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

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

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

Optimistic? Absolutely necessary for survival, but "optimistic"?

There are two sides to the decision to cut staff. There is the cost
side and the benefit side. On the benefit side, there will be a major
depressurization of the cash flow crunch. On the cost side, it is
impossible for me to see how the office can function better with 60%
of its former staff?

There's a PR campaign going on right now to assure us that things
are going to be great, but if you're gullible enough to believe that,
you need to have your head examined. We need to give the new
leadership about 30 days here to see if things are holding steady or
if they're seriously deteriorating due to the layoffs?

Another major issue is how will anyone know? It appears that Stan
and Grant want no one from the office talking to this newsgroup about
anything going on in New Windsor. The implication in a post by Stan
is that anyone caught posting here that is an office employee will be
fired. If all information going out must be cleared through Mr.
Truong, one wonders whether we'll be fed spun information or only
information that suggests things are turning around?

One cannot hide the sound of rushing water by playing violins more
loudly. If USCF is going to do a great job with 23 employees, one has
to wonder why we needed those 17 we just let go for so long?

I am no longer particularly impressed by optimistic talk. I'll give
the new leaders a reasonable chance here to demonstrate progress, but
I don't think they deserve 6 months before they start getting
criticized if things are still tanking.

I'm currently waiting to see if Beatriz has the guts to raise fees
on Scholastics. I have given up hope that USCF will ever lower adult
dues, and it has been my experience that scholastics always get their
way if they bitch loud enough and rattle their sabres.

If USCF cannot face down the scholastic lobby, then it deserves
whatever happens to it.

I personally see very little difference between McCrary's, "send us
your $4.00" theme from last year and Paul T, and Ralph B's theme of
"let's all pitch in to save USCF" from this year. Perhaps if Ralph
and the Scholastics had been willing to take a dues hike instead of
bitching until the $9.00 increase went on adults last year, we
wouldn't be in such dire straits. In my opinion, USCF has been
treating adult regular members like dirt under their feet for years,
and I see no evidence that they are going to lighten their load now.
Instead an appeal is made to EVERYONE to pitch in to help USCF. I
want to see the Life Members go first, then the scholastics, and then
just maybe, then, the regular adults might consider also helping USCF,
even though USCF has done nothing to help them for at least 6 years.

Best Regards,

Bruce

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. 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 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.

Best,
Grant Perks
Interim (shorter the better) COO

You might look into something like PayPal. That can process credit cards,
and payments through the PayPal system.
They have 2 different rates for business, standard rate is 2.9% + $0.30 and
merchant rate is 2.2% + $0.30. I dont know how that would compares to
automated cc services costs. According to the website you get merchant if
you have been member 90 days, and have had $3000 in sales the past 90 days.



"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. 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 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.

Best,
Grant Perks
Interim (shorter the better) COO

Dear Bruce:

I have no control over the staff at New Windsor. That was Mr. Nolan's
responsibility and now Mr. Perks until the EB can find an ED. I also
have no control over which press release is being put out. I can
assure you that I did not write nor had anything to do with the press
release or posting on chessnews.org a few days ago. In fact, I read
it here just like many others. Until this second, I still have no
idea who is still in New Windsor and who was let go.

The members of the EB asked me to help with Marketing and Public
Relations and I agreed to take time off my many other chess projects
to help. During this difficult time, all I am asking for is for
people to unite. Why am I so optimistic?

Well, I have been in business for almost 16 years. One of my many
specialties was to revive companies that were about to go out of
business, having millions in dollars in deficit, and turning them
around to make millions in a very short period of time. Therefore,
this is nothing new for me. But I have retired almost 2 years ago.
Now, my pleasure in life is promoting scholastic and women's chess,
and in some ways, chess overall.

I have no desire to be involved in chess politics or power struggles.
I love chess and I just want to help, in any capacity that the EB
needs. That is all. There are no other motives.

When I post things or write press releases, it will be only facts, not
propagandas. Yes, I may make an error here and there. If I do, I
will correct them immediately. Yes, my fault is I like to be positive
always. There have never been any challenges that I have not
overcome. I am not saying that USCF is doing great. All I am saying
is I am optimistic. I know enough about business to know if the
organization can be saved or not. I believe it can be. But it won't
happen by itself. There is a lot of work to be done.

