PDA

View Full Version : $80,000 wish list.



PHAT
11-08-2004, 06:50 PM
If your chess association had $80,000 what would you want it to do with it?

I know of one association that says that the best place for it is the bank. :rolleyes:

Garvinator
11-08-2004, 06:57 PM
If your chess association had $80,000 what would you want it to do with it?

I know of one association that says that the best place for it is the bank. :rolleyes:
my wish is for my association to have $80,000 in the bank :lol:

Alan Shore
11-08-2004, 08:05 PM
my wish is for my association to have $80,000 in the bank :lol:

Dude, I hope you're not serious...

PHAT
11-08-2004, 08:05 PM
my wish is for my association to have $80,000 in the bank :lol:

It's no wonder you and BG get on so well.

Now be serious.

Garvinator
11-08-2004, 08:31 PM
It's no wonder you and BG get on so well.

Now be serious.
meaning that i wish my association had enough cash flow and income to generate that type of money in the bank :D

Alan Shore
11-08-2004, 08:41 PM
meaning that i wish my association had enough cash flow and income to generate that type of money in the bank :D

It does have quite a bit.. "in shares" apparently. Matt was asking what would you don with it though, what initiatives would you spearhead? Or would you leave it where it is? :P

I notice Bill hasn't yet given an explanation of why the cash is sitting there.. I'd expect his reasoning would be it's necessary to have to ensure NSWCA's continued running. Even so, it's a lot of capital to sit on.

skip to my lou
11-08-2004, 08:48 PM
BD - Are you saying NSWCA has $80,000?

1 - Run some TV ads in winter to promote chess. - I think it costs something like $20,000 to $40,000 to do this. It may seem like alot now, but you are reaching many million viewers.
2 - Since running the TV ads, you have many hundreds or if you're lucky, thousands of more people interested in chess, so: Run Many more tournaments, with high cash prize.
3 - Use some of the money to hire a PR expert. <- Maybe this should go first.
4 - Get a semi decent website... :uhoh: j/k.....

Though one thing you can do with the website at no extra cost is take off that hit counter to hide how unpopular chess is in Australia/NSW (83753 Hits since 02/12/97)

eclectic
11-08-2004, 08:56 PM
If your chess association had $80,000 what would you want it to do with it?

I know of one association that says that the best place for it is the bank. :rolleyes:

i doubt it's enough to bribe an elevation of all australian im's into gm's

for a while i thought it might be the amount needed to sway a certain dr k bonham into applying to become tasmania's next governor but it's most likely out by a factor of 10 or 100

it could be used for a research grant to investigate the cause of irrelevant threads and posts on chess bulletin boards

how about use it to put a deposit on a house in balaclava for the exclusive use of one r j fischer once the australian government can be persuaded to grant him asylum

:whistle:

eclectic

Garvinator
11-08-2004, 08:59 PM
It does have quite a bit.. "in shares" apparently. Matt was asking what would you don with it though, what initiatives would you spearhead? Or would you leave it where it is? :P

I notice Bill hasn't yet given an explanation of why the cash is sitting there.. I'd expect his reasoning would be it's necessary to have to ensure NSWCA's continued running. Even so, it's a lot of capital to sit on.
i think the serious answer is related to the nswca chess centre.

Rincewind
11-08-2004, 09:06 PM
how about use it to put a deposit on a house in balaclava for the exclusive use of one r j fischer once the australian government can be persuaded to grant him asylum

:D

You've got more chance of being struck in the bum by lightening.

Lucena
11-08-2004, 10:08 PM
If your chess association had $80,000 what would you want it to do with it?

I know of one association that says that the best place for it is the bank. :rolleyes:

Hang on a sec how does Matt know this? Is it true? Is he necessarily referring to NSWCA?

Garvinator
11-08-2004, 10:15 PM
Hang on a sec how does Matt know this? Is it true? Is he necessarily referring to NSWCA?
amounts of this nature have been mentioned quite alot before, not just by matt.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2004, 12:59 AM
If your chess association had $80,000 what would you want it to do with it?

I know of one association that says that the best place for it is the bank. :rolleyes:
This was discussed last year on the old ACF BB.

The situation has not changed, with the exception that we received a $10,000 donation last year.

The funds have been accumulated over many years.
The aim of many councils over the years was to build up a fund for the lease or eventual purchase of a chess centre.

One of the biggest costs over the years has been rent. Although we have been able to hold some events at free venues this is not the case for all events. Also it should not be assumed that the free venues will continue, especially with the NSW Givernments new pokie tax coming in from Sept 1st.

Having a chess centre that is usuable by the NSWCA and the NSWJCL would eliminate this cost and would benefit NSW chess.

Of course there is a fair amount of debate as to where this centre should be located. Some would want it in the city, others would like it in the suburbs be they north, south or west.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2004, 01:02 AM
amounts of this nature have been mentioned quite alot before, not just by matt.
Oh he mentioned it back on the 2/8/04 in the NSW Chess Centre thread.

Oepty
12-08-2004, 02:53 PM
If SACA I would want them to use some of it in finding a new South Australia Chess Centre.
Scott

PHAT
12-08-2004, 03:48 PM
Hang on a sec how does Matt know this? Is it true? Is he necessarily referring to NSWCA?

I know it because it is info provided at the AGM.
Yes it is true.
Yes, NSWCA has $80k and has no idea what to do with it. There is no plan, no priority list, working committee, nothing.

We all have ideas of what it could be used for, but the NSWCA says it is best to have it in the bank. These funds have been doing all of us no good at all for many years. It has been used to do absolutely nothing for NSW chess for many years. The NSWCA council has no intention at all of doing anything at all with its/your/our $80k.

Thunderbirds are GO!

PHAT
12-08-2004, 03:55 PM
If SACA I would want them to use some of it in finding a new South Australia Chess Centre.
Scott

NSWCA council does not want to do that. In fact, through neglect of communal duty, they let someone (me) who wanted to see it used for our members, slip through the cracks of the constitution and facilitated his (my) elimination from the equation.


Thunderbirds are GO.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2004, 04:02 PM
I know it because it is info provided at the AGM.
Yes it is true.
Yes, NSWCA has $80k and has no idea what to do with it. There is no plan, no priority list, working committee, nothing.

We all have ideas of what it could be used for, but the NSWCA says it is best to have it in the bank. These funds have been doing all of us no good at all for many years. It has been used to do absolutely nothing for NSW chess for many years. The NSWCA council has no intention at all of doing anything at all with its/your/our $80k.

Thunderbirds are GO!
Sounds like you want to string everyone along like puppets.
After all you suggested last year it be spent on a booze up.
Given evidence of your drunken posts here on the BB perhaps we can now understand the motivation.

The point is the NSWCA havent had 80k for many years.
The amount has grown to 80k over many years.
There is a difference.

The accumulated funds have a purpose as a building fund.
If no money had been saved over the years there would be no fund.
In fact if no money had been saved then when an opportunity arises to get a premises using your logic (or lack thereof) there will be no money available.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2004, 04:10 PM
Your criticism of the building fund is effectively criticising all the previous presidents and council members who have supported the fund.
People like Parr, Safarian, Treddinick, Zworestine, Keast, Ermacora, Greenwood, Cassettari, Donovan, etc.
People whose contribution to NSW chess was demonstrated over many years and which far exceeds your efforts.
In fact your contribution this year whilst on council was zip.

PHAT
12-08-2004, 04:31 PM
Your criticism of the building fund is effectively criticising all the previous presidents and council members who have supported the fund. People like Parr, Safarian, Treddinick, Zworestine, Keast, Ermacora, Greenwood, Cassettari, Donovan, ...


I have not criticised the so called building fund. (BTW, that is the first time I have ever heard it called a biuilding fund.) I have critised he fact that it has not been put to good use.

You can try to say that I am having a go at all the NSWCA ancestory, but it only makes you look defensive of your lack luster presidency.

PHAT
12-08-2004, 04:37 PM
NSWCA council does not want to do that. In fact, through neglect of communal duty, they let someone (me) who wanted to see it used for our members, slip through the cracks of the constitution and facilitated his (my) elimination from the equation.


Thunderbirds are GO.

Geez, I thought I might get a tirade of abuse for this post, but it seems to have left the boss speechless. This is what I call "the silence of thye guilty."

