![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
| Tags: goichbergs, plan, uscf |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
I agree with the substance of these messages. On December 23 after
members of the LMA Committee reviewed the six-month financials, I sent our analysis to President Goichberg and others. We predicted a fiscal year loss in the $100,000-$200,000 and a serious cash crunch in the summer. We recommended immediate cost-cutting measures in Crossville. Bill chose to take the advice instead of two undoubted financial experts in the Federation who projected a much rosier scenario. Unfortunately weeds came in where the roses were supposed to be. The new dues plan is fatally flawed for several reasons: 1) it is way too complicated and confusing. 2) It is not price-point sensitive. 3) It will lead to the demise of one important and tangible benefit, Chess Life. I think something like half of our renewing regular members don't play in rated tournaments in any given year. 4) It will lead to declining revenues. Cordially, Tim Redman |
| Ads |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
I completely agree with Tim Redman.
During my one year on the board I persistently brought up the need for cost cutting. I repeatedly asked questions about where all the money was going. I never got any meaningful answers. For example, Bill Hall would never answer my questions about how many employees the USCF has. I have never heard of a company manager who does not know how many people are working under him. I bet that the president of General Motors can tell you exactly how many employees the company has at any given point of time. Whenever somebody quit the job, Bill Goichberg would announce that expenses had been reduced as though this was a big accomplishment. Bill Hall failed and refused to provide any meaningful financial information upon which the board could base its decisions. My efforts to bring about cost cutting were blocked by the votes of Goichberg, Channing and Hough. On a six member board, they did not have a majority but their three votes were enough to block anything from passing. The USCF already gets $3.2 million in annual revenues. They refuse to tell us where all the money goes. Anybody who donates money to them will have the same effect as someone who gives money to a broke alcoholic so that he can buy another drink. It seems that the only way that they can be stopped from spending your dues money in wasteful and stupid ways is if they completely run out of money and cannot make payroll. Only then might meaningful change take place. I hope that this does not happen but that is the direction in which the board is heading. Sam Sloan On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 12:01 AM, Timothy P. Redman wrote: Hi, Eric, Good to hear from you. It is very difficult to raise money to fund a deficit. Donors want to fund positive programs, not bail out management. Cordially, Tim Redman wrote: Where is the appeal for donations? The fund-raising? Cost-cutting is fine...but frankly, every single affiliate should be called and the hat passed around. Every affiliate should be sending in funds. Other organizations with similar affiliate structures...have affiliates who send a substantial portion of local proceeds to the home office. USCF gets...$40 and some ratings dollars. If there is a crisis, act like there is a crisis...and ask for money...as we do locally. Eric J. In a message dated 5/15/2008 7:14:37 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, Tim Redman writes: I agree with the substance of these messages. On December 23 after members of the LMA Committee reviewed the six-month financials , I sent our analysis to President Goichberg and others. We predicted a fiscal year loss in the $100,000-$200,000 and a serious cash crunch in the summer. We recommended immediate cost-cutting measures in Crossville. Bill chose to take the advice instead of two undoubted financial experts in the Federation who projected a much rosier scenario. Unfortunately weeds came in where the roses were supposed to be. The new dues plan is fatally flawed for several reasons: |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
In BINFO 200802923 Bill Goichberg states:
"If costs would rise more than I expect, we might add a little bit on to the Premium dues. "Bill Goichberg" Bill just does not get it. The question asked was: If Chess Life megazine becomes optional and there are not enough subscribers to support the editorial costs, what will the USCF do? Goichberg's answer is simple: Simply raise the dues that the Premium Members, those being the members who receive Chess Life, have to pay !!??!! That will really solve the problem. Sam Sloan |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Goichberg's "New Plan" for the USCF | samsloan | rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) | 13 | May 16th 08 04:46 PM |
| Chaning Attacks Donna Alarie's Integrity | B. Lafferty[_3_] | rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) | 0 | November 7th 07 03:00 AM |
| "half-truths, unsupported rumors and paranoid fantasies" | samsloan | rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) | 9 | June 23rd 07 02:06 AM |
| Goichberg's List | samsloan | rec.games.chess.play-by-email (Chess - Play by Email) | 1 | March 19th 07 09:09 PM |
| Answer by Sam Sloan to Ethics Complaint by Grant Perks | samsloan | rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) | 1 | January 27th 07 03:21 PM |