PDA

View Full Version : Mt Buller - updated ACF Announcement + CALL FOR NEW BIDS



Pages : [1] 2

george
02-07-2004, 01:48 PM
Hello All,

Following the ACF Executive meeting last evening I was authorised to continue pursuing the Mt Buller option provided certain conditions were met.

This was considered both desirable and prudent as the total Sponsorship offered in Cash and Inkind sponsorship was to the tune of $116,000.

The Financial guarantee required by the ACF Executive will be met within 48 hours of the awarding of the Events to Mt Buller if such happens on the 12 July at the ACF Council Meeting.

The ACF now officially declares that the agreed Tournaments which were allocated to Chess Victoria to be held at Mt Buller no longer are valid.

The ACF calls on all States/Territories to submit a proposal to hold all or any of the Australian Open , Australian Junior or Schools Finals.

Submissions need to reach the ACF Secretary before 2.00pm on the 11th July.

I also ask for any or all Chess Organisers whom may be interested in still holding these three events at Mt Buller to contact me IMMEDIATELY on 0414841575. I am the first point of call for any negotiations.
I personally feel that this sponsorship if signed off and guaranteed is just too good to ignore and would be foolish in the extreme to ignore.
David Cordover has stated to me that he would make available to any ACF Approved Organiser all the information and developement he has done in relation to the Mt Buller Program. It does not have to be a state or territory who wishes to Organise these events but could be an individual who would organise these events on behalf of the ACF rather than a state/territory intermediatory.

As I said in my opening post of the previous ACF Mt Buller announcement nothing should be assumed to have concluded until the ACF Council has made its decisions on 12 July. What can be concluded however is that Chess Victoria with David Cordover as the main Organiser will not be conducting the three events at Mt Buller.

George Howard
President ACF

Trent Parker
02-07-2004, 02:21 PM
http://www.chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=905&page=1
Huh??? whats happening.

george
02-07-2004, 02:29 PM
Hi All,

What is happening is that Mt Buller with all the Sponsorship intact is still a possibility provided someone other than Chess Victoria with David Cordover as the Main Organiser is interested in running the events.

But it is now also possible for the new Chess Victoria bid (I understand with David as the Main Organiser)to be submitted to the ACF Officially before 2.00pm on 11th July along with any other bids from States/Territories.

Regards
George Howard

Garvinator
02-07-2004, 02:33 PM
would this be a fair summary.

In short, all negotations between David and Mt Buller have finished, this leaves the following options:

1) a new organisation/person steps in to organise and continue terms with mt buller
2) accept davids idea/proposal for a melbourne based chess championship
3) a completely new bid, similiar like Peter Parr's idea for central sydney
4) a whole new proposal which has not been mentioned at all so far

Bill Gletsos
02-07-2004, 02:34 PM
Huh??? whats happening.
Did you really need to quote that from the other thread just to make the above comment.

george
02-07-2004, 02:43 PM
Hi Bill,

Can you call me please ASAP I have lost your telehone number and the NSW Chess Site unfortunately doesnt include your phone number.

Thanks mate.

George Howard

Bill Gletsos
02-07-2004, 02:54 PM
Done.

shaun
02-07-2004, 08:39 PM
Bid for Australian Open
=================
Venue: Canberra - I'm pretty confident I can get the use of Parliament House for the event as it is pretty quiet during December/January
Prize Money:At least $1,000,000 (assuming 50,000 entrants)
Overseas players: I've been contacted by hundreds of Grandmasters interested in playing and without giving away too much the names Kasparov, Karpov, Spassky and Fischer have been discussed. There is also a possibility I can convince Lasker, Alekhine and Capablanca to play as they are "down under" anyway.

Now, how could the ACF refuse such an offer. It is unlikely a chance to hold a tournament of this calibre will arise again for the next 100 or so years.

*NB: If the above arrangements fall through I am happy to organise a much reduced event, especially as no-one else will have the lead time to organise a half-way decent event.