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2004, 04:43 PM
I have not criticised the so called building fund. (BTW, that is the first time I have ever heard it called a biuilding fund.) I have critised he fact that it has not been put to good use.
You should pay more attention then.
I referred to this last year.

Of course you are criticing the building fund.
Also only around 70k not 80k would be in the fund.
You did not title your thread how the NSWCA should spend its money on a chess centre. You called it a wish list.


You can try to say that I am having a go at all the NSWCA ancestory, but it only makes you look defensive of your lack luster presidency.
I was the one who suggested we add a U1600 Division to the NSW OPEN.
You gave no input whatsoever.

Your too busy moaning on the BB about byes.

I'm far from worried what a loud mouthed individual like you who contributed nothing thinks.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2004, 04:51 PM
Geez, I thought I might get a tirade of abuse for this post, but it seems to have left the boss speechless. This is what I call "the silence of thye guilty."
Only because I missed it.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2004, 04:52 PM
NSWCA council does not want to do that. In fact, through neglect of communal duty, they let someone (me) who wanted to see it used for our members, slip through the cracks of the constitution and facilitated his (my) elimination from the equation.
What a load of crap.
Whilst on council you never suggested any use of the 80k.
Whilst on Council you were given the task of organising the SCC committee meetings. You promised at the January meeting to do so. When the February meeting came around you were absent and nothing had been done.
At the March meeting you were again asked to organise the meeting. Again you promised to do so. Along came the April meeting and again you were absent and again nothing had been done. You missed the May and June meetings and were removed from the Council in line with the constitution.

You made no contribution over the 6 mths.
Stop trying to blame others for your laziness and lack of effort.
You did nothing that you promised.

PHAT
12-08-2004, 04:54 PM
Back to the wish list ...

The NSWCA council will not enter any deals with Peter Parr, because he not "one of the boys" any more. The council has nothing better to do with $80k

I think I might apply for $1000 grant to help attract a GM to the next Common Man. In the Wollongong club, we have about 10+ paid-up NSWCA members, which is 2-3% of the total NSW membership. Hmmm, 2.5% x $80k = $2000. Yes, that is our share. I don't think it unreasonable. I guess that we could also apply for another $1000 to fund chess promotional activities in the local shopping chessers around town.

I am not so sure we will get the money. After all, it is better off in the bank.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2004, 05:00 PM
Back to the wish list ...
Of course because you cannot defend that you did nothing whilst on the Council.


The NSWCA council will not enter any deals with Peter Parr, because he not "one of the boys" any more. The council has nothing better to do with $80k
You are an idiot.
Personally i get on well with Peter.
However this has nothing to do with whether he is one of the boys of not.



I think I might apply for $1000 grant to help attract a GM to the next Common Man.
Ha ha.
This coming from the person who believes that the priize money in equal divisions and that the elite should not be rewarded for excellence.


In the Wollongong club, we have about 10+ paid-up NSWCA members, which is 2-3% of the total NSW membership. Hmmm, 2.5% x $80k = $2000. Yes, that is our share. I don't think it unreasonable. I guess that we could also apply for another $1000 to fund chess promotional activities in the local shopping chessers around town.

I am not so sure we will get the money. After all, it is better off in the bank.
I know what your chances are.

PHAT
12-08-2004, 05:05 PM
You did not title your thread how the NSWCA should spend its money on a chess centre. You called it a wish list.

You really are a halfwit :wall: Every month your english comprehension skills deteriorate further. Do you have corotid athlerosclerosis?


I was the one who suggested we add a U1600 Division to the NSW OPEN.

FMD. That is the greatest thing I have ever heard of. We must erect a statue of you, to celebrate your stupendously inovative contribution to the future of NSW chess.




Now, what are you going to do with $80k?

Javier Gil
12-08-2004, 05:24 PM
I think a "building fund" is a great idea.
I guess the real issue here is whether the NSWCA can afford to pay the mortgage with its current income (which seems like it depends heavily on donations... sounds kind of risky).
I'm not sure what the current membership fee is, but would most members be willing to have their fee substancially increased in order to guarantee that the mortage is paid back without trouble?
Anyway, as in chess, sometimes you have to make a move, no matter how nice your position is... because waiting for the fund to get bigger and bigger is an equation which is affected by time, and time devaluates money, so leaving it in the bank doesn't seem very wise. Yes, you'll have more money, but prices will go up a lot more. (if you're sure the fund is gonna get bigger, I'm sure the people who donate it won't mind giving it anyway if the premises has been purchased already).

For reference: My local federation has a yearly membership fee of around 60$. (juniors pay less)
As a sport, the goverment provides an office to all federations in the city where all the paper work is done. However, we did purchase a small unit a few years back, used for small meetings, lectures, coaching and even some small tournaments. This was a good investment because we can sell it now and get something bigger.

PHAT
12-08-2004, 05:32 PM
What a load of crap.
Whilst on council you never suggested any use of the 80k.
Fib #1
Yes I did. I said it should go toward a SCC.

Whilst on Council you were given the task of organising the SCC committee meetings.
Fib #2
I voluteered for the task.

You promised at the January meeting to do so.
Fib #3
I made no promise - I do not break promises! - I made an undertaking.

When the February meeting came around you were absent and nothing had been done. At the March meeting you were again asked to organise the meeting. Again you promised to do so. Along came the April meeting and again you were absent and again nothing had been done. You missed the May and June meetings and were removed from the Council in line with the constitution.

The whole process was to have taken 12 months, not 6. If you were a real President, you would have enquired as to what was going on. but you did not. You want only to rule your fiefdom and keep the heretics out.


Stop trying to blame others for your laziness and lack of effort.


I am not blaiming anyone else for my own non-performance in the first 6 months of what should have been a 12 month stint. I am blaiming you for yours, dikhed.

What are your plans for the $80k? Who is looking for ideas to use it?

PHAT
12-08-2004, 05:44 PM
I think a "building fund" is a great idea...


Anyway, as in chess, sometimes you have to make a move, no matter how nice your position is... because waiting for the fund to get bigger and bigger is an equation which is affected by time, and time devaluates money, so leaving it in the bank doesn't seem very wise...


However, we did purchase a small unit a few years back, used for small meetings, lectures, coaching and even some small tournaments. This was a good investment because we can sell it now and get something bigger.

Thanks for shooting BG in the head. Unfortunately it won't make any difference to his performance.

Javier Gil
12-08-2004, 05:57 PM
Thanks for shooting BG in the head. Unfortunately it won't make any difference to his performance.

I have no control over how you interpret or misinterpret my words. That depends on you.
All I can say is that this (mis)interpretation of yours is very far away from what I meant to say, as I'm sure Bill coincides with me in his wish to purchase a premises which can be used as a chess center one day... (and you too, by the way, so I don't see the point of putting Bill down all the time).

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2004, 06:17 PM
You really are a halfwit :wall: Every month your english comprehension skills deteriorate further. Do you have corotid athlerosclerosis?
In which case in about 30 years my skill level will have reached your current level.


FMD. That is the greatest thing I have ever heard of. We must erect a statue of you, to celebrate your stupendously inovative contribution to the future of NSW chess.
No, you fool.
I gave it as just one example.
If I had listed all the things I have been involved in over the year you would have said it reeked of arrogance.

Of course if I were to list all the things you did whilst on the NSWCA Counil that would be a big nothing.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2004, 06:20 PM
I think a "building fund" is a great idea.
I guess the real issue here is whether the NSWCA can afford to pay the mortgage with its current income (which seems like it depends heavily on donations... sounds kind of risky).
I'm not sure what the current membership fee is, but would most members be willing to have their fee substancially increased in order to guarantee that the mortage is paid back without trouble?
Anyway, as in chess, sometimes you have to make a move, no matter how nice your position is... because waiting for the fund to get bigger and bigger is an equation which is affected by time, and time devaluates money, so leaving it in the bank doesn't seem very wise. Yes, you'll have more money, but prices will go up a lot more. (if you're sure the fund is gonna get bigger, I'm sure the people who donate it won't mind giving it anyway if the premises has been purchased already).

For reference: My local federation has a yearly membership fee of around 60$. (juniors pay less)
As a sport, the goverment provides an office to all federations in the city where all the paper work is done. However, we did purchase a small unit a few years back, used for small meetings, lectures, coaching and even some small tournaments. This was a good investment because we can sell it now and get something bigger.
Hi Javier.

Dont bother trying to have a reasonable debate with Matt.
He is a do nothing fool.

