PDA

View Full Version : Adding Value to Membership



Trent Parker
23-11-2004, 10:38 PM
There has been some mention on the bb that there may be people who think that there is no value in joining the NSWCA. This may be somewhat evident by decreasing membership numbers.

Therefore the big question is:

How can the NSWCA add value to their membership?

There has been talk of a newsletter......
What else culd add value to membership?

Paul S
24-11-2004, 01:20 AM
A newsletter is a good start.

Could also look into the possibility of having only state members being able to have their games rated, although this would be difficult to implement in practice (eg would make the work of the State Ratings Officer a lot more complex).

arosar
24-11-2004, 08:02 AM
NO a newsletter isn't a good start. More faster time tourneys like rapids. I notice that in these events dormant 2000+ players come out to play.

AR

Rincewind
24-11-2004, 08:16 AM
NO a newsletter isn't a good start. More faster time tourneys like rapids. I notice that in these events dormant 2000+ players come out to play.

Are some of these dormant 2000+ players overrated and come out to play because they can do so without fear of losing rating points? If so what about an UNRATED tournament or two?

PHAT
24-11-2004, 08:21 AM
What else culd add value to membership?

A 7 day 12 hour chess centre for members.

Maybe the NSWJCL needs to be "forced" to support the Parr proposal.

arosar
24-11-2004, 08:22 AM
Nah man, I'm talking about the likes of Flatow. I often see him in fast time events. He and his mates like Ghenzer, and this German bloke who lives here (dunno his name), Berezovski too and some others. Basically, one-day events are good cos people don't gotta devote a whole weekend to play chess.

You see what I'm saying?

AR

Bill Gletsos
24-11-2004, 11:33 AM
A newsletter is a good start.

Could also look into the possibility of having only state members being able to have their games rated, although this would be difficult to implement in practice (eg would make the work of the State Ratings Officer a lot more complex).
This has been discussed by the Council previously.
It wont happen unless a state rating fee is implemented.

ursogr8
24-11-2004, 11:56 AM
This has been discussed by the Council previously.
It wont happen unless a state rating fee is implemented.

Bill

The Victorian Clubs collect a fee; the ACF collects part of that fee; the State Association handles it in the middle.
Hard to see how NSWCA stands aloof from a normal commercial arrangement between tiers.

starter

Bill Gletsos
24-11-2004, 12:02 PM
Bill

The Victorian Clubs collect a fee; the ACF collects part of that fee; the State Association handles it in the middle.
Hard to see how NSWCA stands aloof from a normal commercial arrangement between tiers.

starter
You seem to keep forgetting starter that clubs are not members of the NSWCA.

ursogr8
24-11-2004, 12:51 PM
You seem to keep forgetting starter that clubs are not members of the NSWCA.

Bill
I don't forget that the NSW arrangement of players being members of the State Association.
But it does seem odd that in a three party arrangement (in VIC) there is no problem collecting the fee, at the grass-roots, and paying the ACF at the top, and at the same time only making the ratings-product available to those who join the formal chess structure. On the other hand, if what I read from Paul Sike is correct, you (NSW) seem to have players being rated but not requiring them to join the formal chess structure.

In 3 tiers we can make it happen; but in 2 tiers Paul is saying you have difficulty.


We have only two real products to sell Bill; ratings and titles. We can't let either be eroded by 'freebies', nor puff, ;) .


starter

Paul S
24-11-2004, 07:23 PM
It wont happen unless a state rating fee is implemented.

Perhaps a state rating fee should be implemented by NSWCA Council? :hmm:

PHAT
24-11-2004, 10:35 PM
Bill
... if what I read from Paul Sike is correct, you (NSW) seem to have players being rated but not requiring them to join the formal chess structure.


I have spoken to Bill a number of times about this and scene the goings on. It boils down to this:

If the NSWCA charges a ratings fee over and above the ACF fee, a bunch of spoilers (clubs in western Sydney) say they will bail out and run both their own ratings system and competitions in opposition to the NSWCA. They have done it in the past. Since they have show themselves to be sociopathic in nature and shafted the rest of the chess community once before, the council members are schit-scared to take on these creeps.