Bill Gletsos
02-07-2004, 08:57 PM
Bid for Australian Open
=================
Venue: Canberra - I'm pretty confident I can get the use of Parliament House for the event as it is pretty quiet during December/January
Prize Money:At least $1,000,000 (assuming 50,000 entrants)
Overseas players: I've been contacted by hundreds of Grandmasters interested in playing and without giving away too much the names Kasparov, Karpov, Spassky and Fischer have been discussed. There is also a possibility I can convince Lasker, Alekhine and Capablanca to play as they are "down under" anyway.

Now, how could the ACF refuse such an offer. It is unlikely a chance to hold a tournament of this calibre will arise again for the next 100 or so years.

*NB: If the above arrangements fall through I am happy to organise a much reduced event, especially as no-one else will have the lead time to organise a half-way decent event.
Very clever Shaun. :lol:

eclectic
02-07-2004, 09:02 PM
Bid for Australian Open
=================
Venue: Canberra - I'm pretty confident I can get the use of Parliament House for the event as it is pretty quiet during December/January
Prize Money:At least $1,000,000 (assuming 50,000 entrants)
Overseas players: I've been contacted by hundreds of Grandmasters interested in playing and without giving away too much the names Kasparov, Karpov, Spassky and Fischer have been discussed. There is also a possibility I can convince Lasker, Alekhine and Capablanca to play as they are "down under" anyway.

Now, how could the ACF refuse such an offer. It is unlikely a chance to hold a tournament of this calibre will arise again for the next 100 or so years.

*NB: If the above arrangements fall through I am happy to organise a much reduced event, especially as no-one else will have the lead time to organise a half-way decent event.

Shaun,

If you actually did pull off the above miracle [ ;) ] you'd be elected unopposed as FIDE's next president.

eclectic

Garvinator
02-07-2004, 09:08 PM
Shaun,

you'd be elected unopposed as FIDE's next president.

eclectic
and that would be the best reason not to run the tournament :whistle:

ursogr8
03-07-2004, 02:16 PM
The Whitehorse Junior Chess Club will be a bidder for the Australian Junior tournament now to be decided at the next ACF meeting.

Whitehorse Junior Chess Club (WHJC) has recently conducted the successful 2004 Victorian Junior, and web-site details of this event are at
http://www.boxhillchess.org.au/vicchess/

Whitehorse shares the same premises and Committee as the Box Hill Chess Club.
Box Hill recently ran the 2004 Victorian OPEN week-ender.

WHJC have already been allocated a significant pledge from the local council to offset the cost of renting a venue for the Australian OPEN. The venue will the carpeted and spacious. It is the Lower Town Hall; which has been used for major events previously.
Accommodation in dormitories, at a local private school, has been discussed in principle with the school, and promises to be a low cost option for those coming from interstate and requiring somewhere to stay for the duration of the tournament.

WHJC plan to put together the same electronic facilities that drew recent praise from chess-tourist Amiel Rosario. Namely, DGT boards to capture the top board games live; independent viewing gallery, and all games entered into the web-site data-base.

Victorian entrants will welcome the reduced cost of a tournament site at Box Hill instead of Mt Buller, and a major increased turn-out of Victorian talent is expected.

Box Hill is a major transport hub for the east of Melbourne and will suit those juniors who live anywhere on the Melbourne rail network. Box Hill is also well-serviced by buses and trams.

We hope that the Box Hill bid will become the preferred solution of Chess VICTORIA for presentation to the ACF.


starter

Garvinator
03-07-2004, 04:05 PM
just curious starter, this may be of no concern to whitehorse, but have you considered how this might affect the complete mt buller bid?

Alan Shore
03-07-2004, 04:09 PM
Personally I think people should wait just that tiny bit longer and at least hear out the new Mt Buller bid before everyone starts throwing offers on the table, another week or two of consideration can't hurt.

Garvinator
03-07-2004, 04:11 PM
Personally I think people should wait just that tiny bit longer and at least hear out the new Mt Buller bid before everyone starts throwing offers on the table, another week or two of consideration can't hurt.
that would be nice, but as George Howard has said, new bids are being called for and must be in by July 11 ready for the acf council meeting on July 12. So i guess other bidders have no choice about when they bid.