And whatever you do dont possibly agree with me or you will subjected to Matt's wrath (in other words he will abuse you).

The current NSW membership fee is $25. Its been that for a number of years.

arosar
12-08-2004, 06:28 PM
I have no control over how you interpret or misinterpret my words. That depends on you.
All I can say is that this (mis)interpretation of yours is very far away from what I meant to say, as I'm sure Bill coincides with me in his wish to purchase a premises which can be used as a chess center one day... (and you too, by the way, so I don't see the point of putting Bill down all the time).

That's why Mr Sweeney has no political clout whatsoever. You agree with him but he's way too hot. Too dangerous. All this carrying on about a centre is ridiculous. Everyone knows we need one and we all want one. But you can't do it willy-nilly. It's very stupid. That 80K took years to pile up, ya see.

Now here's a suggestion. How about revamping the website? Pay Jeo to do it. Make the website a revenue earner.

And since I like to make even more money, invest some of that 80K in a managed fund. Or how about putting some into a bi-annual masters event with serious dough? That'd be neat.

AR

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2004, 06:39 PM
Fib #1
Yes I did. I said it should go toward a SCC.
How could you have possibly suggested that when I have been saying all along that the money was planned for a SCC.
I said that as far back as last year on the old ACF BB.


Fib #2
I voluteered for the task.
Incorrect.
I suggested it at the Council meeting immediately following the AGM last year.


Fib #3
I made no promise - I do not break promises! - I made an undertaking.
Semantic rubbish.
You agreed at the Jan council meeting you would arrange a SCC committee meeting in the following month. You didnt.
You agreed at the March meeting you would arrange a SCC committee meeting in the following month. Again you didnt.


The whole process was to have taken 12 months, not 6.
Incorrect.
You were tasked with organising the meetings and providing feedback to the Council. This was determined at the meeting following the AGM.
You agreed to organise meetings at the Jan and March meetings.
If as you are now trying to suggest that you had no intention of doing anything for the first 6 months then you should have said so at the Council meetings.
You didnt.

You are a joke.



If you were a real President, you would have enquired as to what was going on. but you did not. You want only to rule your fiefdom and keep the heretics out.
I and the Council knew exactly what was going on.
You made promises at the meetings and failed to carry them out.



I am not blaiming anyone else for my own non-performance in the first 6 months of what should have been a 12 month stint. I am blaiming you for yours, dikhed.
Rubbish.
You are making excuses.
You were either totally inept in agreeing to things at council meetings you would not or could not carry out or were deliberately misleading the Council.
Either way you were a waste of time.


What are your plans for the $80k? Who is looking for ideas to use it?
Firstly it isnt 80k.
If we spent 80k we would have no money left.
The figure would be more like 70k.
That money is planned for a chess centre. That was said last year. It has been said over many years.

What is laughable is that you were quite prepared to lay claim to spending the money on that in the very first quote at the top of this post.

You are nothing but a joke.
All you did this year was confirm it.
You have no credability.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2004, 06:41 PM
That's why Mr Sweeney has no political clout whatsoever. You agree with him but he's way too hot. Too dangerous. All this carrying on about a centre is ridiculous. Everyone knows we need one and we all want one. But you can't do it willy-nilly. It's very stupid. That 80K took years to pile up, ya see.

Now here's a suggestion. How about revamping the website? Pay Jeo to do it. Make the website a revenue earner.

And since I like to make even more money, invest some of that 80K in a managed fund. Or how about putting some into a bi-annual masters event with serious dough? That'd be neat.

AR
The NSWCA has definite plans to build up the NSW Open into a significant event to a point where the prize money will at least equal the Doeberl Cup. We substantially increased the prize money this year over last year and the plan is to increase it again next year.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2004, 06:50 PM
I have no control over how you interpret or misinterpret my words. That depends on you.
Matt will interpret you words in whtever may suits his purpose at the time.
Dont expect consistency.


All I can say is that this (mis)interpretation of yours is very far away from what I meant to say, as I'm sure Bill coincides with me in his wish to purchase a premises which can be used as a chess center one day...
You and I agree.


(and you too, by the way, so I don't see the point of putting Bill down all the time).
Matt will disagree with me whenever he can.
Dont expect logic to be involved where Matt is concerned.

Garvinator
12-08-2004, 06:52 PM
The NSWCA has definite plans to build up the NSW Open into a significant event. We substantially increased the prize money this year over last year and the plan is to increase it again next year.
since the nsw open prizemoney is going to be improved, from what i noticed last year, can the conditions be improved as well.

For instance:

1) No roll up boards
2) more space between the boards to reduce the feeling of being squashed in

those are the two main things i remember.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2004, 06:59 PM
since the nsw open prizemoney is going to be improved, from what i noticed last year, can the conditions be improved as well.

For instance:

1) No roll up boards
2) more space between the boards to reduce the feeling of being squashed in

those are the two main things i remember.
I thought we had gotten rid of all those roll up boards.
In general space requirements means money.
The bigger the area you want the more you pay.
The venue was free but in real terms the club wants to make the best use of the function areas. It will obviosuly give preference to those paying.
That is not to say we could not have gotten more room if we had had bigger numbers, just the club expects effective use of the available space.

PHAT
12-08-2004, 07:38 PM
I have no control over how you interpret or misinterpret my words. That depends on you.
All I can say is that this (mis)interpretation of yours is very far away from what I meant to say, as I'm sure Bill coincides with me in his wish to purchase a premises which can be used as a chess center one day... (and you too, by the way, so I don't see the point of putting Bill down all the time).

You said exactly what needed to be said. I did not misinterpret what you said at all. I think that you do not realise that, what you said was a bullet between the eyes of the man who cannot bring himself to do something with a risk greater than 1%.

PHAT
12-08-2004, 07:50 PM
Hi Javier.

Dont bother trying to have a reasonable debate with Matt.
He is a do nothing fool.

And whatever you do dont possibly agree with me or you will subjected to Matt's wrath (in other words he will abuse you).

Bill, soft soaping recruitment efforts for newbies, to get them onto the side of petrification makes you look like a desperate pittiful schemer.

You press the 5 minute sleep button 12 times an hour. When are you going to gain consciousness?

PHAT
12-08-2004, 07:59 PM
That's why Mr Sweeney has no political clout whatsoever. You agree with him but he's way too hot. Too dangerous.

Me, too hot? :cool: Too dangerous? :lol:

Actually, Ameil, to have political clout, one has to be a filthy liar. It is an proportionaly inverse relationship.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2004, 08:09 PM
You said exactly what needed to be said. I did not misinterpret what you said at all. I think that you do not realise that, what you said was a bullet between the eyes of the man who cannot bring himself to do something with a risk greater than 1%.
As usual you misrepresent the situation.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2004, 08:12 PM
Bill, soft soaping recruitment efforts for newbies, to get them onto the side of petrification makes you look like a desperate pittiful schemer.
Unlike you I actually know who Javier Gil is.
I have seen him play when he lived here in OZ.

I'm just ensuring he is informed as to exactly what you represent.


You press the 5 minute sleep button 12 times an hour. When are you going to gain consciousness?
Even when I'm asleep I'm more on the ball than you could ever be.
You are a joke.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2004, 08:14 PM
Actually, Ameil, to have political clout, one has to be a filthy liar. It is an proportionaly inverse relationship.
Given the amount of misinformation and misrepresentation of the facts you sprout on the BB it would appear that you put paid to that theory.

PHAT
12-08-2004, 08:15 PM
As usual you misrepresent the situation.

There is nothing misterpretable about the fact that the NSWCA will not do a deal with Parr to open a SCC.

Gutless.

Mean while, NSW chess players still have no SCC and there is no plan to get us into one.

Geriatric.

Bill Gletsos
12-08-2004, 08:29 PM
There is nothing misterpretable about the fact that the NSWCA will not do a deal with Parr to open a SCC.

Gutless.
Not gutless you clown, sensible.
Only a fool like you would make a decsion without detering the situation and the relevant facts.

Do you know what the leasing arrangements would be, the rent, anything.
Answer no.

You are a joke.


Mean while, NSW chess players still have no SCC and there is no plan to get us into one.
The plan always called for the co-operation of the NSWCA and the NSWJCL.
Also any plan must be viable and financially responsible.
You would be one of the first to bitch and complain if the venture fell in a whole.