So, non-NSWCA members continue to get their games processed for rating by NSWCA, free. Three cheers for the council that has allowed this stupidity to go on for years.

Bill Gletsos
24-11-2004, 11:41 PM
I have spoken to Bill a number of times about this and scene the goings on. It boils down to this:

If the NSWCA charges a ratings fee over and above the ACF fee, a bunch of spoilers (clubs in western Sydney) say they will bail out and run both their own ratings system and competitions in opposition to the NSWCA.
There is no evidence to support this claim.


They have done it in the past.
It happened for about 3-4 years back in the early to mid 80's.


Since they have show themselves to be sociopathic in nature and shafted the rest of the chess community once before, the council members are schit-scared to take on these creeps.
Not true.
Its just the implementation of a state ratings fee is not easy.


So, non-NSWCA members continue to get their games processed for rating by NSWCA, free. Three cheers for the council that has allowed this stupidity to go on for years.
As usual you have no clue what you are talking about.

Bill Gletsos
24-11-2004, 11:43 PM
Perhaps a state rating fee should be implemented by NSWCA Council? :hmm:
Although I'm in favour of it there did not appear much support for it when I floated the idea at last years AGM or at a following council meeting.

PHAT
25-11-2004, 01:34 AM
Its just the implementation of a state ratings fee is not easy.

Utter balderdash. Just charge it.

You were worried that if the NSWCA just "charged it," the psycho-westies would walk. So your idea was to introduce a very small fee and reduce the annual membership fee with a resultant (hopefully!) zero sum gain. However, there is a guttlessnes in council that beggers belief.

BTW, that gutlessness is also apparent with its dealings with the NSWJCL. If council does not "deal with" the JCL and make it cooperate with us, we should simply apply enormous pressure - poach all their over 12yrs players with inducements and run events that clash.

I must say however, that the NSWJCL is realy well run and the admins in it do a stirling job. It is just that they are spending all their efforts running the show and have no time to explore the alternatives.


For Christ's sake, if the NSWCA and NSWJCL don't take on Parr's offer, what the phk is the plan? Another year with $80-90k fermenting in the bowels of a dieing NSWCA?

Bill Gletsos
25-11-2004, 09:57 AM
Utter balderdash. Just charge it.
As usual you have no clue what you are talking about.
From a financial viewpoint NSW has no need to charge a state rating fee, however to charge a non members rating fee is too difficult to administer (its been tried in the past).


You were worried that if the NSWCA just "charged it," the psycho-westies would walk. So your idea was to introduce a very small fee and reduce the annual membership fee with a resultant (hopefully!) zero sum gain. However, there is a guttlessnes in council that beggers belief.
There is nothing gutless about it you fool.
If you were to charge a state rating fee which applied to members (for which there is no financial reason) then you would need to reduce the membership fee by a average corresponding amount.


BTW, that gutlessness is also apparent with its dealings with the NSWJCL.
You really are an idiot. The NSWJCL is responsible for junior chess in NSW. It is not for the NSWCA to dictate how it should function or spend its money. The NSWJCL dont see Campbell St in the city as junior friendly.


If council does not "deal with" the JCL and make it cooperate with us, we should simply apply enormous pressure - poach all their over 12yrs players with inducements and run events that clash.
This just shows what a complete fool you are and why you have absolutely no credability.
Why didnt you turn up to the NSWJCL AGM and argue this. Of course if you had you would have been laughed at.


I must say however, that the NSWJCL is realy well run and the admins in it do a stirling job.
Finally you got something right.


It is just that they are spending all their efforts running the show and have no time to explore the alternatives.
You really have no clue what you rabbit on about.


For Christ's sake, if the NSWCA and NSWJCL don't take on Parr's offer, what the phk is the plan? Another year with $80-90k fermenting in the bowels of a dieing NSWCA?
All you show is just how financially irresponsible you are.
No one would ever put you in charge of the NSWCA finances.

Trent Parker
25-11-2004, 10:03 AM
Could also look into the possibility of having only state members being able to have their games rated, although this would be difficult to implement in practice (eg would make the work of the State Ratings Officer a lot more complex).


