I'm glad to see that Tim is working on some new ideas, but
Chess Life is like a giant advertisement. We should want people
to read it. I think the kids' dues are too low. Why make it
so much lower than adult membership? I assume that kids
would (or should) receive a publication. It should be voluntary
to subsidize children whose parents are unable to pay for their
membership.

Bruce Draney wrote:

Tim Hanke has come up with a proposal for USCF dues that is very
interesting and certainly merits discussion. I know that if the Board
passes Tim's proposal, that this will be historic, because I know
several of the most powerful and prominent leaders of USCF in the past
are vehemently opposed to the entire concept of non-magazine/tournament
participation memberships. Desperate times however call for desperate
measures and it may be that we are past the point of any longer worrying
if the old dues structure system can be made to work after 8 years in a
row of losing large amounts of money.

Ideally, everyone would love to leave dues alone and raise funds through
donations, but this pie in the sky solution to our problems is just
another form of denial, as the "Money Fairy", ranks right up there with
Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy, and they ain't comin' either.

Here are Tim's proposals as published on his website:

USCF Membership Dues: A Summary

by Tim Hanke

Right now USCF has a huge variety of membership categories. Here is a concise summary of the membership dues categories
I suggest we adopt.

Adults

$25 for a Playing Membership (no magazine)
$49 for a Full Membership (includes new, high-quality monthly magazine)
$35 for a Magazine Subscription (no membership rights)

Kids

$15 for a Playing Membership
$25 for a Full Membership (includes quarterly magazine just for kids)
$15 for a Kids Magazine Subscription (no membership rights)

Tournament Membership

Non-USCF members could pay $3 per round (in addition to the regular entry fee) for the right to play in any tournament. Their
games would be rated, but they would get no other membership benefits.

This is so revolutionary as to almost be unimaginable for
traditionalists, but it would be interesting to crunch some numbers and
see what would need to happen to make it work and whether it could
possibly lose us money or cause decreases in membership and revenues,
(something which seems hard to imagine, given our recent financial
performance and membership declines in critical categories).

Twenty five for an adult to just play chess, seems reasonable,
particularly compared to the present "Economy" membership which
basically values Chess Life magazine at less than a dollar per issue and
sells a non-mag membership to an adult for 3 times what a child's
parents or coach would pay for the exact same thing. This also sets the
full membership with CL at $49.00/year, the same as it is now. Tim
doesn't mention commissions, so I'm unsure if they're being eliminated
or they're just not calculated into the revenue equation. Something
which definitely needs to be clarified.

On the Junior side of the equation $15.00 for a non-mag membership and
$25.00 for a full membership with mag, is fairly close to what it is
right now, with a modest $2.00 increase for those children who really
just want to play tournament chess.

Tim is offering a $3.00 per round fee for players who don't want to
spring for a full membership, which makes sense, because at $3.00/round,
a 5 rounder will cost $15.00 which is only going to make since to an
adult who wants to play in only one event, because if he plays in two
events or plans to, he would be better off just paying the $25.00/year
membership.

There is some gamble or risk involved here, particularly absent any
reliable long term research about membership beliefs or values. Many
USCF politicians, (present company included), believe that they know why
other members behave the way they do, what they want, what they dislike,
and there is nothing to base these feelings on other than anecdotal
evidence and our own beliefs. For years, USCF has been flying blind and
when we were the only game in town, we could miss our market by a
country mile and still hit close enough to hold the market share and run
surpluses, but markets have changed, and now days flying blind, leads to
millions of dollars in financial losses as we blunder from one decision
to another, hoping we'll get the right formula to make things work.

Best Regards,

Bruce