Geriatric.
Fool.
It is easy for you to criticise from the sidelines when you are a do nothing individual.
You are a waste of time.

peanbrain
12-08-2004, 09:40 PM
There is nothing misterpretable about the fact that the NSWCA will not do a deal with Parr to open a SCC.

Gutless.

Mean while, NSW chess players still have no SCC and there is no plan to get us into one.

Geriatric.

Thank god matt was/is nowhere near the administration of NSWCA, otherwise instead of looking at $80k in the bank, we most likely end up with a DEBT of $80k! :doh:

matt is a clown and the sooner he moves to Mexico the better for NSW chess. May be our three time national champion can hire him as a chess coach down there?! ;)

Garvinator
13-08-2004, 12:57 AM
I thought we had gotten rid of all those roll up boards.

clearly not as they were used for all rounds :doh:

PHAT
13-08-2004, 07:56 AM
Thank god matt was/is nowhere near the administration of NSWCA, otherwise instead of looking at $80k in the bank, we most likely end up with a DEBT of $80k! :doh:


Tell us, peacock, what exactly would be wrong with the NSWCA going $80k into debt? While you are at it, list the advantages too. Maybe then you will start to actually think before you post.

(So far, the intellectual and practical contributions you have made to this BB have been less than useful. Try to make up for it by giving this post a concidered reply.)

PHAT
13-08-2004, 08:00 AM
Even when I'm asleep I'm more on the ball than you could ever be.


I see you have graduated for kindy kome backs to an infant school's debating rools.

ursogr8
13-08-2004, 09:11 AM
If your chess association had $80,000 what would you want it to do with it?

I know of one association that says that the best place for it is the bank. :rolleyes:

Matt

I am with you on this one.

If my chess association had $80,000 I would not want it put away for a building fund in Sydney metro. There would be an ever-widening gap between the reserve in the bank and the price of the premises.
Instead I would vote to spend it on the development of chess participation. I would issue a call for ideas.

starter

Brian_Jones
13-08-2004, 09:35 AM
"Instead I would vote to spend it on the development of chess participation. I would issue a call for ideas".

Well done Starter! The best comment I've seen in this thread.
PARTICIPATION - forget chess centres, a waste of money and an impossible dream! Let's start to plan 2005/6 activities now (just look at 2004 NSW Open planning - it was a complete stuff up - and such a pity after a promising 2003!)

Alan Shore
13-08-2004, 12:20 PM
"Instead I would vote to spend it on the development of chess participation. I would issue a call for ideas".

Well done Starter! The best comment I've seen in this thread.
PARTICIPATION - forget chess centres, a waste of money and an impossible dream! Let's start to plan 2005/6 activities now (just look at 2004 NSW Open planning - it was a complete stuff up - and such a pity after a promising 2003!)

These are my sentiments too - what I was getting at earlier. Promote chess more to the audiencences most willing to listen.

Bill Gletsos
13-08-2004, 01:36 PM
I see you have graduated for kindy kome backs to an infant school's debating rools.
That is all thats required to answer your claims.

Bill Gletsos
13-08-2004, 01:39 PM
Tell us, peacock, what exactly would be wrong with the NSWCA going $80k into debt? While you are at it, list the advantages too. Maybe then you will start to actually think before you post.
Only an absolute fool would not understand what is wrong with going 80k into debt.
Obviously the words insolvent dont mean much to you.


(So far, the intellectual and practical contributions you have made to this BB have been less than useful. Try to make up for it by giving this post a concidered reply.)
His contribution certainly could be no worse than yours.

Garvinator
13-08-2004, 01:42 PM
Bill,

When the previous people made their donations towards the $80 k, did they say they had a preferred way they would like it spent.

Also you have listed previous presidents, have they expressed a way they would like it spent.

I think these two points are important too as both are relevant in how the money was raised.

Bill Gletsos
13-08-2004, 04:58 PM
Bill,

When the previous people made their donations towards the $80 k, did they say they had a preferred way they would like it spent.

Also you have listed previous presidents, have they expressed a way they would like it spent.

I think these two points are important too as both are relevant in how the money was raised.
There were no conditions attached to the $10,000 donation we received last year.
The remainder of the money is as far as I am aware just simple accumulation of profits over many years.

ursogr8
13-08-2004, 05:32 PM
There were no conditions attached to the $10,000 donation we received last year.
The remainder of the money is as far as I am aware just simple accumulation of profits over many years.

You have a wonderful way with words Bill. Such a spin doctor. :clap:

As I read 'simple' I am led to the idea of the naturalness of accumulating money, as though it is something that all State Treasurers do as a matter of course.

As I read 'profit' I am left musing what would we would have have thought if it was called 'unspent surplus'.



starter

Bill Gletsos
13-08-2004, 06:29 PM
You have a wonderful way with words Bill. Such a spin doctor. :clap:
No spin at all, just a statement of fact.


As I read 'simple' I am led to the idea of the naturalness of accumulating money, as though it is something that all State Treasurers do as a matter of course.
Well it sure beats accumulating losses.


As I read 'profit' I am left musing what would we would have have thought if it was called 'unspent surplus'.
Since the net profit each year is just added to the previous and a net profit can in actual terms be a loss to describe it as a surplus would not have been accurate.
Therefore to have called it accumulated unspent surplus would have been incorrect as every year was not necessarily a surplus.

arosar
13-08-2004, 06:35 PM
OK, how about uncommitted funds then?

I think that's what Matty is after: to commit the funds. To something - useful. Maybe I agree to this, but I prefer the conservative approach.

AR

Bill Gletsos
13-08-2004, 07:04 PM
OK, how about uncommitted funds then?

I think that's what Matty is after: to commit the funds. To something - useful. Maybe I agree to this, but I prefer the conservative approach.

AR
From Matt's post 29 in this thread he thinks it should be going towards a chess centre.
Unfortunately Matt is apparently in favour of any chess centre proposal irrespective of the merits one way or the other.
He would of course not know any of the actual details because he has not discussed it with Peter Parr.

Clearly for a chess centre to be successful it needs the support of both the NSWCA and the NSWJCL.

Also it should be noted that if there had never been any accumulated profits there would be no possability of the NSWCA ever purchasing premises.

If NSW chess was to recive a bequest that nearly but not quite allowed for the purchase of premises it would indeed be a terrible shame if the remaining funds needed were not available due to the squandering of accumulated profits and a complete indicment of those who chose to follow such a path.

Cat
14-08-2004, 08:19 AM
It's scandalous really, while chess rots the Emperor plays his fiddle. It's clearly the duty of the fund-holders to use the money to actively in the promotion of chess and to be so errant in their duties they have no defence.

It would appear to me from the posts I've seen on the BB there is no one in the chess world with the appropriate acumen to properly dispose of the funds. Matt's right that a proper plan of operations needs to be developed and it needs to be done professionally.

There is so much that could be done with that kind of funding but it could also be frizzled away on mad-cap schemes. Canvassing the BB inhabitants is not necessarily the best approach. One also has to be wary as to where the professional advice is obtained, needless to say.

Bill, bury the hachet, be generous and everyone stands to win!

ursogr8
14-08-2004, 02:46 PM
Also it should be noted that if there had never been any accumulated profits there would be no possibility of the NSWCA ever purchasing premises.

If NSW chess was to recive a bequest that nearly but not quite allowed for the purchase of premises it would indeed be a terrible shame if the remaining funds needed were not available due to the squandering of accumulated profits and a complete indicment of those who chose to follow such a path.

Bill

I will be nominating these two paragraphs of yours as the weakest argument ever put in a post.

regards
starter

Bill Gletsos
14-08-2004, 04:53 PM
Bill

I will be nominating these two paragraphs of yours as the weakest argument ever put in a post.

regards
starter
I'd be nominating your response.

Bill Gletsos
14-08-2004, 04:59 PM
It's scandalous really, while chess rots the Emperor plays his fiddle. It's clearly the duty of the fund-holders to use the money to actively in the promotion of chess and to be so errant in their duties they have no defence.
That clearly isnt the case at all.
The accummulated funds have long been considered for a particular purpose.


It would appear to me from the posts I've seen on the BB there is no one in the chess world with the appropriate acumen to properly dispose of the funds. Matt's right that a proper plan of operations needs to be developed and it needs to be done professionally.
A sydney chess centre has long been the desire of many NSWCA members.
Why should the money accumulated be diverted from that goal.