Alan Shore
03-07-2004, 04:36 PM
that would be nice, but as George Howard has said, new bids are being called for and must be in by July 11 ready for the acf council meeting on July 12. So i guess other bidders have no choice about when they bid.

True.. I don't think they've given bidders sufficient time. Would be better to wait and have confirmed venues rather than bidding only to have things fall through :eek:

ursogr8
03-07-2004, 05:24 PM
just curious starter, this may be of no concern to whitehorse, but have you considered how this might affect the complete mt buller bid?

gr'gr'

The ACF President started this thread with a call for bids. And he put a tight dead-line of 2pm 11/7 on bids being tabled.
How easy do you think it is to put a bid togther; particularly the three tough items > venue >> Council grants >>> cheap accommodation options?
Step 1...we bid...right.

So, no, we have not turned our mind to being an ACF Councillor and looked at the impact of one bid on another. The ACF will have the details and will manage the decision, superbly.


starter

ursogr8
03-07-2004, 05:26 PM
Personally I think people should wait just that tiny bit longer and at least hear out the new Mt Buller bid before everyone starts throwing offers on the table, another week or two of consideration can't hurt.

Why BD would you think that? Just a feeling? Or some rationale?

Are you not the person who likes rapid activities rather than prolonged thought?

starter

ursogr8
03-07-2004, 05:29 PM
True.. I don't think they've given bidders sufficient time. Would be better to wait and have confirmed venues rather than bidding only to have things fall through :eek:

WHJC has a confirmed venue BD and a confirmed $3000 grant.

starter

Alan Shore
03-07-2004, 07:42 PM
Why BD would you think that? Just a feeling? Or some rationale?

Are you not the person who likes rapid activities rather than prolonged thought?

starter

Don't be a git, surely you can see the benefits of not foolishly rushing into things. :rolleyes:

Alan Shore
03-07-2004, 07:44 PM
WHJC has a confirmed venue BD and a confirmed $3000 grant.

starter

Well Speedy Gonzales, that's quite good given the time constraints. Or perhaps it was a backup plan that was there all along ;)

Garvinator
03-07-2004, 08:06 PM
WHJC has a confirmed venue BD and a confirmed $3000 grant.

starter
interesting situation this is for cv and acf. Do bids need to have state approval before being considered by the acf? If so, does this mean that this new bid has to pass cv approval and move into the number one position for acf consideration.

when is the next cv committee meeting if this is the case? is it before july 11? If not and my hypothesis is correct, that a new bid must have state approval before being considered by the acf, then how can the new bid get passed by cv before being considered by the acf?

Interesting times ahead :hmm:

Bill Gletsos
03-07-2004, 08:39 PM
Do bids need to have state approval before being considered by the acf?
Although I think it would generally be desireable, according to the current ACF By-laws I believe the answer is it isnt required.

ursogr8
04-07-2004, 08:13 AM
Don't be a git, surely you can see the benefits of not foolishly rushing into things. :rolleyes:

BD
We are not rushing into things. WHJC constructed this proposal and negotiated prices back in late 2003. Our bid just for the Juniors OPEN was overtaken by the package proposal for all events at Mt Buller.
It only took a few phone calls to confirm the venue was still available, the grant was still available, and the school facilities are still available.

So what benefit is there in submitting our proposal closer to the July 11th deadline?

I notice you lapsing into your old habit of name calling.




Well Speedy Gonzales, that's quite good given the time constraints. Or perhaps it was a backup plan that was there all along ;)



We are not rushing into things. WHJC constructed this proposal and negotiated prices back in late 2003. Our bid just for the Juniors OPEN was overtaken by the package proposal for all events at Mt Buller.
It only took a few phone calls to confirm the venue was still available, the grant was still available, and the school facilities are still available.

I notice you lapsing into your old habit of name calling, a second time.

starter

ursogr8
04-07-2004, 08:21 AM
interesting situation this is for cv and acf. Do bids need to have state approval before being considered by the acf? If so, does this mean that this new bid has to pass cv approval and move into the number one position for acf consideration.

when is the next cv committee meeting if this is the case? is it before july 11? If not and my hypothesis is correct, that a new bid must have state approval before being considered by the acf, then how can the new bid get passed by cv before being considered by the acf?

