From:
Date: Sat Aug 7, 2004 10:21 pm
Subject: [fide-chess] AF4C merger = demise of USCF

In a message dated 8/4/04 7:44:33 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
writes:

There has never been any intention of presenting the motion as
written. Rather, the idea was to allow more specific negotiations, so
that a substitute can be presented on the floor. This is a common
method where Bylaws issues may be involved.

AF4C is by far the richest group ever to approach USCF. One of their
members is worth $750,000,000 according to published sources, and is
among America's 400 richest men. I understand that he is not their
richest Board member. Since 2001, they have been planning a national
program of chess growth. I have worked with them to try to persuade
that unifying their efforts with USCF's, under the USCF banner, is
best for US chess.

They are willing to consider everything from a full merger (into USCF,
with AF4C disappearing) to smaller arrangements such as sharing
scholastic resources. They are willing to make compromises, such as
accepting minority representation on a Board with elected USCF
representatives (as I was told yesterday) along with all sorts of
safeguards. They are extremely wealthy philanthropists who have
absolutely no need to make money from chess.

They have also offered up to $1,000,000 to USCF. However, they do
request that any arrangement have assurances that a real growth plan
can be put into place and achieved consistently. That is an extremely
reasonable request for any large donor to make.

They also have staff resources already in place that USCF does not
have. The current Board hopes to pay an ED and to hire a scholastic
Director, but as soon as they start adding such staff their major
thrust (staff-cutting) will quickly erode. AF4C would be willing to
share activities with their staff already in place, with USCF staff.

However, the current EB has conducted no negotiations on any
arrangement this summer. Thus, there will be nothing to present the
Delegates except a motion to create negotiations for the future.

I have done my best to bring the richest group of sponsors USCF has
ever seen to us, with huge donations offered. I have worked with them
in bringing about various compromises to address member concerns. It
is entirely up to USCF whether it is interested from this point
forward.

AF4C recently arranged Merrill-Lynch sponsorship for a single
scholastic tournament with 1100 kids. More such events and sponsorship
are planned. I hope that AF4C will have an interest in selling USCF
memberships at those events, but if USCF will not even talk to them as
a courtesy, that could become questionable.

Mr. Fernandez is correct that AF4C has the financial resources to
duplicate all of USCF's services overnight. There is a huge potential
new market of millions of new players in the US that USCF cannot
meaningfully. address If USCF is not interested, then I hope AF4C will
try to capture that huge new market for the good of US chess as whole.

regards, John McCrary

Original Message:
-----------------


Hi John,

A million thanks for your strong effort to continue the relationship
which our Board was able to establish with Eric and his Seattle group.
Together, we saved our US Championship.

Over the years, this joint project has grown and provided an immense
contribution to chess in our country and around the world.

The idiotic selfishness (or utter stupidity) of those who would work
against Eric's proposal and refuse EVE N. TO TALK to Eric and his
people has totally turned me against the current majority of the
Executive Board.

This does not mean I have abandoned my love of chess or my dedication
to USCF. However, I am forced to a very painful decision.

I WILL NOT ATTEND the US Open and Delegates Meeting in Florida unless
Beatriz Marinello immediately resigns, along with those on the Board
who have supported her refusal to have any dialogue with Eric.

However, I will still be around and I ask ALL MY FRIENDS in USCF, to
give me a call at 954-941-7671. I look forward to seeing everybody. I
hope we can get together while you are visiting this paradise, my
beloved "Sunshine State".

I am sure, as we renew and build our friendships, we can work together
to find many ways to promote our Royal Game.

All the best,

Bob Smith
USCF Past President

From:
Date: Sat Aug 7, 2004 10:31 pm
Subject: [fide-chess] AF4C merger = demise of USCF

In a message dated 8/5/04 4:53:10 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
writes:

If the advocates of merger can simply play the game straight on the up
and up, they will prevail. If the instincts of the political animals
to tergiversate and obfuscate cannot be overcome, then they will
probably lose.

Yours, Larry Parr



Hi Larry,

Unfortunately, the ones in "power" want no part of a merger.

Beatriz, Don and Dr. Brady seem unwilling even to talk about it. They
should resign.

