Subject: USCF Doomed?...
From: ojunk (GrantPerks)
Date: 08/23/2003 6:36 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

Larry, John, and Bruce,

Yes, 40% reductions in staff will affect services. Chess Life won't have the
same look. We won't be publishing books in the short term as well. Volunteers
have filled in for some of the key staff positions. I am sure we will be able
to find other volunteers to do things like be the official photographer at
tournaments etc.

One item on my to do list for Monday is to find an automated credit card
processor for the online store. The manual processing of credit cards was a
full time position. This technological advancement shouldn't cost us any
capital and hopefully very little programming time from our end. We are
looking
to update other systems as well as we go along.

The staff reductions have gone a long way in reducing expenses and righting
the
ship. We need to reduce other expenses and increase revenues to make it
seaworthy. Many people have suggested raising the rating fees for scholastics
to that for adult tournaments. Raising both to an amount slightly greater
than
the current adult rate might be justified and necessary.


At the EB meeting on Monday after the Delegates Meeting, I suggested that
rating fees for both regular and scholastic events go up to 25 cents per game
on disk, 50 cents on paper. After some discussion involving scholastic
leaders, the Board seemed to favor 20 cents per game on disk and 40 cents on
paper, pending input from the Scholastic Council. I heard that subsequently, a
notice went into the October Chess Life that effective Jan 1, the 20 cents disk
and 40 cents paper fees will be in effect.

Long-term we need to find a way to stop the decline in total adult
memberships.
I played in a tournament last weekend that had a total of nine players. In
the
past this same tournament has seen numbers in the 30's. Not large by any
means
even at 30, but multiply this around the country and it adds up. Members that
don't play don't renew. The organizer did not run a TLA since he was trying
to
control cost. This event is at the risk of being cancelled next year. I am
sure there are other similar stories from other affiliates. In order to stop
the decline in tournament participation, I will be suggesting to the board
that
we bring back a limited number of free TLA's for each adult affiliate.


Good idea. I assume the TLAs would be limited in size as in the past.

When TLA fees were greatly increased in 2001 and many organizers dropped out,
less members read TLAs because there was so little listed in their area. This
caused still fewer organizers to purchase TLAs, etc. A vicious circle.

TLAs have recovered about half of the 2001 damage since the fees went back
down. If each affiliate can place a few smaller TLAs free, this will improve
readership and help build the TLA section up in the same way it was torn down.


While no one should rely only on TLAs for major tournaments, it used to be
possible for smaller events to succeed without much more publicity than a TLA,
and USCF will benefit if this again becomes the case.

It's also important that each Chess Life TLA have a corresponding online TLA.
This has not always been the case as the online TLA section has fallen too far
behind at times.


I don't recall seeing Stan's comment about me firing anyone from the office
who
post to the newsgroup. As I recall, Stan's comments were regarding another
concern. While I would rather office employees not post to the newsgroup or
leak out information, as long as they don't do it during office hours and it
isn't harmful to other staff members or of a sensitive nature there won't be
retribution from me.

We have received many suggestions regarding cuts in Chess Life. I am lobbying
for keeping the content essentially the same, just limiting the use of the
four
color press. Is a red masthead that never changes all that bad? In that
regard
if the cost savings justify it, I am leaning toward a retro 70's look,
hopefully we can avoid a retro 50's look.

In the 50s it was a newspaper! I like the Chess Life of the 70s as a model,
but switching to cheaper paper like Inside Chess used should be considered.
For financial reasons, I think the number of pages must be reduced, though.

Bill Goichberg


Best,
Grant Perks
Interim (shorter the better) COO

ojunk (GrantPerks) wrote in message ...
Larry, John, and Bruce,

Yes, 40% reductions in staff will affect services. Chess Life won't have the
same look. We won't be publishing books in the short term as well. Volunteers
have filled in for some of the key staff positions. I am sure we will be able
to find other volunteers to do things like be the official photographer at
tournaments etc.

One item on my to do list for Monday is to find an automated credit card
processor for the online store. The manual processing of credit cards was a
full time position. This technological advancement shouldn't cost us any
capital and hopefully very little programming time from our end. We are looking
to update other systems as well as we go along.