Interesting times ahead :hmm:

a'a''

Next CV Executive meeting was not scheduled until August. Hence it is important for WHJC to make its proposal visible now instead of taking the risk that CV treats as 'still in the mail'.

If we really needed a STATE sponsorship, and we could not get a CV tick, then we would have to approach Tas. on the basis of a profit sharing arrangement for their imprimatur.

Of course, CV could have a phone hook-up.
Anyhow, our bid is now on its way to Gazza AND the ACF President.

starter

ursogr8
04-07-2004, 09:43 AM
WHJC has a confirmed venue BD and a confirmed $3000 grant.

starter

Venue size can take 200 players

Likely costs of accommodation options are >
Dormitory accommodation $25 / night including breakfast.
Shared room accommodation $30 / night including breakfast
Single room accommodation $35 / night including breakfast.

Preliminary booking of venue made for January 10 to January 22.
Also
If required we will be able to run the national schools competition over the weekend of January 8 and 9 at the Box Hill Chess club with which you are familiar from Amiel's pics recently.

starter

jenni
04-07-2004, 10:23 AM
The schools comp most desirably should be in the school year - I think the ACT will be putting in a bid for the schools

Garvinator
04-07-2004, 10:46 AM
is it both the act and whitehorse opinions that the mt buller deal is dead, cause i thought the opportunities offered by mt buller is the way we should head as a sport, including the media stuff.

ursogr8
04-07-2004, 11:05 AM
is it both the act and whitehorse opinions that the mt buller deal is dead, cause i thought the opportunities offered by mt buller is the way we should head as a sport, including the media stuff.

gra'g'

I thought my post #17 answered this question.
The issue you raise is for the decision-maker to judge...the ACF.

WHJC does not have an opinion on the Mt Buller deal.




starter

ps One good thing is that your repeated question allowed my repeated answer...and hence another post to close the differential.

Bill Gletsos
04-07-2004, 11:39 AM
Venue size can take 200 players

Likely costs of accommodation options are >
Dormitory accommodation $25 / night including breakfast.
Shared room accommodation $30 / night including breakfast
Single room accommodation $35 / night including breakfast.

Preliminary booking of venue made for January 10 to January 22.
Also
If required we will be able to run the national schools competition over the weekend of January 8 and 9 at the Box Hill Chess club with which you are familiar from Amiel's pics recently.

starter
When considering the Guru's plans for Mt. Buller over the past few months the ACF Council had agreed that the ASCC should be held in early December.

I'm not convinced the ASCC needs to be part of the Aus Open/Aus Junior Mt. Buller package.

ursogr8
04-07-2004, 11:56 AM
When considering the Guru's plans for Mt. Buller over the past few months the ACF Council had agreed that the ASCC should be held in early December.

I'm not convinced the ASCC needs to be part of the Aus Open/Aus Junior Mt. Buller package.
Thanks Bill
I did preface the sentence with 'If required'.
I am therefore taking your post to mean there is no need for WHJC to offer a back-up solution for 8-9/Jan. It was not high on our ambition anyway.

starter

Alan Shore
04-07-2004, 02:41 PM
BD
We are not rushing into things. WHJC constructed this proposal and negotiated prices back in late 2003. Our bid just for the Juniors OPEN was overtaken by the package proposal for all events at Mt Buller.
It only took a few phone calls to confirm the venue was still available, the grant was still available, and the school facilities are still available.

Therefore I was correct in reasoning this plan had been constructed before.


I notice you lapsing into your old habit of name calling.

Firstly, I see no difference in veiled name-calling (such is your practice) than my forthright expressions - it's apparent to anyone who can read between the lines. Secondly, if you're so sensitive to be insulted by my harmless little quips you most likely deserve to be.

ursogr8
04-07-2004, 05:47 PM
Therefore I was correct in reasoning this plan had been constructed before.





At 7.42 pm you said
"Don't be a git, surely you can see the benefits of not foolishly rushing into things. "

Two minutes later you had changed to
"Well Speedy Gonzales, that's quite good given the time constraints. Or perhaps it was a backup plan that was there all along

It seems to my reading that there was no reasoning on your part; just an incorrect assumption first, then frantic guessing as you saw that your assumption was wrong.