Regards,

Bob Smith

USCF Past President

From:
Date: Sat Aug 7, 2004 10:49 pm
Subject: [fide-chess] AF4C merger = demise of USCF

In a message dated 8/5/04 10:41:27 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
writes:

Gentlemen, Gentlemen,

Well, there we have it. We have the assurance of Harold
Winston, no less, that a resolution that calls for a merger would be
invalid if passed. That should make everyone sleep more easily at
night. John McCrary tells us that though the Delegates are the
highest body in the USCF and though they may pass a resolution calling
for a merger, we would not have a merger. That, too, should make
everyone sleep more easily at night.
The other side of the coin is that words have meaning when
formally adopted and that there would be some kind of upshot from such
a resolution passing. It would constitute a PEG on which to hang some
kind of legal garment. We simply don't know as yet what surprises are
in the pockets of that garment.
What a sad mess.
Straightforward full disclosure would likely sweep away
opposition to what appears to be a good idea. Instead, we have these
types who can't help flitting around corners and pulling up cloaks.

Yours, Larry Parr


Hi Larry,

Conversation is useless. Those in power oppose any deal with Seattle.

Beatriz will NOT EVEN TALK. Don drags his feet. Every effort is made
to kill any dialogue with Eric.

Our Board, when I was President, made the deal with Eric and his
Seattle group to fund the US Championship. Had this not been done,
there would now be no US Championship and maybe no USCF?

I just don't get it.

I give up.

Good luck to Myron and John, but I just can't make the scene if
Beatriz refuses to resign. Don should quit or at least explain
himself.

Best regards,

Bob Smith

From:
Date: Sat Aug 7, 2004 10:59 pm
Subject: [fide-chess] E-Mail from Beatriz Marinello to John
McCrary

In a message dated 8/5/04 11:08:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
writes:

Gentlemen, Gentlemen,

There is plenty of scope to criticize Beatriz Marinello's
atrocious English syntax, which is akin to footwork in boxing. But
Rocky Marciano was no Baryshnikov gazelle either. The issue is
whether she has led with a right and hit political jawbone as the Rock
hit Jersey Joe Walcott's sweet spot in their first fight.
John McCrary certainly wants to redeem his image, as the
current USCF president avers, and we all know that he resigned, quite
rightly, because someone had to take responsibility for misleading the
Federation, albeit unintentionally, about its actual status. He
understood that there would be a recall, and he did not wish to face
it. How one wishes that he had couched his resignation in completely
honest, upright terms. I think we can all agree that it would have
helped him.
Still, we ought not to forget that Mr. McCrary has performed a
real service by connecting the Federation with the AF4C, if only thus
far for talks that have yet to reach fruition. We ought not to forget
that combining the work of the Federation with the work of the AF4C,
if that involves a merger or not, is a brilliant idea. We ought not
to forget that there are some great chess people out there in Seattle,
and their labors added to or merged with the Federation's labors has
got to be a fine thing.

Yours, Larry Parr

Hi Larry,

I have no problem with Beatriz personally. I have great respect for
the work she has done with scholastics nor the quality of her work
while she was employed in the Office.

Unfortunately, she now appears to be a victim of bad advice;
undoubtedly from power brokers, to all of us well known.

In any event, she and Don should resign and allow their replacements
to work with Eric and the Delegates to put together a workable plan
that can support ALL of chess as well as USCF.

Best regards,

Bob Smith

"Sam Sloan" wrote in message
om...

Could you kindly explain how it would be possible and legal to merge
two entirely different types of organizations?

First, they are not entirely different. Second, I know of no reason why they
can't merge. There is nothing to prevent a c-4 from have a charity
subsidiary or a c-3 from having a membership subsidiary. It is necessary
that charitable donations be used for charitable purposes. So what are the
facts supporting your statement?

On Sun, 8 Aug 2004 21:53:13 -0400, "StanB"
wrote:


"Sam Sloan" wrote in message
. com...

Could you kindly explain how it would be possible and legal to merge
two entirely different types of organizations?

First, they are not entirely different. Second, I know of no reason why they
can't merge. There is nothing to prevent a c-4 from have a charity
subsidiary or a c-3 from having a membership subsidiary. It is necessary
that charitable donations be used for charitable purposes. So what are the
facts supporting your statement?

OK. Now you are talking about something a bit different, making the
USCF as subsidiary of AF4C or making the AF4C a subsiriary of the
USCF.

However, that is not the deal they are discussing, or perhaps it is.

The main point is that they are asking us to vote SIX DAYS FROM TODAY
on whether or not to merge, but they refuse to give us any information
at all on what form this merger will take.