There is so much that could be done with that kind of funding but it could also be frizzled away on mad-cap schemes. Canvassing the BB inhabitants is not necessarily the best approach. One also has to be wary as to where the professional advice is obtained, needless to say.
Trust me the NSWCA Council wont be listening to the denizens of the BB.


Bill, bury the hachet, be generous and everyone stands to win!
It has nothing to do with burying any hacket.
It has to do with fulfilling a role.

Alan Shore
14-08-2004, 08:10 PM
Trust me the NSWCA Council wont be listening to the denizens of the BB.

Isn't that a bit supercilious? I would hope there'd be more flexibility than that.

ursogr8
14-08-2004, 08:21 PM
Also it should be noted that if there had never been any accumulated profits there would be no possibility of the NSWCA ever purchasing premises.

If NSW chess was to recive a bequest that nearly but not quite allowed for the purchase of premises it would indeed be a terrible shame if the remaining funds needed were not available due to the squandering of accumulated profits and a complete indicment of those who chose to follow such a path.

OK Bill. I will have another try at responding to your argument.
Are you suggesting that you are holding the $80,000 in reserve
JUST IN CASE there is
i) a bequest of an amount unknown at this point,
ii) there is a suitable property of cost unknown at this point
and
iii) the $80,000 just makes up the difference between
the unknowns in i) and ii).
If my paraphrasing is what you meant, then your argument for the reserving of $80,000 is not believable.

regards
starter

Bill Gletsos
14-08-2004, 08:57 PM
OK Bill. I will have another try at responding to your argument.
Are you suggesting that you are holding the $80,000 in reserve
JUST IN CASE there is
i) a bequest of an amount unknown at this point,
ii) there is a suitable property of cost unknown at this point
and
iii) the $80,000 just makes up the difference between
the unknowns in i) and ii).
If my paraphrasing is what you meant, then your argument for the reserving of $80,000 is not believable.

regards
starter
I dont think I was suggesting all of the money might be needed just some of it. However all that is mute if there were no money at all.

As for not being believable I understand the MCC received a bequest that allowed it to purchase its current premises.

I had suggested that the money was most likely to be used for leasing premises rather than purchase.
However if accumulated profits had never existed then the prospect of even leasing would not be possible.

Bill Gletsos
14-08-2004, 09:08 PM
Isn't that a bit supercilious? I would hope there'd be more flexibility than that.
With regards to its finances the views of those from other states or non NSWCA members is immaterial.
As for the small number of NSW members who actually post here it can easily be argued that there are members holding opposing views. e.g. Peter Parr's views would counterbalance Brian Jones.

PHAT
15-08-2004, 06:26 AM
Every year a NSWCA councillor, Norm, conducts the thankless and unpleasant job of collecting annual fees - around $8k. The morjority of this is saved. Over the last decade, due to these savings being invested in term deposits and a recent $10k donatation, the NSWCA has $80k. The undebated understanding is that this money wouls be used to create a chess centre.

Personally, I think that a centrally located chess centre is a fine goal. There is no agreement as to which centre; city, geogaphical, population demographic, or chess population.

Peter Parr has put up proposals that place the proposed chess centre in a building that is 5 minutes from Central Station 5 minutes from the CBD, 5 minutes from a red light district, in fact it is 5 minutes from everywhere. The NSWCA has rejected these proposals for one single reason. The NSWJCL doesn't like the area and says that it will not co-operate with the NSWCA and hold all its events at the proposed site. The NSWJCL has that the area is sleezy/dangerous and juniors ought not be there.

The problem with the NSWJCL's position is that it is hypocritical. Currently, its event location is a five minute walk from the station, down a deserted street along parkland. As any crime watch group, copper, women's safty organization will tell you, deserted areas are more "dangerous" than crouded city streets.

I say forget the NSWJCL for now. NSWCA go it alone. We can poach all the better and more senior junior players from the NSWJCL by offering them super generous discounts for the first year and running a NSW Junior Masters series on a clashing date. Surely the NSWJCL would then, pull its head in and capitulate on their idiotic stance.

ursogr8
15-08-2004, 08:28 AM
I dont think I was suggesting all of the money might be needed just some of it. However all that is mute if there were no money at all.

:eek: Bill. I am shocked you did mean what I paraphrased. I repeat; I think it is the worst reason for holding onto reserves that I have ever heard.


As for not being believable I understand the MCC received a bequest that allowed it to purchase its current premises.

Yes, MCC got a bequest. I am not arguing that the bequest is not possible/likely/important. But for you to hold money just on the off-chance the uncertain/un-received/some-time bequest needs a top-up from reserves, is just, well, fanciful.


I had suggested that the money was most likely to be used for leasing premises rather than purchase.
This is a different, and near-rational point.

However if accumulated profits had never existed then the prospect of even leasing would not be possible.
True, but not what I was criticising about your original post.


Now, for the third time > Have you read the parable about the three talents?


starter

ursogr8
15-08-2004, 08:40 AM
Every year a NSWCA councillor, Norm, conducts the thankless and unpleasant job of collecting annual fees - around $8k.

:eek: :eek:
This is shocking news. Can it be true?
When I first joined the BB in early 2003, the first thread I can recall debating was the NSW approach of having individual members versus the Victorian approach of having affiliated Clubs. I was assured then that the NSW approach was very manageable and efficient.
Now, it is revealed (admittedely by a exiled/sacked Councillor) that there is INEFFICIENCY in the structure. NSW has to find a volunteer each and every year to collect fees from many individuals, on all points of the compass, on behalf of the STATE.

Poor Norm. He is doing a totally unnecessary task. Every year.
And on top of that, most of the money he dutifully collects gathers mould in the Bank. I think I would be voting for a different system.


starter

Brian_Jones
15-08-2004, 09:36 AM
Matthew, you are not telling the whole story. The NSWJCL's man venue is in Lidcombe, 15 km west of the CBD and relatively close to the Olympic stadium at Homebush. It is easy to park and safe in daylight. Surrey Hills is much more seedy and dangerous even in the day. (The riots are often in Redfern but not in Lidcombe).

Besides there is already a Chess Centre in Strathfield at Brett Tindall's Sydney Academy of Chess!

PHAT
15-08-2004, 10:45 AM
Matthew, you are not telling the whole story.

True. However, I was putting a brief summary of my thoughts. Necessarily, bits are left out.


The NSWJCL's man venue is in Lidcombe, 15 km west of the CBD and relatively close to the Olympic stadium at Homebush. It is easy to park and safe in daylight.

15km W, yes, but that is half an hour's travel away from central Sydney.

... close to Homebush, yes, but so what? To what advantage? If you know of some, I will be better informed.

... easy Parking, yes, but there is never more than 10-15 cars there because parents just dump there kids at the door and bolt.

... safe in daylight, hmmm, I guess we will simply have to disagree on this. Deserted open spaces are more dodgy than crowded streets. (Personally, I have no fear for my kids safty there or in the city.)


Surrey Hills is much more seedy and dangerous even in the day. (The riots are often in Redfern but not in Lidcombe).

The proposed centre, is about 30m on the Surry Hills side of the CBD border - 2km from the hot spot.


Besides there is already a Chess Centre in Strathfield at Brett Tindall's Sydney Academy of Chess!

But it ain't a chess centre that accommodated 200+ players.


I realise that there is commercial competition issues and "turf" and "draw area" et cetera. However, I think we should be thinking of increasing the size of the pie. I must add that I think there is a very good case for having a Sydney Chess Centre in Paramatta because that is the demographic centre. Perhaps you could put a [i]specific proposal for Paramatta, to the NSWCA.

Bill Gletsos
15-08-2004, 11:32 AM
Every year a NSWCA councillor, Norm, conducts the thankless and unpleasant job of collecting annual fees - around $8k. The morjority of this is saved. Over the last decade, due to these savings being invested in term deposits and a recent $10k donatation, the NSWCA has $80k. The undebated understanding is that this money wouls be used to create a chess centre.

Personally, I think that a centrally located chess centre is a fine goal. There is no agreement as to which centre; city, geogaphical, population demographic, or chess population.

Peter Parr has put up proposals that place the proposed chess centre in a building that is 5 minutes from Central Station 5 minutes from the CBD, 5 minutes from a red light district, in fact it is 5 minutes from everywhere. The NSWCA has rejected these proposals for one single reason. The NSWJCL doesn't like the area and says that it will not co-operate with the NSWCA and hold all its events at the proposed site. The NSWJCL has that the area is sleezy/dangerous and juniors ought not be there.