This has been discussed by the Council previously.
It wont happen unless a state rating fee is implemented.

What about having the players games rated but not published ???

Thus the rating would not be available for the player to use in a tournament.

Bill Gletsos
25-11-2004, 10:09 AM
What about having the players games rated but not published ???

Thus the rating would not be available for the player to use in a tournament.
Apart from the fact that the ACF Rating Officers are not going to maintain a list of players whose ratings will not be published, it just wouldnt work.
If a state submits an event for rating then it will be rated and published.

Trent Parker
25-11-2004, 10:15 AM
ok........

ursogr8
25-11-2004, 10:21 AM
There is nothing gutless about it you fool.
If you were to charge a state rating fee which applied to members (for which there is no financial reason) then you would need to reduce the membership fee by a average corresponding amount.


.

But Bill, there is another viable option here.
If you adopt the rating fee strategy of user-pays then the connection to an offset in the membership fee is not relevant.

For example, if the rating fee is set at $2 per participation in a week-ender then those who play 20 week-enders pay $40; and those who play 1 pay $2.

This is essentially the Victorian system. (We do have in addition, a strong encouragement to join affiliated Clubs....but that is secondary to user_pays_rating_fees).

starter

ps Collection of the $2 is easy...it is just part of the tourney entry fee....no separate accounting required.

Bill Gletsos
25-11-2004, 10:34 AM
But Bill, there is another viable option here.
If you adopt the rating fee strategy of user-pays then the connection to an offset in the membership fee is not relevant.

For example, if the rating fee is set at $2 per participation in a week-ender then those who play 20 week-enders pay $40; and those who play 1 pay $2.

This is essentially the Victorian system. (We do have in addition, a strong encouragement to join affiliated Clubs....but that is secondary to user_pays_rating_fees).

starter

ps Collection of the $2 is easy...it is just part of the tourney entry fee....no separate accounting required.
You seem to be suffering from a delusion here starter.
Stick to teaching your fellow Mexicans how to suck eggs.

The NSWCA pays the ACF admin fee from entry fees collected from its own tournaments.
For non NSWCA events the NSWCA charges the organiser the ACF admin fee.
How the organiser funds it ios up to him.

Now there is no need from a financial viewpoint for NSW to charge a seperate state rating fee. In fact what you would want to charge is a non member rating fee. This however is too difficult to administer and adds unnecessary work to the state ratings officer.
Therefore a state rating fee for non NSWCA events would be the easiest to administer. However in this case some reduction in NSWCA membership fee for members is probably justified.

PHAT
25-11-2004, 11:03 AM
From a financial viewpoint NSW has no need to charge a state rating fee
Why a stupid thing to say. There is a need to have a revenue stream and a user pays state rating fee is normal. It is abnormal to give non-members in any sport, perpetual benefits gratus.


... however to charge a non members rating fee is too difficult to administer (its been tried in the past).

Try a different method, drongo.



If you were to charge a state rating fee which applied to members (for which there is no financial reason) then you would need to reduce the membership fee by a average corresponding amount.

Now tell us all something we don't know.



The NSWJCL is responsible for junior chess in NSW.

yes


It is not for the NSWCA to dictate how it should function or spend its money.

True, as far as the word "dictate" goes. However, The NSWCA has in its constitution the following.

"2. OBJECTS

To encourage, promote, maintain and control the playing of Chess in the State of New South Wales by: -

promoting and conducting chess matches, competitions, and tournaments,

... as is necessary, affiliating or co-operating with other chess, sporting, or social organizations, ...

taking actions it deems necessary to promote the aforesaid." [bold by MS]


Well? Is the NSWCA going to take the JCL out the back and snot it for being obstructionist? The JCL executive are answerable to NOBODY. Their AGM is a non event. They do what they want with their funds and events and the NSWCA executive cower like mongrel curs.


The NSWJCL dont see Campbell St in the city as junior friendly. And has the JCL run a survey of what the parents want? No. I have never been asked and nor have I heard of any parent being asked. There is no chess admin so open to abuse of power than the JCL. While it does what does do very well, it needs to be kicked hard in the right direction.




