what are people's opinion of having a paid CEO for Australian chess?
I know that during the time that GG was the ACF Supreme Leader, such a move was mooted, but nothing much happened to it.
Australian Soccer has recently hired a new CEO, John O'Neil, the former boss of Rugby Union, and his package is mostly incentive based and will be paid out of the Australian Soccer operations.
He stated that his aim in relation to Australian soccer was to enable broadcast of games, which in turn will lead to more sponsors and spectators.
Soccer is similar in one respect to chess, in that almost a million people in Australia play it socially (making it the most popular particpative sport) yet few pay to go to the games, play professional soccer, or not much Australian soccer is shown on TV. Similarly a lot of people know how to play chess socially, yet few go to clubs, play in tournaments, and broadcast is non existent. However like soccer, chess has a broad base of people who have played it in a social context.
John Neil's challenege is to transfer this massive social popularity to get broadcast rights, spectators and sponsors and enable top professional soccer players to play in Australia.
Would having a full time professional CEO for Australian chess, enable Australian Chess to similarly convert the social chess population to attend chess clubs, play more tournaments, attract more sponsors and get broadcasts of chess?