![]() |
Sam Sloan's 500 Words Candidate's Statement (This is final.)
The USCF was founded in 1939. For 60 long years, the federation
struggled, often on the brink of collapse. Finally, the USCF reached its peak in 1999. It had $6.5 million in sales, 90,000 members and a reserve of $2 million. At that point, federation insiders decided that their long wait had ended and now was the time to put their hot hands directly on the money. They changed the name from Policy Board to Executive Board and stopped confining themselves to policy decisions. They started to manage the day-to-day affairs of the corporation. On a flimsy pretext, they fired the professional manager who had been running the company and replaced him with their flunky. The result? Sales dropped like a stone. Services were drastically cut. Adult members fled. By year end 2002, sales had dropped from $ 6.5 million to $.4.5 million. More than one million dollars had been lost. A new group came in, determined to reinvigorate the books and equipment business, which accounted for a majority of the sales. B&E sales increased from $1.8 million to $2.8 million in just one year. The USCF was on the road to financial recovery. That is until a new group was elected in August 2003, led by a former employee. In their first day in office, 17 staff members were ordered to be fired. The new plan was to "1. Get Rid of the Books & Equipment Business" which was the very business which had brought most of the revenues and profits. Services were cut or reduced. The explanation offered by the new president was: "We need to drive away the people who has been milking the USCF for many years." Drive away which people? Milking the USCF of what money? For which years? The new president writes: "Since August our Board has been demonstrating a hands-on approach." This is the problem, not the solution. Our LMA Bank Account, which in 1999 held more than one million dollars in cash and equivalent, is now down to ten dollars!!! The solution: The Executive Board, which consists of volunteers who have never run a business, needs to stop trying to run a corporation which they have no capability or competence to run. We need to return the management of the USCF to serious business people who know how to run a business. We need an Executive Director understands both chess issues and business issues. I hope the voters in this election will take the trouble to look at the numbers, including the financial statements at http://www.uschess.org/org/govern/ma...alsyearend.pdf The board obviously did not look at these numbers because, if they had, they could not possibly have made the horrible decisions they made. Instead, without looking, reading, thinking, or asking, the board voted to give away the books and equipment business as part of a plan to "drive away" the people they claimed had been "milking" the federation for years. Sorry to bring you the bad news. |
Sam Sloan's 500 Words Candidate's Statement (This is final.)
"Sam Sloan" wrote in message
... The USCF was founded in 1939. For 60 long years, the federation struggled, often on the brink of collapse. Finally, the USCF reached its peak in 1999. It had $6.5 million in sales, 90,000 members and a reserve of $2 million. At that point, federation insiders decided that their long wait had ended and now was the time to put their hot hands directly on the money. They changed the name from Policy Board to Executive Board and stopped confining themselves to policy decisions. They started to manage the day-to-day affairs of the corporation. On a flimsy pretext, they fired the professional manager who had been running the company and replaced him with their flunky. The result? Sales dropped like a stone. Services were drastically cut. Adult members fled. By year end 2002, sales had dropped from $ 6.5 million to $.4.5 million. More than one million dollars had been lost. A new group came in, determined to reinvigorate the books and equipment business, which accounted for a majority of the sales. B&E sales increased from $1.8 million to $2.8 million in just one year. The USCF was on the road to financial recovery. That is until a new group was elected in August 2003, led by a former employee. In their first day in office, 17 staff members were ordered to be fired. The new plan was to "1. Get Rid of the Books & Equipment Business" which was the very business which had brought most of the revenues and profits. Services were cut or reduced. The explanation offered by the new president was: "We need to drive away the people who has been milking the USCF for many years." Drive away which people? Milking the USCF of what money? For which years? The new president writes: "Since August our Board has been demonstrating a hands-on approach." This is the problem, not the solution. Our LMA Bank Account, which in 1999 held more than one million dollars in cash and equivalent, is now down to ten dollars!!! The solution: The Executive Board, which consists of volunteers who have never run a business, needs to stop trying to run a corporation which they have no capability or competence to run. We need to return the management of the USCF to serious business people who know how to run a business. We need an Executive Director understands both chess issues and business issues. I hope the voters in this election will take the trouble to look at the numbers, including the financial statements at http://www.uschess.org/org/govern/ma...alsyearend.pdf The board obviously did not look at these numbers because, if they had, they could not possibly have made the horrible decisions they made. Instead, without looking, reading, thinking, or asking, the board voted to give away the books and equipment business as part of a plan to "drive away" the people they claimed had been "milking" the federation for years. Sorry to bring you the bad news. To use a phrase from YOUR book: "Everybody knows" what's already happened. What are YOU going to do to change it? What do YOU bring to the table, other than going to a bunch of meetings? Why should anybody vote for YOU? What do you say to those people who know about you only from what you've published on your website www.samsloan.com? Why should they elect a person like YOU to the USCF's EB? MN |
Sam Sloan's 500 Words Candidate's Statement (This is final.)