Why didnt you turn up to the NSWJCL AGM and argue this.

Because the NSWCA council did not make me aware of the positon at the time. Typical of the secret dealings of the council - just like the refusal to release the NSWCA Survey Results.



All you show is just how financially irresponsible you are.
No one would ever put you in charge of the NSWCA finances.

The bailifs are never going to be knocking on my door.

It is the executive who are irresponsible:

Sitting on a growing nestegg with the intention of eating the hatchling to produce another egg.

Letting scab non-members get ratings without paying for the service.

Running ever smaller tournaments that are suffering financially because of the loss of the economies of scale.

Bleeding the members of a member's fee and not giving it back in prize money.


Remember, I have seen the council in inaction.

PHAT
25-11-2004, 11:13 AM
Therefore a state rating fee for non NSWCA events would be the easiest to administer. However in this case some reduction in NSWCA membership fee for members is probably justified.

If the fee was ~50c, there would be no need for poor Norm Greenwood to go twisting hundreds of begrudging arms and chasing down club teams year in year out.

Of course, that would be too provocative toward the westies and we are too spineless to call their bluff.

Bill Gletsos
25-11-2004, 11:35 AM
Why a stupid thing to say. There is a need to have a revenue stream and a user pays state rating fee is normal. It is abnormal to give non-members in any sport, perpetual benefits gratus.
The NSWCA has a revenue stream. Its a membership fee.
There is no reason at this stage for the NSWCA to charge a state rating fee for its own events and certainly no reason to base its membership on such a fee.


Try a different method, drongo.
Thats why I have suggested a state rating fee for non NSWCA events.
However the majority of council do not appear to support it.



Now tell us all something we don't know.
You apparently didnt.


Well? Is the NSWCA going to take the JCL out the back and snot it for being obstructionist? The JCL executive are answerable to NOBODY. Their AGM is a non event.
How would you know, you havent turned up to one have you, cause if you had you wouldnt have been asking stupid questions about how much they spent on supporting juniors going overseas.


They do what they want with their funds and events and the NSWCA executive cower like mongrel curs.
Its their funds not the NSWCA's, they have the right to determine how their funds are spent.



And has the JCL run a survey of what the parents want? No. I have never been asked and nor have I heard of any parent being asked. There is no chess admin so open to abuse of power than the JCL. While it does what does do very well, it needs to be kicked hard in the right direction.
The only person who needs to be kicked hard in the right direction is you.
You are a complete fool and have no clue.
You have no credability and are a joke.


Because the NSWCA council did not make me aware of the positon at the time.
Perhaps thats because you never attended Council meetings, nor contributed anything whilst on council.


Typical of the secret dealings of the council - just like the refusal to release the NSWCA Survey Results.
There was no secret dealings. As for the Survey results there was never a plan to publish them and apart from a few of you here on the BB like you, Paul S and Brian there have been no requests by members to do so.



Remember, I have seen the council in inaction.
Yes you were the master of inaction.
You did absolutely nothing whilst on council.
You are just a loud mouthed joke.
You have no credability.

Bill Gletsos
25-11-2004, 11:41 AM
If the fee was ~50c, there would be no need for poor Norm Greenwood to go twisting hundreds of begrudging arms and chasing down club teams year in year out.
There is no way the NSWCA would base its membership fee on a rating fee.
As for Norm chasing people for membership fees, this really only applies to the Grade matches where he chases the clubs for the players membership fees. Since the followup is with the clubs (it is after all a club competition) this isnt a major problem.


Of course, that would be too provocative toward the westies and we are too spineless to call their bluff.
You as usual have no clue what you are talking about.

arosar
25-11-2004, 11:47 AM
Oi! Fellas . . . did someone lead the chorus in welcoming Matt?

If not, let's go. All together now: "WELCOME BACK MATT!!"

AR

Bill Gletsos
25-11-2004, 11:53 AM
Oi! Fellas . . . did someone lead the chorus in welcoming Matt?

If not, let's go. All together now: "WELCOME BACK MATT!!"

AR
Well he is still as clueless now as before his break.

PHAT
25-11-2004, 12:00 PM
Well he is still as clueless now as before his break.