The staff reductions have gone a long way in reducing expenses and righting the
ship. We need to reduce other expenses and increase revenues to make it
seaworthy. Many people have suggested raising the rating fees for scholastics
to that for adult tournaments. Raising both to an amount slightly greater than
the current adult rate might be justified and necessary.

Long-term we need to find a way to stop the decline in total adult memberships.
I played in a tournament last weekend that had a total of nine players. In the
past this same tournament has seen numbers in the 30's.

You are of course right and the decline was noticeable here about 5
years ago. Events that drew 30-40 players now are dreaming to draw 20
and are considering it a decent turnout if they draw 15-16. We now
are restricted to free sites. Without free sites there would be no
tournaments held in the state at all, either rated or unrated. The
last event held at a hotel in Nebraska (excluding the AmericInn
events) were held in the year 2000. It is a shame that you are the
first USCF official to actually state this as an absolute, in the last
5 years, and that in my view tells the true reasons for our current
calamity. Other USCF officials, mockingly made such statements and
then proceeded to do everything within their power to further destroy
adult chess. To say that people like me are angry about this is to
greatly understate the case. I am still extremely angry and always
will be at the last three administrations for what they have done to
adult chess in this country. Whether I will ever rejoin USCF depends
upon how much the people in charge of USCF make redress for the huge
numbers of stupidities and offenses that they committed over the past
6 years and also whether USCF survives to even be rejoinable. I am
not optimistic that adult numbers can be reversed now Grant. The
reason is that I believe that adults left and turned their backs on an
organization that seemed to care nothing about them. The directors
and organizers also quit and many like me have found other important
activities to occupy their time rather than squabbling with an office
and a Board that never listens to them, ignores their feelings, raises
their fees continuously and caters to the whim of whiney groups with
more power and louder voices.


Not large by any means
even at 30, but multiply this around the country and it adds up. Members that
don't play don't renew. The organizer did not run a TLA since he was trying to
control cost. This event is at the risk of being cancelled next year. I am
sure there are other similar stories from other affiliates. In order to stop
the decline in tournament participation, I will be suggesting to the board that
we bring back a limited number of free TLA's for each adult affiliate.

I suggested this idea in 1997. I was assured at the time that USCF
couldn't afford it at the time. I was further rebuffed in attempts to
do this as Chair of the Affiliates Committee. I wish you luck with
this and if there is any hope in recruiting organizers who in turn can
recruit adult members, it is with some type of incentive. Taking away
incentives and then returning smaller incentives however than were
taken away originally is not a recipe for success. It might be too
late to help but it would certainly be the most intelligent idea put
forth by anyone in power for years. It is unfortunate once again that
it took all these years for someone to suggest it that had any power
to implement it.


I don't recall seeing Stan's comment about me firing anyone from the office who
post to the newsgroup. As I recall, Stan's comments were regarding another
concern. While I would rather office employees not post to the newsgroup or
leak out information, as long as they don't do it during office hours and it
isn't harmful to other staff members or of a sensitive nature there won't be
retribution from me.

It was in the thread about Deb Sherry posting here and suggesting
that people in the office have been warned that they will fired by
you if they post here. Of course you can speak for yourself and your
comments suggest that Stan was referring to spreading office gossip
more than merely posting here. I personally doubt that most USCF
staffers would post here without using an anonymous identity.


We have received many suggestions regarding cuts in Chess Life. I am lobbying
for keeping the content essentially the same, just limiting the use of the four
color press. Is a red masthead that never changes all that bad? In that regard
if the cost savings justify it, I am leaning toward a retro 70's look,
hopefully we can avoid a retro 50's look.

Sounds reasonable. Bring back those awful red covers with the black
and white photos. The color photos have been awful anyway and far too
expensive. Timeliness in my view is the key. If the release of Anson
and Kurzdorfer leads to the mag coming out on time, it will be richly
ironic.


Best,
Grant Perks
Interim (shorter the better) COO

Didn't they tell you this was a 5 year contract? :-)

Best Regards,

Bruce

ojunk (GrantPerks) wrote in message ...
Larry, John, and Bruce,

Yes, 40% reductions in staff will affect services.

Chess Life won't have the same look.

I think almost all of the readership will understand..The paucity of
newsstand sales with an art department means there is little to lose!