The problem with the NSWJCL's position is that it is hypocritical. Currently, its event location is a five minute walk from the station, down a deserted street along parkland. As any crime watch group, copper, women's safty organization will tell you, deserted areas are more "dangerous" than crouded city streets.

I say forget the NSWJCL for now. NSWCA go it alone. We can poach all the better and more senior junior players from the NSWJCL by offering them super generous discounts for the first year and running a NSW Junior Masters series on a clashing date. Surely the NSWJCL would then, pull its head in and capitulate on their idiotic stance.
I say forget you.

The NSWJCL is an integral part of chess in NSW.
A chess centre that does not involve the NSWJCL is no chess centre at all.
On top of that, the NSWJCL has considerable cash reserves.
Cash reserves that I believe exceed the NSWCA.
The combination of both the NWXCA nad NSWJCl in any venture is the only way forward.

Bill Gletsos
15-08-2004, 11:44 AM
:eek: :eek:
This is shocking news. Can it be true?
When I first joined the BB in early 2003, the first thread I can recall debating was the NSW approach of having individual members versus the Victorian approach of having affiliated Clubs. I was assured then that the NSW approach was very manageable and efficient.
Now, it is revealed (admittedely by a exiled/sacked Councillor) that there is INEFFICIENCY in the structure. NSW has to find a volunteer each and every year to collect fees from many individuals, on all points of the compass, on behalf of the STATE.

Poor Norm. He is doing a totally unnecessary task. Every year.
And on top of that, most of the money he dutifully collects gathers mould in the Bank. I think I would be voting for a different system.
You tried this beatup last year starter on the old ACF BB.
I suggest you stick to Mexican politics.

Just because the NSW resident moron describes it as thankless doies not make it so.

The NSWCA Council members and I'm sure all members recognise the contribution made by Norm as Treasurer and Peter Cassettari as Registrar in handling memberships as well as in other areas.

Bill Gletsos
15-08-2004, 11:52 AM
True. However, I was putting a brief summary of my thoughts. Necessarily, bits are left out.
Often a lot is left out when you express your thoughts.



15km W, yes, but that is half an hour's travel away from central Sydney.

... close to Homebush, yes, but so what? To what advantage? If you know of some, I will be better informed.

... easy Parking, yes, but there is never more than 10-15 cars there because parents just dump there kids at the door and bolt.

... safe in daylight, hmmm, I guess we will simply have to disagree on this. Deserted open spaces are more dodgy than crowded streets. (Personally, I have no fear for my kids safty there or in the city.)
I seriously doubt your views would be respresentative of most parents.


The proposed centre, is about 30m on the Surry Hills side of the CBD border - 2km from the hot spot.



But it ain't a chess centre that accommodated 200+ players.


I realise that there is commercial competition issues and "turf" and "draw area" et cetera. However, I think we should be thinking of increasing the size of the pie. I must add that I think there is a very good case for having a Sydney Chess Centre in Paramatta because that is the demographic centre. Perhaps you could put a [i]specific proposal for Paramatta, to the NSWCA.
If Brian or anyone else wants to put up a resonable and workable proposal to the NSWCA and the NSWJCL, then I'm sure we would consider it.

The NSWCA going it alone on any chess centre without the support of the NSWJCL would be shortlived at best.
Any centre that does not meet with the approval/support of the NSWJCL is not viable in the long term which is the goal.
Short lived options are really no options.

Gringo
15-08-2004, 11:56 AM
As Parr comments " there's Gletsos' opinion and everyone else's and he gets his way." e.g. Glicko Shmicko. Let's hope a NSW President with Real Class
emerges. Talking of the old B.B - it was better without Billy here every 5 minutes.

Bill Gletsos
15-08-2004, 12:00 PM
As Parr comments " there's Gletsos' opinion and everyone else's and he gets his way." e.g. Glicko Shmicko. Let's hope a NSW President with Real Class
emerges. Talking of the old B.B - it was better without Billy here every 5 minutes.
Unlike an anonymous gutless wonder like you, I know Peter well enough to know he would make any criticisms directly to my face.

ursogr8
15-08-2004, 12:02 PM
You tried this beatup last year starter on the old ACF BB.
This is not an argument for your case; it is just name-calling.


I suggest you stick to Mexican politics.
This is not an argument for your case; it is just refusal to argue by you.


Just because the NSW resident moron describes it as thankless doies not make it so.
This is not an argument for your case; it is just name-calling of another.


The NSWCA Council members and I'm sure all members recognise the contribution made by Norm as Treasurer and Peter Cassettari as Registrar in handling memberships as well as in other areas.
This is not an argument for your case; it is just a total diversion. I never said they were not appreciated.

You get 0/4 for this attempt.


starter

Bill Gletsos
15-08-2004, 12:04 PM
This is not an argument for your case; it is just name-calling.


This is not an argument for your case; it is just refusal to argue by you.


This is not an argument for your case; it is just name-calling of another.

.
This is not an argument for your case; it is just a total diversion. I never said they were not appreciated.

You get 0/4 for this attempt.

Your original post got the response it deserved.

Garvinator
15-08-2004, 12:33 PM
for what it is worth on the nswca centre since im from qld ;) i think it would be financial suicide to have a chess centre that was not supported by the state junior association.

Why create a chess centre and waste a huge revenue stream(to be blunt).

PHAT
15-08-2004, 03:48 PM
The NSWJCL is an integral part of chess in NSW.

A chess centre that does not involve the NSWJCL is no chess centre at all.

On top of that, the NSWJCL has considerable cash reserves.

Cash reserves that I believe exceed the NSWCA.

The combination of both the NWXCA nad NSWJCl in any venture is the only way forward.



True

True

OH! How much?

OH! By how much?

True. So get your collective sch.t together and spend it on the players and the future of the game - instead of hording it like children of the Great Depression.

PHAT
15-08-2004, 03:58 PM
The NSWCA Council members and I'm sure all members recognise the contribution made by Norm as Treasurer and Peter Cassettari as Registrar in handling memberships as well as in other areas.

Nobody likes to see Norm having to wring money out of players - or see him walking toward you at renewal time. The whole unwholesome scene is unecessary. And if YOU had to do that job, you would soon change your tune. Dispicable.

Bill Gletsos
15-08-2004, 04:11 PM
OH! How much?

OH! By how much?
You commented on it last year on the old ACF bb.
I'll leave it to you to remember.


True. So get your collective sch.t together and spend it on the players and the future of the game - instead of hording it like children of the Great Depression.
You had your opportunity to contribute.
You did nothing.
You are a joke.

Bill Gletsos
15-08-2004, 04:14 PM
Nobody likes to see Norm having to wring money out of players - or see him walking toward you at renewal time. The whole unwholesome scene is unecessary. And if YOU had to do that job, you would soon change your tune. Dispicable.
As usual you have no clue what you are talking about.

ursogr8
15-08-2004, 07:28 PM
Your original post got the response it deserved.

hi Bill
Combined with the 0/4 that your first response 'earned', and now this non-value-adding second response then I am presuming you have resigned from your position in this argument?
starter

Bill Gletsos
15-08-2004, 07:53 PM
hi Bill
Combined with the 0/4 that your first response 'earned', and now this non-value-adding second response then I am presuming you have resigned from your position in this argument?
starter
Not at all.
Your own attempts were scoreless.

Alan Shore
15-08-2004, 09:24 PM
On top of that, the NSWJCL has considerable cash reserves. Cash reserves that I believe exceed the NSWCA.

!!

The plot thickens.

I know how though. NSWJCL runs tournaments that charge $10 entry for a large number of participants and no prizemoney if you win. There's at least one individual involved in it I was distinctly unimpressed with when meeting too.

Bill Gletsos
15-08-2004, 11:23 PM
There's at least one individual involved in it I was distinctly unimpressed with when meeting too.
They were probably distinctly unimpressed by you. :hmm:

PHAT
16-08-2004, 05:43 PM
You commented on it last year on the old ACF bb.
I'll leave it to you to remember.


I never knew the actual figure. However, Jenni Oliver said


"I know the ACTJCL currently has $20,000 in kitty (not for long, as we are supporting the school teams going to WA and helping with coaching for our kids at the nationals, plus buying lots of trestle tables for our new "home"). I understand the nswjcl has significantly more than that."