To use a phrase from YOUR book: "Everybody knows" what's already happened. What are YOU going to do to change it? What do YOU bring to the table, other than going to a bunch of meetings? Why should anybody vote for YOU? What do you say to those people who know about you only from what you've published on your website www.samsloan.com? Why should they elect a person like YOU to the USCF's EB? MN Because Sam Sloan believes in himself. He is never wrong, never apologizes, and he is also in never, never land. EZoto |
Sam Sloan's 500 Words Candidate's Statement (This is final.)
Sorry to bring you the bad news.
To use a phrase from YOUR book: "Everybody knows" what's already happened. What are YOU going to do to change it? What do YOU bring to the table, other than going to a bunch of meetings? Why should anybody vote for YOU? You can't tell someone to pitch in and then attack them when they try to. |
Sam Sloan's 500 Words Candidate's Statement (This is final.)
"Ray Gordon" wrote in message
... To use a phrase from YOUR book: "Everybody knows" what's already happened. What are YOU going to do to change it? What do YOU bring to the table, other than going to a bunch of meetings? Why should anybody vote for YOU? You can't tell someone to pitch in and then attack them when they try to. He didn't attack him, he attacked deficiencies in his candidate statement. -- John Rowland - Spamtrapped Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood. That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line - It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes |
Sam Sloan's 500 Words Candidate's Statement (This is final.)
"Ray Gordon" wrote in message
... Sorry to bring you the bad news. To use a phrase from YOUR book: "Everybody knows" what's already happened. What are YOU going to do to change it? What do YOU bring to the table, other than going to a bunch of meetings? Why should anybody vote for YOU? You can't tell someone to pitch in and then attack them when they try to. First of all, nobody told Sloan to pitch in -- he did that on his own, just as he's done for the last eight or nine years. Of course, his candidacy has about as much validity as the numerous, petty, and wasteful lawsuits you file. Second, I didn't attack him. I merely asked questions I expect ANY candidate to be able to answer, since all his candidate statement did was rehash the USCF's trials and tribulations without giving any of the pertinent information people want to know about HIS platform. MN |
Sam Sloan's 500 Words Candidate's Statement (This is final.)
A nice overview, Sam, even if a bit repetitive
(and still, no one else writes them but you) and, by necessity, incomplete. One important thing missing: the top USCF officers acted many times in the past as FIDE president lackeys. They didn't respect human rights and American liberty ideals. Thus it should be in the statutes that the top USCF officers are forbidden to serve or run for any FIDE positions during their USCF tenure and for the nextr five years. This way the conflict of interests and the harm to good causes will be avoided. (Their only contact with FIDE should be as LOYAL representatives of USCF). Wlod |
Sam Sloan's 500 Words Candidate's Statement (This is final.)
Here is the milking comment in full context. For starters, Beatriz
states: "Mr. Niro acted outside of his powers because the USCF Executive Director is not allow to modify existing policy made by the Executive Board." I would like to know where this "existing policy" was ever stated. According to a posting by Joel Benjamin, the seeding of the US Woman's Champion on the Olympiad team started in 2002 or just a year earlier. Also, it appears that this was the idea of AF4C, not the idea of the USCF. I have attended a number of the board meetings and I have read the minutes of all of them and nowhere that I have seen did the USCF Executive Board ever say that the US Champion had an automatic right to play on the Olympic Team. Going back over the years I cannot recall even once where a player got on the Olympiad teams solely by being the US Champion. If I am wrong, please show me where I am wrong. Later in the same posting Beatriz stated: "I am not afraid of the challenges, since August our Board has been demonstrating a hands-on approach, but we need help. Therefore, we recognize the importance of engaging new leaders, doers and ideas. But also we need to drive away the people who has been milking the USCF for many years." Since this posting referred almost entirely to Frank Niro plus indirectly to Susan Polgar and Paul Truong, one would assume that Beatriz is accusing them of "milking the USCF". Sam Sloan --- On Thu Apr 22, 2004 at 6:36 pm, wrote: Hello Phil: I am enclosing my reply. Please take into account that my time is limited, therefore I cannot engage in a discussion nor a debate on policies in a public forum. The reason why I read these postings is because I am interested in our members' opinions. In a message dated 4/22/2004 12:56:37 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: Dear Beatriz, I am afraid this explanation is still as clear as the rules. Did Mr Niro act outside of his powers or simply without consultation? These are quite distinct differences, and when we last spoke this was a prime article to address. I would suggest reading the regulations concerning the USCF Invitational Event Requirements posted in the USCF Website. These regulations were revised in August 2003 by former USCF President Dr. John MacCrary. Similar rules has been used for the last 10 years. Yes, Mr. Niro acted outside of his powers because the USCF Executive Director is not allow to modify existing policy made by the Executive Board. Has it in fact been addressed? Currently, the Executive Board is developing a policy which will impact all contracts between the USCF and other entities/people. In general terms the contracts will be categorized the following way: contracts that require only the approval of the USCF Executive Director, contracts that require the approval of the President and contracts that require the approval of the USCF Executive Board. Most likely any contract