We won't be publishing books in the short term as well.

There are very few USCF members who think USCF should be in the book
publishing business.


Volunteers have filled in for some of the key staff positions. I am
sure we will be able to find other volunteers to do things like be the
official photographer at tournaments etc.

Hooray for the volunteers...and please publicly acknowledge their
good efforts!


The staff reductions have gone a long way in reducing expenses and righting the ship. We need to reduce other expenses and increase revenues to make it
seaworthy.

Many people have suggested raising the rating fees for scholastics
to that for adult tournaments. Raising both to an amount slightly greater than
the current adult rate might be justified and necessary.

I believe that the afiliates can live with that.

Long-term we need to find a way to stop the decline in total adult memberships.
I played in a tournament last weekend that had a total of nine players. In the
past this same tournament has seen numbers in the 30's. Not large by any means
even at 30, but multiply this around the country and it adds up.

Members that don't play don't renew. The organizer did not run a TLA
since he was trying to control cost. This event is at the risk of
being cancelled next year. I am sure there are other similar stories
from other affiliates. In order to stop the decline in tournament
participation, I will be suggesting to the board that we bring back a
limited number of free TLA's for each adult affiliate.

The best idea you've posted...Much of USCF's recent troubles can be
directly related to the Redman/DeFeis TLA fiasco of 2001..This has
caused a permanent drop in rated tournament activity and adult
membership renewals.


We have received many suggestions regarding cuts in Chess Life. I am lobbying
for keeping the content essentially the same, just limiting the use of the four color press. Is a red masthead that never changes all that bad? In that regard if the cost savings justify it, I am leaning toward a retro 70's look,
hopefully we can avoid a retro 50's look.

The Hochberg era CHESS LIFE had quality content...as for eye appeal,
at least two commissioned (I presume relatively inexpensively) cover
drawings he had done became successfulposters!

Best,
Grant Perks
Interim (shorter the better) COO

My best wishes to you in your position!

Schachmeister

One other problem for me in supporting the USCF, is that being a
member for 30 years one gets tired of waiting for them to get their
act together.

Perhaps (for me, and other long-time USCF members), the time has come
to not renew USCF dues & see how they do from there - If the USCF can
survive, and perhaps even thrive, then I imagine it will be because
the member base (which we are dreaming will shoot up enourmously),
will be from the young up.

In this regard I think it makes the most sence (to save USCF) to make
no distinction in membership catagories. Everyone should pay the
same. In fact why not make the new rate $40 for everybody - A nice
even number everyone should be able to afford! (Parents always pay for
the kids).


Larry S. Tamarkin


eepmeep (John Fernandez) wrote in message ...
Subject: USCF Doomed?...
From: (Larry S. Tamarkin)
Date: 8/21/2003 11:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

After reading about the near 40% staff cut, it seems to me that the
USCF is truly doomed...

There is no way that they can maintain old members, get new members,
while at the same time trying to manage a difficult transference of
responsibilities to a smaller staff, much less an almost totally new
staff across the country, when they move to Crossville.

I am a member since 1973, but I do not think I want to support an
organization in this much disarray any longer...

Larry S. Tamarkin
Original USCF Life Master

Funny, but I think the huge staff cut is the most optimistic piece of news I've
heard since I became a USCF member in 1995.

John Fernandez

In article , Paul Rubin says...

Kevin L. Bachler writes:
But irrespective of all of that, I am starting to have a real
problem with your level of criticism given that you aren't a member.

I'm sure Bruce is losing lots of sleep over the idea that Kevin has
a problem with Bruce's criticism. Snort.

If you, Rubin and others don't like this org, and you want something
cheap, then maybe you should join ACA. The website is
http://www.geocities.com/radale/aca/

I'm already an ACA member. I don't think the ACA is capable of being
a serious national organization but at least they're not trying to
continually rip people off.


LOL You get no value for $1.

So, the EB has taken some bold steps. I am sure that they will take
some more. If it is to survive, USCF could use your dues. Gonna rejoin?