Nevertheless, let's just say NSWJCL has about the same as NSWCA.

If the city join t has a lease of ~$26k pa and it is split 50/50 with a commercial operator. the NSWCA and NSWJCL would have to find $13k pa. Return on investments would pay for $8k of it ($160k @5%). NSWCA pays ~$2k in venue hire very year and NSWJCL pays ~$3k. 8+2+3=13.

FMD. Looks viable!

arosar
16-08-2004, 05:47 PM
FMD. Looks viable!

Man, this whole SCC thing is one of the most oppressive subjects on this BB. It's like watching reruns of A Country Practice. That's a FMD moment mate!

I wish one of youse would just sit down and prove the numbers instead of just yappin' on about it.

AR

ursogr8
17-08-2004, 09:33 AM
"Instead I would vote to spend it on the development of chess participation. I would issue a call for ideas".

Well done Starter! The best comment I've seen in this thread.
PARTICIPATION - forget chess centres, a waste of money and an impossible dream! Let's start to plan 2005/6 activities now (just look at 2004 NSW Open planning - it was a complete stuff up - and such a pity after a promising 2003!)

Well Brian
It looks like you, and Jeo (late edit) in NSW, BD in QLD, and me in VIC that are voting for the money to spent on increasing participation, instead of 'bricks and mortar'.
Why would the chess community want to concentrate on 'bricks and mortar', instead?


starter

skip to my lou
17-08-2004, 09:43 AM
starter, I guess you missed my post.. :cry:

Garvinator
17-08-2004, 10:11 AM
Well Brian
It looks like you in NSW, BD in QLD, and me in VIC that are voting for the money to spent on increasing participation, instead of 'bricks and mortar'.
Why would the chess community want to concentrate on 'bricks and mortar', instead?


starter
ill have a go at that one. I guess the reason is that by having a chess centre, the two associations believe they can increase participation by having a fixed home, instead of having to move around the city all the time.

If the venue can be junior friendly and still be a serious chess venue, then they believe that is will attract new members and players.

One way to get your name in the paper is to open up a new building ;) You called the gardiner chess centre- perfect-land, well one of the reasons you called it that is cause Graeme has his own building.

ursogr8
17-08-2004, 10:12 AM
starter, I guess you missed my post.. :cry:

And so you did Jeo. And it was not as though it was buried in a pre-move off-thread of a Bill-Matt tirade either. My overlook entirely.
It was a very good post of yours :clap: and deserved more response from Bill.
I will go back and adjust my post.

starter

Brian_Jones
18-08-2004, 09:10 AM
Sydney is a big city some 120km x 60km big (excluding Central Coast, Wollongong and Newcastle). One chess centre would not be enough - the travelling would be too much!. We would need at least half a dozen centres in different areas (not unlike the existing clubs at North Sydney, St George, Hakoah, Canterbury, Ryde-Eastwood, Wests, Rooty Hill, Liverpool etc. Maybe the emphasis should be on getting the major clubs into junior-friendly premises (airconditioned offices, hotels, church halls, schools or scout huts) and then increasing the memberships (participation!?) at each of these clubs by running exceptionally well-marketed events which people just have to play in!

ursogr8
18-08-2004, 09:26 AM
Sydney is a big city some 120km x 60km big (excluding Central Coast, Wollongong and Newcastle). One chess centre would not be enough - the travelling would be too much!. We would need at least half a dozen centres in different areas (not unlike the existing clubs at North Sydney, St George, Hakoah, Canterbury, Ryde-Eastwood, Wests, Rooty Hill, Liverpool etc. Maybe the emphasis should be on getting the major clubs into junior-friendly premises (airconditioned offices, hotels, church halls, schools or scout huts) and then increasing the memberships (participation!?) at each of these clubs by running exceptionally well-marketed events which people just have to play in!

Excellent post Brian.
:clap:

The points you make are similar to the long thread on the previous BB, which was initiated by Ian Rogers article in the national Press, re the Evening Chess Club. It was in discussion of this article that I first learned how many NSW Chess Clubs had subsidised access to licensed premises. Of course, that type of premises is difficult for junior participation, and hence is a real blocker on growth strategies.

Perhaps some part of the $80,000 could be put towards a 50% subsidy for the (first-year) rent of any Club moving to junior-friendly premises.

starter

ursogr8
18-08-2004, 09:32 AM
Man, this whole SCC thing is one of the most oppressive subjects on this BB. It's like watching reruns of A Country Practice. That's a FMD moment mate!


AR

Cheer up Amiel.
Has the weather closed in on you again, or something.

Rincewind
18-08-2004, 10:34 AM
Perhaps some part of the $80,000 could be put towards a 50% subsidy for the (first-year) rent of any Club moving to junior-friendly premises.

Trev, and everyone, is the following workable...

Overall chess club with two premises

Seniors Club hosted rent free for evening chess at licensed premises.

Junior Club hosted in junior-friendly environs operating in the early afternoon and weekend timeslots. Rent may be a major expense.

Evening events intended for Senior play but serious juniors are welcome (note that this involves playing later at night and requires supervision due to licensing requirements).

Junior only tournaments held at junior venue on weekends. Also weekend tournaments for senior and juniors held at the same.

This way the seniors get to have their beer and drink it too but junior development is not ignored and link between juniors and seniors is clear and established. As the juniors expenses are likely to be hire there can be some cross-subsidisation of the junior rent and expenses by the senior club. This benefits the seniors inthe long run anyway as number and quality of players will increase over time.

But the question is, is it workable?

ursogr8
18-08-2004, 10:08 PM
Trev, and everyone, is the following workable...

Overall chess club with two premises

Seniors Club hosted rent free for evening chess at licensed premises.

Junior Club hosted in junior-friendly environs operating in the early afternoon and weekend timeslots. Rent may be a major expense.

Evening events intended for Senior play but serious juniors are welcome (note that this involves playing later at night and requires supervision due to licensing requirements).

Junior only tournaments held at junior venue on weekends. Also weekend tournaments for senior and juniors held at the same.

This way the seniors get to have their beer and drink it too but junior development is not ignored and link between juniors and seniors is clear and established. As the juniors expenses are likely to be hire there can be some cross-subsidisation of the junior rent and expenses by the senior club. This benefits the seniors in the long run anyway as number and quality of players will increase over time.

But the question is, is it workable?


Good thought-provoking question Barry.

As always with this sort of question, if time is spent refining the question and if time is spent deciding on ‘criteria for determining success’, then the analysis benefits greatly.

So, Barry, you pose the question as
> is it workable?
You could be asking is it viable? Or is it sellable to the seniors? Or is likely to attract local Council funding to recognise your efforts on junior activities? Or is it likely to attract enough volunteers?

I am inclined to Paul Sike’s view that ‘volunteers are the biggest problem in chess’. So, if your proposed solution addresses ‘the biggest problem’ satisfactorily then we might hope that the smaller problems don’t sink the ship. However, I never liked Paul’s phrasing; it always sounded negative to me…as though he was putting it forward as a ready-made excuse for failure.
Personally, I define the central task as ‘establishing a culture where volunteering flourishes’. It is important (critical) to have adequate resources to establish a feature-rich chess club.
The culture takes quite a few pre-conditions for it to occur. Last year, I argued in a long post that one pre-condition was a determination amongst the office-bearers of the Club to ‘recognise and reward’ volunteering. This post was well received in general terms, but quite a few posters felt uncomfortable that it was too-American, and it was almost un-Australian. Instead, Aussies are inclined to hide their light under a bushel, even if they do volunteer.
The introduction of culture that is ‘recognise and reward’ can almost be carried by a single resource at the Club. A single individual, with leadership qualities, can achieve sufficient ‘recognise and reward’ occasions in the Club to move the atmosphere at the Club in the right direction over a 12 month period.
To summarise to this point; a ‘recognise and reward’ culture is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition (notice the ‘borrow’ from the formality of mathematics).

Moving on then to other dimensions of your proposal.
>> the two buildings concept (one for junior Club, and one for the seniors). See now how this very idea has a flaw that puts at risk our central concept of volunteering. What you are suggesting is that a few altruistic seniors march down to another venue and run a junior Club. Baz, altruism is a scarce commodity and is very hard to encourage away from the place you would prefer to be (the senior Club). Look at it this way, the good work of an organiser of junior activities is not seen by his senior mates at the boozer, and all he does is bring the occasional strong-fast-developing junior to the odd senior event to rip rating points away. Is this organiser of junior activities going to be ‘recognised and rewarded’. Unfortunately, probably no.