Whether I agree or not with decisions by the EB, that is between me
and them. The EB will have a chance to prove themselves. I give
everyone their due respect. I wish them well and I am willing to
serve and assist if and when duties called. If I feel that I am
unable to help, I would say so and step aside. This is not about me.
This is about the future of an organization with almost 100,000
members.

Please remember another thing. These 7 board members are all
volunteers. Each of them has a different background and experience.
This is not an easy task for them. That is why they need help in many
areas. But they work very hard and give up their own money and time
to help. I, for one, applaud their efforts. I also appreciate people
like Ralph B. He did a great thing by rallying people to chip in and
help. I met Ralph twice and I have tremendous respect for him. I
appreciate anyone and everyone who helps chess and there are very few
people that I don't get along with. Life is too short to be bitter
and negative.

Best Regards,
Paul





(Bruce Draney) wrote in message . com...
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

Optimistic? Absolutely necessary for survival, but "optimistic"?

There are two sides to the decision to cut staff. There is the cost
side and the benefit side. On the benefit side, there will be a major
depressurization of the cash flow crunch. On the cost side, it is
impossible for me to see how the office can function better with 60%
of its former staff?

There's a PR campaign going on right now to assure us that things
are going to be great, but if you're gullible enough to believe that,
you need to have your head examined. We need to give the new
leadership about 30 days here to see if things are holding steady or
if they're seriously deteriorating due to the layoffs?

Another major issue is how will anyone know? It appears that Stan
and Grant want no one from the office talking to this newsgroup about
anything going on in New Windsor. The implication in a post by Stan
is that anyone caught posting here that is an office employee will be
fired. If all information going out must be cleared through Mr.
Truong, one wonders whether we'll be fed spun information or only
information that suggests things are turning around?

One cannot hide the sound of rushing water by playing violins more
loudly. If USCF is going to do a great job with 23 employees, one has
to wonder why we needed those 17 we just let go for so long?

I am no longer particularly impressed by optimistic talk. I'll give
the new leaders a reasonable chance here to demonstrate progress, but
I don't think they deserve 6 months before they start getting
criticized if things are still tanking.

I'm currently waiting to see if Beatriz has the guts to raise fees
on Scholastics. I have given up hope that USCF will ever lower adult
dues, and it has been my experience that scholastics always get their
way if they bitch loud enough and rattle their sabres.

If USCF cannot face down the scholastic lobby, then it deserves
whatever happens to it.

I personally see very little difference between McCrary's, "send us
your $4.00" theme from last year and Paul T, and Ralph B's theme of
"let's all pitch in to save USCF" from this year. Perhaps if Ralph
and the Scholastics had been willing to take a dues hike instead of
bitching until the $9.00 increase went on adults last year, we
wouldn't be in such dire straits. In my opinion, USCF has been
treating adult regular members like dirt under their feet for years,
and I see no evidence that they are going to lighten their load now.
Instead an appeal is made to EVERYONE to pitch in to help USCF. I
want to see the Life Members go first, then the scholastics, and then
just maybe, then, the regular adults might consider also helping USCF,
even though USCF has done nothing to help them for at least 6 years.

Best Regards,

Bruce

In article , Paul Truong says...
SNIP

Please remember another thing. These 7 board members are all
volunteers.

Isn't it 6 now?

Kevin L. Bachler

"Kevin L. Bachler" wrote in message
...

-snip-

ACA. The website is http://www.geocities.com/radale/aca/

This is the buggiest Website I have seen in quite a while. I get one or two
runtime errors ("Object expected", "Syntax error") on all of the pages I
have tried. I'm using an up-to-date IE.

-snip-

George

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.

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 (the dues
should be the same for all members 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.

Subject: Bruce Draney, a challenge
From: Paul Rubin
Date: 8/23/2003 1:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

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.

Somehow I'm not surprised that you're a member since a life membership is $1.
Has the ACA done anything since that tmt in May, 2000 that appears on the URL
provided by Kevin? The one that they are still advertising $40 advance entries.

So, the EB has taken some bold steps. I am sure that they will take
some more.

Undoubtedly.

If it is to survive, USCF could use your dues. Gonna rejoin?

I'm willing to rejoin at the current scholastic dues rate (the dues
should be the same for all members 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.