a mess for years we only show a blind eye as we want to play chess.

Then once in awhile some one like Morgan Mills wants to play in the Cdn Closed and the CFC can't give a decent guy a place to play. Because they have never thought about taking responsibility of organizing it themselves.

I would not run a Cdn Closed this year.

Leave the past winner as the champion this year and work on using the Organizer venues you already have and produce a better idea rather than try a ship shot horrible event for this year.

[Christopher Mallon]

Re: Canadian Closed 2011

Chris you know if the CFC Foundation Fund would release the Toronto Building funds plus the interest that it has made I'm sure there would be more than enough money to run a Canadian Closed.

There is no longer any such thing as the "Toronto Building Fund" therefore there is nothing to "release."

Plus in any case, using capital assets to pay for expenses is a very poor way to run a business. What would you plan to do next year?

No, the Foundation is not the answer to the problem of how to run the Closed.

[Kerry Liles]

Re: Canadian Closed 2011

There is no longer any such thing as the "Toronto Building Fund" therefore there is nothing to "release."

I think John's implication was clear: to extricate the money that once was the "Toronto Building Fund" and use it to kickstart permanent sponsorship of Canadian Closed tournaments...

Unfortunately, I don't believe money can just be extricated from the fund (for any reason other than those specified by the Foundation). The matter of how or why the money ended up in there is a separate matter (and apparently still not settled as far as a number of people are concerned).

Someone else (Egis?) suggested that the interest from the fund could be used, but I seem to think that the CFC already receives the interest from the Fund. Is that correct? Even if that is so, I don't believe the interest is all that much money...

[Fred McKim]

Re: Canadian Closed 2011

Someone else (Egis?) suggested that the interest from the fund could be used, but I seem to think that the CFC already receives the interest from the Fund. Is that correct? Even if that is so, I don't believe the interest is all that much money...

The CFC receives the interest the Chess Foundation makes on it's investments. For the first 9 months of this year we have received (at least in the ledger books) $5,447 from the Foundation. It is considered part of our general revenue stream when we are doing our budgeting.

All life memberships go to the Foundation.

[Peter McKillop]

Re: Canadian Closed 2011

I think John's implication was clear: to extricate the money that once was the "Toronto Building Fund" and use it to kickstart permanent sponsorship of Canadian Closed tournaments...

This note is premised on the idea that, in many undertakings, it is important to promote excellence - not to the exclusion of everything else, but certainly the promotion of excellence should have its rightful place in the funding decisions of an organization like the CFC.

Through a combination of increased membership fees and increased rating fees, the CFC's membership could choose to self-sponsor two important events on the chess calendar: the Canadian Closed and the Olympiad. For example, the objective could be to raise an additional $20,000 per year with these monies helping to fund Olympiad teams in even years and the Closed in odd years. Seems like a lot of money at first glance but it would probably average out to around 6 or 7 cents per member per day. This idea doesn't include life members (practically speaking, how would you collect the money).

Unfortunately, it's highly unlikely this idea would fly any time soon, even though it's relatively inexpensive on a per-member basis (what does it cost these days to play one round of golf on a decent, public course), because (a) the political will doesn't exist to make it happen and (b) chess players are cheap (let's be honest).

Seems to me that CFC members need to make a decision: are our elite players worthy of increased support from the membership-at-large? If the decision is 'yes', then, to at least get the ball rolling with some new ideas, the CFC should be pursuing people like Gordon Ritchie and Brian Fiedler, among others who have demonstrated the ability to raise funding for major events, to take leadership roles.

I've been coming to ChessTalk for about 11 years now (curse you, Larry Bevand :) ) and this topic of funding (sponsorships, patrons, etc.) has been discussed over and over with little accomplished other than occasional ad hoc efforts. Bob Gillanders, if you happen to read this, getting the CFC moving towards a workable funding model in support of excellence could be part of your legacy!!

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Canadian Closed 2011

Plus in any case, using capital assets to pay for expenses is a very poor way to run a business. What would you plan to do next year?

Are you telling the members money for a new web site is no problem, but money for running the Canadian Championship is not possible?

[Fred McKim]

Re: Canadian Closed 2011

Are you telling the members money for a new web site is no problem, but money for running the Canadian Championship is not possible?

The Web Site is being considered a capital asset.

Funding a Candian Closed would be considered an expense. It is unlikely the governor's would approve spending what is left of the "receipt of the CFC building fund" on an expense.

What might be a more reasonable use of this money would be hiring somebody to line up ongoing sponsorship for the Canadian Closed.

[Paul Leblanc]

Re: Canadian Closed 2011

I agree with Peter that the only reliable way to generate the funds to allow the CFC to do all the things we want is to pass the cost on to the members through membership dues and rating fees. Personally, I would be happy to pay double the current annual membership fee to ensure we have a fully funded Olympiad Team, a full time director, a good website with up to date information, a bulletin and some assistance to our national championships.
We only have 975 fully contributing adult members once you subtract the juniors, honourary members, life members etc. so the cost per member to have a fully functioning national organization is pretty high.
As for using Foundation funds, I am completely against this idea of selling the future for today's needs.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Canadian Closed 2011

The Web Site is being considered a capital asset.

Funding a Candian Closed would be considered an expense. It is unlikely the governor's would approve spending what is left of the "receipt of the CFC building fund" on an expense.

What might be a more reasonable use of this money would be hiring somebody to line up ongoing sponsorship for the Canadian Closed.

Why don't you consider the Canadian Championship, your premier event, a capital asset and the new web site with questionable frills an expense?

Canada needs to do something to improve the level of chess.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Canadian Closed 2011

I agree with Peter that the only reliable way to generate the funds to allow the CFC to do all the things we want is to pass the cost on to the members through membership dues and rating fees. Personally, I would be happy to pay double the current annual membership fee to ensure we have a fully funded Olympiad Team, a full time director, a good website with up to date information, a bulletin and some assistance to our national championships.
We only have 975 fully contributing adult members once you subtract the juniors, honourary members, life members etc. so the cost per member to have a fully functioning national organization is pretty high.
As for using Foundation funds, I am completely against this idea of selling the future for today's needs.

You're not a life member?

Instead of doubling the membership fees why not double the membership? If you double your fees and the membership drops to half what will you do? Double the fees again?

Regarding the Canadian Olympic National team, the last one didn't even have a representative from Western Canada, the power base of the Prime Minister, at a time when the charitable status was being appealed. An ironic coincidence.

[Alan Baljeu]

Re: Canadian Closed 2011

Um, capital is something you buy and keep around. Events don't fit that category.

Most members are occasional players. $40 to play in a $20 tournament is hard to swallow. $80 is unreal. It would drive people to ignore the CFC and play unofficial tournaments. If you want to fund the national tournaments, it's either by raising membership or sponsorship.

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: Canadian Closed 2011

Bob Gillanders, if you happen to read this, getting the CFC moving towards a workable funding model in support of excellence could be part of your legacy!!

Peter - some good comments and food for thought. :)

The fight in recent years has been to resist persistent calls for cuts to membership dues and rating fees. Just hold the line until we can gain some credibility, operate under a balanced budget, and avoid those crushing deficits of a few years ago.

As you can see from Paul's comment, the Foundation and the governors aren't going to be issuing us any credit cards anytime soon. It's going to be a long struggle. :( But progress is being made.

As for Gordon and Brian. Both gentlemen have made great contributions for the chess community. Their continuing efforts are much appreciated. But we need to work of the many to lighten the load of the few. :)