I think I have convinced myself that the two clubs have to be in the one premises. I will eagerly await jenni’s view.

Two final points
>>> the cross-subsidy idea. Gee, how do you sell this Baz? You stand up in front of the senior Committee or the senior AGM and you say "I want to take your financial reserves and apply them to a junior Club down the road". I could not do that and be confident of the outcome. You suggest the argument "it will be good for them in the long-term". I don’t think I could do it successfully to blokes who have had a subsidised ride in the boozer.

>>>> finally, does your solution look like a series of small steps and accomplishments for the juniors? The answer is no. What you describe is two premises that are rather sterile. There is little likelihood of a seniors honour board (recognising champions and significant volunteers), that can be seen by developing juniors, and importantly by the potential volunteer parents. There are few opportunities for seniors to sit with each and every youngster after his game and go through the ideas in the moves. There is no hint that you would re-structure your tournaments to fit the juniors in.
Baz, what you have described is an add-on. I don’t think the graft would take, unless you got real lucky and attracted a substantial leader-volunteer. One such individual can make the difference, but probably not sustainable.


Thanks anyway for the question. Apology that I ended up on the negative side of the ledger. Perhaps I am in a glass-half-empty cycle.

regards
starter

Garvinator
18-08-2004, 10:42 PM
in reading barry's post and your reply starter, i had thought barry's idea was two centres to be located in different parts of sydney and are joint run by the nswca and nswjca. They use the premises for their own needs at different times ie juniors afternoons and seniors at night.

All nswca and nswjca tournaments are played at these two venues.

Maybe i have missed the boat on both posts, or i have come up with another idea :uhoh:

Cat
19-08-2004, 12:32 AM
A sydney chess centre has long been the desire of many NSWCA members.
Why should the money accumulated be diverted from that goal.



Ah, so the money's being saved for a pipe-dream!

Bill Gletsos
19-08-2004, 01:35 AM
Ah, so the money's being saved for a pipe-dream!
Who cares what you think. I know I dont.

ursogr8
19-08-2004, 08:14 AM
in reading barry's post and your reply starter, i had thought barry's idea was two centres to be located in different parts of sydney and are joint run by the nswca and nswjca. They use the premises for their own needs at different times ie juniors afternoons and seniors at night.

All nswca and nswjca tournaments are played at these two venues.

Maybe i have missed the boat on both posts, or i have come up with another idea :uhoh:

ag'ag'

I read Barry's second sentence 'Overall chess club with two premises' to mean a suburban Club, not State venues. But given the thread he posed the question on, you may be correct. But given Barry does not live in the Big Smoke, you may be incorrect. But given that most of us Mexicans see issues through CLUB-eyes, I could be incorrect.

If my post is off-topic, this is one occasion where I give you permission to act as thread police and get the moderators to move it off-shore.

starter

Rincewind
19-08-2004, 08:52 AM
I read Barry's second sentence 'Overall chess club with two premises' to mean a suburban Club, not State venues. But given the thread he posed the question on, you may be correct. But given Barry does not live in the Big Smoke, you may be incorrect. But given that most of us Mexicans see issues through CLUB-eyes, I could be incorrect.

If my post is off-topic, this is one occasion where I give you permission to act as thread police and get the moderators to move it off-shore.

I was thinking more like a single suburban club with two premises if not in the same suburb, at least close-by. However, the same model might have other applications (assuming it is workable at all). However the main reason for the arrangement is to take advantage of rent free premises for the seniors. I doubt the NSWCA would be looking to house the state chess centre "flagship" on such terms, as rent-free accomodation does have certain limitations.

Cat
19-08-2004, 02:41 PM
Who cares what you think. I know I dont.

Then stop responding to my posts. If you don't care, just ignore me. You're like a dog with a bone.

Bill Gletsos
19-08-2004, 02:56 PM
Then stop responding to my posts. If you don't care, just ignore me. You're like a dog with a bone.
Just because I dont care what you think, does not mean I'll let you get away with stupid worthless posts.

Cat
19-08-2004, 03:06 PM
Just because I dont care what you think, does not mean I'll let you get away with stupid worthless posts.

Whereas your stupid posts are worthy?

Bill Gletsos
19-08-2004, 03:15 PM
My posts are only stupid when they include a quote of one of yours or Matt's posts. :owned:

Cat
19-08-2004, 03:32 PM
My posts are only stupid when they include a quote of one of yours or Matt's posts. :owned:

oh no they're not

Bill Gletsos
19-08-2004, 03:48 PM
oh no they're not
:lol: :lol: And matt talks about kindergarten replies.
You would be perfect in their playground.

Garvinator
19-08-2004, 05:41 PM
not sure how this fits in with an 80 k wish list :hmm:

ursogr8
19-08-2004, 06:09 PM
I was thinking more like a single suburban club with two premises if not in the same suburb, at least close-by. However, the same model might have other applications (assuming it is workable at all). However the main reason for the arrangement is to take advantage of rent free premises for the seniors.

Err ummm ahhhhhhhhh.
Baz

Did you have any thoughts on my post? :uhoh:

Too wide of the mark? Not what you wanted?

starter

ursogr8
19-08-2004, 06:20 PM
The NSWJCL is an integral part of chess in NSW.
A chess centre that does not involve the NSWJCL is no chess centre at all.
On top of that, the NSWJCL has considerable cash reserves.
Cash reserves that I believe exceed the NSWCA.
The combination of both the NWXCA nad NSWJCl in any venture is the only way forward.

Bill,
Do you have a motion on the books that says the $80,000 reserves must be used on bricks and mortar?
starter

Rincewind
20-08-2004, 08:19 AM
Err ummm ahhhhhhhhh.
Baz

Did you have any thoughts on my post? :uhoh:

Too wide of the mark? Not what you wanted?

Food for thought. Perhaps the mechanics of your argument were a little over-simplyfied. I think things are a little more laid-back in Wollongong. (IE Not the hot-bed of political infighting you seem to have in Victorian chess clubs :eek: ). ;)

ursogr8
20-08-2004, 08:48 AM
Food for thought.

Ah. Good. A little recognition then.


Perhaps the mechanics of your argument were a little over-simplyfied.

A valued skill for management. ;)



I think things are a little more laid-back in Wollongong.


Don't get too laid-back otherwise you will be asleep at the wheel of opportunity.


(IE Not the hot-bed of political infighting you seem to have in Victorian chess clubs :eek: ). ;)

Where would you rather have the debate occur? Among the Clubs and promoters (VIC style). Among the State Executive (NSW style). None of the above (Qld style).
Dissent is healthy. Quiteness is a RISK.


starter

Garvinator
20-08-2004, 12:45 PM
None of the above (Qld style).
assuming is misleading :P

just cause my committee doesnt post here doesnt mean there isnt quite a bit of discussion on caq matters. People can talk away from here and get things done you know, or not get things done depending on your point of view :eek:

ursogr8
20-08-2004, 01:05 PM
assuming is misleading :P

just cause my committee doesnt post here doesnt mean there isnt quite a bit of discussion on caq matters. People can talk away from here and get things done you know, or not get things done depending on your point of view :eek:

gggg''''

If a tree falls in a forest, and no-one is around to hear the crashing sound, you know what they say..."The tree did not fall".

starter

MovingMan
15-09-2004, 02:35 AM
Tell us, peacock, what exactly would be wrong with the NSWCA going $80k into debt? While you are at it, list the advantages too. Maybe then you will start to actually think before you post.

(So far, the intellectual and practical contributions you have made to this BB have been less than useful. Try to make up for it by giving this post a concidered reply.)

golly gosh - Matt seems to hope for "intellectual and practical contributions" have not you yourself made that unlikely Matt ??

PHAT
16-08-2005, 07:36 AM
It has been a long time since this thread was active - time to arc it up again.

What has happened in the intervening year and a half. :hmm:

NOTHING. :eek:

What has the NSWCA done to put together a "wish-list?"

NOTHING :rolleyes:

What method does the NSWCA have to consult its members about a wish list?

A NEWSLETTER :clap:

When will the call for suggestions go into the newsletter?

NEVER - because the council is too risk averse. It is set in its ways to the point that it mimics brain death.:hand: