If you don't have the discipline to study good chess books then you're
probably wasting your time and money on expensive lessons. Chess teachers
rarely impart anything magical. In my opinion the best they can do is teach
you what you need to do, during the 99% of the time you're not with them, to
improve. The rest is up to you, but I think most people (myself included)
feel "Hey, I've just spent 90 minutes with so-and-so and paid him $100.
That's good enough until next time!"

GMs can tell you, for example, how to study a master game but rarely give
better advice than Fritz 5.2 on specific moves. They can show you important
endings but then again so can a good $25 endings book. They can show you
middlegame themes and plans but you can get a lifetimes' worth of top-level
game analysis from $100 worth of books. (Of course you can have a $500
library like me, and if (like me) you don't read 'em, what's the point?).

I believe GM teachers' benefit is mostly psychological, although for me it's
reverse psychology (the more lessons I take, the worse I get).

Angelo DePalma

"B. G." wrote me. If you choose to become
disciplined and study books, I think it
might be more cost effective. But the discipline to study regularly is
very hard to attain. At least with scheduled lessons you feel some
obligation to attend (since you're paying, it's in your best interest
to attend and learn something).
job.