which involves $10,000 or more and multiyear commitments will required the approval of the President and/or the Executive Board. Two signatures will be required for these contracts. In my view, Anna Hahn as the US Women's Champion had the right to participate in the upcoming Olympiad according to our existing rules. Very good. However, if you are so certain, why fear a suit? Because we were threaten with a legal action against the USCF if we did not address the complicated issue of the letter signed by Frank Niro. Right or wrong engaging a legal battle did not achieve any positive results, we decided then to engage in a diplomatic negotiation of this matter.. snip Now, this situation is passed. The lessons learned are numerous, the USCF has appointed the International Affairs Committee to submit a proposal to revise the existing regulations in consultation with players and other committees. Is this the committee that has not met very recently or often? The one previously chaired by Eric Johnson? As part of the discussion concerning the issue of the "Continental Championship" some players expressed their views and opinions. IM Irina Krush was particularly impressive and eloquent. She is only 21 years old, but we recognized on her a potential leader. The USCF needs leaders and doers. snip The selection process for the Olympic Team is and will continue being the responsibility of the USCF. Seeking for sponsors is also necessary for the financial recovery of the USCF, as for the future development of chess, but the USCF MAKES THE RULES. Well USCF tries to. I agree that this particular hurdle is passed, but unless there is a change it will surely happen all over again. The USCF is it road to financial recovery, I am a volunteer who spend many hours every day devoted to this task. I decided to take this responsibility because I love chess and the USCF. The USCF will not go under and continue making the rules in the United States. By the way, I will recommend renewing your membership that expired in 1996, this will be a contribution towards the future of the USCF. I hope you accept these challenges not to your authority to make the rules and implement them, but to also have the rules make sense and be motivating to players who are subject to them. I am not afraid of the challenges, since August our Board has been demonstrating a hands-on approach, but we need help. Therefore, we recognize the importance of engaging new leaders, doers and ideas. But also we need to drive away the people who has been milking the USCF for many years. Considering the recent fiasco resulting from a competition entry, will you repeat it? Does it raise any questions at all? This is not going to change, although my approach as a President of the USCF is inclusive with an open door policy the final desicion are made by the USCF Executive Board and the Board of Delegates. Explaining some of this to my brother in law, who is a VP of a company that sponsors chess - in fact sponsors some of John Fernandez's events in NY City, he laughed. His company, an international financier could send a men's team this year. Not wanting to put him off chess funding entirely, I let him lead the conversation, and I think to obtain funding the consequence would be that pitching for $50,000 to $100,000 financing would mean adjusting your procedures from those deployed for the Women's Olympiad. If you are serious about this, please send me a private e-mail with the information. Thank you for thinking about our players! The only way, how we are going to grow chess in America is by expanding our network, reaching out into the chess community and developing a plan for seeking for sponsors and other similar sources of revenue. Frankly its not. It will be by paying attention to what chess players want, since they all vote with their dollars. People are almost completely indifferent to organisations and possess very little loyalty to any particular one in a competitive market. Another way for USCF to gain ground is by partnering with active agents in the chess market. It has conclusively proved that it can't compete as if it were a business, and in fact has lost every single sponsor. As a President's speech you sound all the right notes to rally the troups. But the generals of chess out there are in business for themselves and won't give up any ground to you, and you will only This attract corporals to your service. This year has been a real struggle, I feel like I running in a Marathon which will never stop. I have a tremendous responsibility on my shoulders. I believe in people, restoring the financial health and credibility of the USCF is good for everyone's businesses. All the best, Beatriz Marinello USCF President Mr. Truong has the right idea of partnering. Even huge international companies like IBM partner with everyone they can. If USCF's philosophic diet is more of the same old thing, only more of it, rather than a more fundamental assessment of its role and character in the C21st... :( Cordially, Phil Innes |
Sam Sloan's 500 Words Candidate's Statement (This is final.)
|
Sam Sloan's 500 Words Candidate's Statement (This is final.)
|
Sam Sloan's 500 Words Candidate's Statement (This is final.)
|
Sam Sloan's 500 Words Candidate's Statement (This is final.)
|
Sam Sloan's 500 Words Candidate's Statement (This is final.)
|
Sam Sloan's 500 Words Candidate's Statement (This is final.)
"Sam Sloan" wrote in message ... "I am not afraid of the challenges, since August our Board has been demonstrating a hands-on approach, but we need help. Therefore, we recognize the importance of engaging new leaders, doers and ideas. But also we need to drive away the people who has been milking the USCF for many years." Since this posting referred almost entirely to Frank Niro plus indirectly to Susan Polgar and Paul Truong, one would assume that Beatriz is accusing them of "milking the USCF". Hardly. They had not been on the receiving end of any USCF largess until quite recently. Certainly not for many years. StanB |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:40 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-6 ChessBanter.com