We are being asked to approve the merger now and then to leave it up
to the EB "to work out the details".

If this goes through, next year at this time the USCF as we know it
will have ceased to exist.

Sam Sloan

On Sun, 8 Aug 2004 21:53:13 -0400, "StanB"
wrote:


"Sam Sloan" wrote in message
. com...

Could you kindly explain how it would be possible and legal to
merge
two entirely different types of organizations?

First, they are not entirely different. Second, I know of no reason
why they
can't merge. There is nothing to prevent a c-4 from have a charity
subsidiary or a c-3 from having a membership subsidiary. It is
necessary
that charitable donations be used for charitable purposes. So what
are the
facts supporting your statement?

OK. Now you are talking about something a bit different, making the
USCF as subsidiary of AF4C or making the AF4C a subsiriary of the
USCF.

However, that is not the deal they are discussing, or perhaps it is.

The main point is that they are asking us to vote SIX DAYS FROM TODAY
on whether or not to merge, but they refuse to give us any information
at all on what form this merger will take.

We are being asked to approve the merger now and then to leave it up
to the EB "to work out the details".

If this goes through, next year at this time the USCF as we know it
will have ceased to exist.

Sam Sloan

John McCrary certainly wants to redeem his image, as the
current USCF president avers, and we all know that he resigned, quite
rightly, because someone had to take responsibility for misleading the
Federation, albeit unintentionally, about its actual status.

While I find all of this very funny, I must question the "albeit
unintentionally", which begs the question "The buck stops where?"
There was nothing unintentional about the immense loses of the McCrary
administration. To claim he didn't know does not increase his status.
McCrary now seeks to do a Nixon by resurrecting his fallen name by finding an
"angel" to rescue USCF. To aid him in this effort, he has the assistance of
crazy Bob Smith, who is threatening not to attend the US Open if Beatriz
Marinello does not resign (as Bob agreed to do in St Paul before he had his
mind changed by Chessdon and then changed his mind again and resigned, giving
the Presidency to Tim Redman). St Paul was a hoot.

Very funny.
It is hard to know who to root for, but it is priceless to watch from a
distance.

Rp

I have great respect for
the work she has done with scholastics nor the quality of her work
while she was employed in the Office.

Larry,
Would you like to comment on the syntax of this sentence?
Perhaps you can find a meaning?
Was English a second language for Bob Smith?

Richard Peterson

I have read with shock and regret the posting of Bob Smith calling for Baetriz
Marinello to resign as USCF President because she has not reacted fast enough
to the so-called AF4C Merger of John McCrary.
Let me remind you that Mr. McCrary was President while the USCF spun perilously
close to bankruptcy. When some of us tried to warn him of the coming disaster
if he stuck to his plan to increase book and equipment sales at any cost--he
ignored us. I resigned in frustration from the Finance Committee in Late Spring
2003 before the audited report pulled the plug on the sham that all was
financially strong with the USCF. USCF lost $364,930 in fiscal 2002-03 under
McCrary's Presidency. I then called for McCrary to resign as USCF President. He
did. With a discedited presidency he should remove himself from major
initiaitives.

Instead he keeps pursuing some kind of "merger", "affiliation" or "sale" of the
USCF. I served on a Committee of Past USCF Presidents which included McCrary
and Smith. The only specific proposal submitted by McCrary was one in which
there would be an overall governing Board for USCF and AF4C. This nine member
Board would have 5 members appointed permanently by AF4C and 4 elected by USCF.
I pointed out that this was not a merger --it was a sale of USCF. As for the
promised million dollars, ($500,000 immediately, the rest in pieces later), it
was not a donation as McCrary Claims--just a transfer of funds from AF4C to a
new entity AF4C-USCF completely owned by AF4C. That is not amerger --it is a
sale. McCrary's response was to generalize-- and ask that the USCF President
negotiate the details!!

I also noted that only a fool negotiates from weakness-- and at that time the
very survival of USCF was in doubt--better to turn around our finances and then
explore whether and what kind of cooperation USCF might undertake with AF4C.
President Marinello has been instrumental in turning around our finances. For
anyone to suggest that she resign is outrageous. President Marinello is owed
an apology by Mr. Smith. And she is owed a vote of thanks from the rest of us.
Dr. Leroy Dubeck, Past President USCF
rec/game/chess/politics