Your problem is that I know too much.

Bill Gletsos
25-11-2004, 12:06 PM
Your problem is that I know too much.
Actually you know very little.

PHAT
25-11-2004, 12:16 PM
There is no reason at this stage for the NSWCA to charge a state rating fee for its own events and certainly no reason to base its membership on such a fee.

CRAP. The reason is that non-members are getting fee rating services.



I have suggested a state rating fee for non NSWCA events.
However the majority of council do not appear to support it.

You got that right. The council is inward-looking and certain councillors are protecting their own turf to the deterement of the rest of NSW chess.


How would you know, you havent turned up to one [JCL AGM] have you, cause if you had you wouldnt have been asking stupid questions about how much they spent on supporting juniors going overseas.

I've been at 2. I saw no evidence of desemination of reports, financial or otherwise.


Its their funds not the NSWCA's, they have the right to determine how their funds are spent.

And it is the responsibility of the NSWCA to kick all the NSW clubs, coaches, organisations, players and retailers et cetera into line for the good of NSW chess.


... apart from a few of you here on the BB like you, Paul S and Brian there have been no requests by members to do so.

So, are you going to meet the requests for the info from 3 paid up members?


I guess we will see why PeterC was gathering proxies. I wonder what kind of underhand overkill of the rank and file at the AGM has been planned.

Bill Gletsos
25-11-2004, 12:23 PM
CRAP. The reason is that non-members are getting fee rating services.
Your comprehension skills are the only thing that is crap.
I said there is no reason for a state rating fee for its own events.
To play in NSWCA events you have to be a member.



You got that right. The council is inward-looking and certain councillors are protecting their own turf to the deterement of the rest of NSW chess.
Rubbish.


I've been at 2. I saw no evidence of desemination of reports, financial or otherwise.
Well it would appear you never asked about them.



And it is the responsibility of the NSWCA to kick all the NSW clubs, coaches, organisations, players and retailers et cetera into line for the good of NSW chess.
Rubbish.



So, are you going to meet the requests for the info from 3 paid up members?
No.


I guess we will see why PeterC was gathering proxies. I wonder what kind of underhand overkill of the rank and file at the AGM has been planned.
You have never represented the rank and file.

Garvinator
25-11-2004, 12:32 PM
You have never represented the rank and file.
From my understanding, Matt represented nothing when on the nswca council :hand: tough to represent something when you dont do anything.

PHAT
25-11-2004, 12:54 PM
From my understanding, Matt represented nothing when on the nswca council :hand: tough to represent something when you dont do anything.

It is hard for you up there in QLD to all that goes on in the NSW. Suffice to say, Bill is being economical with the truth.

Now, if you wish to become a destroyed target, just continuing being Big Dog's, Me-Too.

PHAT
25-11-2004, 12:56 PM
Rubbish.


Nice come-back! But it won't be enough on Sunday.

Bill Gletsos
25-11-2004, 01:01 PM
It is hard for you up there in QLD to all that goes on in the NSW. Suffice to say, Bill is being economical with the truth.
Rubbish.
You attended the January and March meetings.
You missed the February, April, May and June meetings all without any apology either before or after the meeting.
You promised at both the January and March meetings to organise a meeting of the SCC committee during the following month, however you did not do so on either occasion.
You did not take part in any email discussion after the 5th of April and you only responded 3 times between the the 7th Feb and the 5th April (2 of the posts were on this day).

PHAT
25-11-2004, 01:11 PM
Rubbish.
You attended the January and March meetings.
You missed the February, April, May and June meetings all without any apology either before or after the meeting.
You promised at both the January and March meetings to organise a meeting of the SCC committee during the following month, however you did not do so on either occasion.
You did not take part in any email discussion after the 5th of April and you only responded 3 times between the the 7th Feb and the 5th April (2 of the posts were on this day).

The file is not the person.

Haven't you something better to do than spend time compiling dosiers on your critics? You are demonstrating paranoiac behaviour. Are you attending theropy for it, or are you concentrating on mastering your autism first.