I'm willing to rejoin at the current scholastic dues rate

Are you in elementary school

(the dues
should be the same for all members

Why? I think they should not. Many things charge children less than adults.

and the current scholastic dues
seem like a reasonable amount) provided the USCF signs a
confidentiality agreement with me that it won't disclose my personal
data to any third party without my permission. I do NOT want to get
any junk mail because of a USCF membership. In fact, since I don't
want any USCF publications sent to me in hardcopy, I'm not even
willing to give the USCF my address.

Right now, I'm not sure why we'd want you as a member.

Kevin L. Bachler

As an individual chessplayer, I think that $49 is a bit high for
someone like me who only plays once or twice a year.




"Larry S. Tamarkin" wrote:

One other problem for me in supporting the USCF, is that being a
member for 30 years one gets tired of waiting for them to get their
act together.

Perhaps (for me, and other long-time USCF members), the time has come
to not renew USCF dues & see how they do from there - If the USCF can
survive, and perhaps even thrive, then I imagine it will be because
the member base (which we are dreaming will shoot up enourmously),
will be from the young up.

In this regard I think it makes the most sence (to save USCF) to make
no distinction in membership catagories. Everyone should pay the
same. In fact why not make the new rate $40 for everybody - A nice
even number everyone should be able to afford! (Parents always pay for
the kids).

Larry S. Tamarkin

eepmeep (John Fernandez) wrote in message ...
Subject: USCF Doomed?...
From: (Larry S. Tamarkin)
Date: 8/21/2003 11:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

After reading about the near 40% staff cut, it seems to me that the
USCF is truly doomed...

There is no way that they can maintain old members, get new members,
while at the same time trying to manage a difficult transference of
responsibilities to a smaller staff, much less an almost totally new
staff across the country, when they move to Crossville.

I am a member since 1973, but I do not think I want to support an
organization in this much disarray any longer...

Larry S. Tamarkin
Original USCF Life Master

Funny, but I think the huge staff cut is the most optimistic piece of news I've
heard since I became a USCF member in 1995.

John Fernandez

"Jerry Snitselaar" writes:
yeah, I did some more searching and it seems for a high volume
business PayPal would cost more than other services.

There's also a lack of solidity to it. If a web store only accepts
paypal, that means the store doesn't have the financial credentials to
be able to process credit cards on its own merchant account. It's a
good way to get started but it's not something a serious established
business does.

"Kevin L. Bachler" wrote in message

Bruce,

Certainly there are a lot of problems with USCF. You seem to be spending
a lot
of time telling all the readers of the newsgroup about all the problems,
and are
even doing a great job of inventing problems that don't exist yet.

....
I am starting to have a real problem with your
level of criticism ... I think that you've stretched it a
little too much. Let's deal with reality, not Chicken Little.

....
Kevin L. Bachler

This has gone a bit overboard, I believe.

Now, Bruce, you are entitled to your opinion, and you are entitled to
express it.

However, your consistent harping and the literal inventing of some of your
gripes leads me to believe your purposes have origins buried in your past
relationships with the USCF, and are influencing your judgment. You still
say 'us' and 'we' when speaking of the USCF, so I know you still consider
yourself one of the members, if not in fact.

What made you so spiteful? Can you let that go, and thus become more
objective in your compositions? Or are you so focused on the end of the
USCF that you will do whatever you can to hasten its demise?

sandirhodes

permission. I do NOT want to get
any junk mail because of a USCF membership. In fact, since I don't
want any USCF publications sent to me in hardcopy, I'm not even
willing to give the USCF my address.

Right now, I'm not sure why we'd want you as a member.

Who are you claiming to speak for, Sir?

If they don't want him as a member, they don't want ME as a member, and I don't
even know him.

I'm just not into being exclusionary.

In article , LeModernCaveman
says...

permission. I do NOT want to get
any junk mail because of a USCF membership. In fact, since I don't
want any USCF publications sent to me in hardcopy, I'm not even
willing to give the USCF my address.

Right now, I'm not sure why we'd want you as a member.

Who are you claiming to speak for, Sir?

For me.


If they don't want him as a member, they don't want ME as a member,

That may be ok.

and I don't
even know him.


Rubin is someone who constantly crows that dues are too high. If dues were $10
they would probably be too high for Rubin. He also tends to think that we
should go to used computer stores, get Altair computers, run CPM software on
them and save USCF lots of money in the process.

I'm just not into being exclusionary.

Me neither.

Kevin L. Bachler