Bill Gletsos
25-11-2004, 01:18 PM
Haven't you something better to do than spend time compiling dosiers on your critics?
No dossier at all.
It only takes a minute or so to check archived email.
Plus it was documented previously on the BB.
I was just saving posters the trouble of having to find it.


You are demonstrating paranoiac behaviour. Are you attending theropy for it, or are you concentrating on mastering your autism first.
No paranoia at all.
Just making sure your contribution whilst on council is acknowledged and letting your record speak for itself.
You are just a loud mouthed blow hard who did nothing yet criticise those council members who actually do.
You are a joke with no credability.

Trent Parker
25-11-2004, 01:20 PM
hmm i've created a flamewar :lol:

Garvinator
25-11-2004, 01:25 PM
hmm i've created a flamewar :lol:
you had to know that this would happen as soon as Bill and Matt came together again. :hand:

Bill Gletsos
25-11-2004, 01:44 PM
Nice come-back! But it won't be enough on Sunday.
As I said you represent no one but yourself.
You are a joke with no credability.

ursogr8
25-11-2004, 01:52 PM
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx :hand:

Bill

Have you declared yourself on user-pays as a charging strategy for rating fees?

starter

Bill Gletsos
25-11-2004, 01:52 PM
And has the JCL run a survey of what the parents want? No. I have never been asked and nor have I heard of any parent being asked. There is no chess admin so open to abuse of power than the JCL.
I should have addressed this more in my earlier response.

Their AGM is advertised in their magazine. The financial statements of the NSWJCL are available at their AGM.

The NSWJCL committee is made of of over 50% of parents of the children who are in the NSWJCL. Those parents represent the views of the other parents. It is the parents of children who have questioned the junior friendliness of an inner city chess centre.

If you actually turned up to more NSWJCL events and spoke to the people you would actually have a clue what is going on. Perhaps that is just asking too much. You have no clue.

Instead you just make stupid statements based on your limited understanding of the NSWJCL.

You have no credability.

Bill Gletsos
25-11-2004, 02:00 PM
Bill

Have you declared yourself on user-pays as a charging strategy for rating fees?

starter
NSW has no need for a state rating fee covering every event in NSW.

I believe there is a need for a state rating fee for non NSWCA events on top of the ACF admin fee, however since this would also affect NSWCA members then perhaps a slight reduction in NSWCA would need to be considered.

Of course you could just impose said fee without any reduction in membership fee but I'm not sure thats desirable.

I would envisage a NSW state rating fee for non NSWCA events as being the same as the ACF admin fee.

ursogr8
25-11-2004, 02:50 PM
NSW has no need for a state rating fee covering every event in NSW.

I believe there is a need for a state rating fee for non NSWCA events on top of the ACF admin fee, however since this would also affect NSWCA members then perhaps a slight reduction in NSWCA would need to be considered.

Of course you could just impose said fee without any reduction in membership fee but I'm not sure thats desirable.

I would envisage a NSW state rating fee for non NSWCA events as being the same as the ACF admin fee.

Bill

The question was simple >
"Have you declared yourself on user-pays as a charging strategy for rating fees?".

Could you just respond
a) I am in favour of a user-pays charging strategy for rating fees, or
b) I am not in favour of a user-pays charging strategy for rating fees.

starter

Rincewind
25-11-2004, 06:16 PM
Ok, thread reopened. Please stick to matter chess. For discussion on personality differences please stick to the non-chess threads or better still just wait till Sunday and do it tete-a-tete.

Bill Gletsos
25-11-2004, 08:36 PM
Bill

The question was simple >
"Have you declared yourself on user-pays as a charging strategy for rating fees?".

Could you just respond
a) I am in favour of a user-pays charging strategy for rating fees, or
b) I am not in favour of a user-pays charging strategy for rating fees.

starter
I replied to this in the agm thread.

Paul S
26-11-2004, 08:44 PM
What about having the players games rated but not published ???

Sounds fair enough to me.

Bill Gletsos
26-11-2004, 09:24 PM
Sounds fair enough to me.
Faor has nothing to do with it.
It isnt practical.
I will explain it again so even you understand.
If a tournament is submitted by a state for rating to the ACF then the ACF will process it.
The ACF will publisgh ratings for all players on the master file.