Firstly, I see no difference in veiled name-calling (such is your practice) than my forthright expressions - it's apparent to anyone who can read between the lines.



In 1400 of my posts no-one else has commented that I have written anything between the lines. You are the first and only one.
Veiled name-calling eh. Not even Sweeney and Bill have invented that phrasing. I wonder what it means?


Therefore I was correct in reasoning this plan had been constructed before.


Secondly, if you're so sensitive to be insulted by my harmless little quips you most likely deserve to be.


Did I say I was insulted that you called me a git? Just trying to help you mate understand the difference between
> a point in favour of whatever you are proposing, and
>> a name-call

Now, are you going to use one of your posts to expand on my question where you claimed a benefit in delaying the WHJC bid further
given
· Mt Buller fell over Saturday last
· Bids close 2pm 11 July


starter

Libby
04-07-2004, 06:23 PM
The schools comp most desirably should be in the school year - I think the ACT will be putting in a bid for the schools

Yes - poor (?) Jenni is a little out of the loop as she happily sunbathes in northern parts. In the ACT we had made some preliminary enquiries with a view to bid for the Australian Schools in 2005 or 2006. The ACT has been an enthusiastic participant in the Australian Schools events since the events, in their current format, began.

We have no intention of hijacking the arrangements of others. What we do have, with 3 of our 4 schools events completed locally already, are many players with bemused parents. Is it January or December? What teams? All teams? Where to stay in Mt Buller itself (I had counselled to wait until the organisers confirmed the packages for the schools comp). Now not Mt Buller? Where is it to be then?

Schools teams in the ACT usually include 1-2 active chess players and 2-3 children with an interest in chess but for whom this is the first competitive experience with the game. Equally so for the families. This doesn't leave them with a very good impression of our game. We can finger point (or not) as much as we like but outsiders think we look like a bunch of dills.

So yes, the ACT will put together a bid to host the 2004 Australian Schools Championship. Our plans for 2005/6 were in their infancy so we are not quite as advanced as WHJC with the alternative Aus Jnr bid. We are also at the beginning of the ACT school holidays making some of our committee unavailable to assist, and presenting some problems in getting firm discussions underway with our preferred school venue but we do expect to have enough details ready by 11 July.

Happy to hear from anyone with comments/reservations. We are also quite happy to travel (as we have demonstrated over many years) to any other state & venue as awarded by the ACF. Above all however, we would like to see this resolved soon and with some certainty.

Libby :rolleyes:

Garvinator
04-07-2004, 06:26 PM
Above all however, we would like to see this resolved soon and with some certainty.

Libby :rolleyes:
the acf council meets on july 12 to decide most of these matters, so you should have your answers a couple of days later.

Alan Shore
04-07-2004, 06:31 PM
In 1400 of my posts no-one else has commented that I have written anything between the lines. You are the first and only one.
Veiled name-calling eh. Not even Sweeney and Bill have invented that phrasing. I wonder what it means?

Did I say I was insulted that you called me a git? Just trying to help you mate understand the difference between
> a point in favour of whatever you are proposing, and
>> a name-call

It was here:


Why BD would you think that? Just a feeling? Or some rationale?

Are you not the person who likes rapid activities rather than prolonged thought?

Something you've hinted at many times before in other posts. First you make a ridiculous generalisation and second it may be implied you're suggesting I don't think things through. However, I've never whined about your veiled innuendos before, unlike yourself who seem to continue to kick up a fuss at the slightest indiscretions, almost as much as you carry on about postcount (ggray remarked to me he is quite tired of it himself...). This is the final time I will get drawn in, consider the matter closed.



At 7.42 pm you said
"Don't be a git, surely you can see the benefits of not foolishly rushing into things. "

Two minutes later you had changed to
"Well Speedy Gonzales, that's quite good given the time constraints. Or perhaps it was a backup plan that was there all along

It seems to my reading that there was no reasoning on your part; just an incorrect assumption first, then frantic guessing as you saw that your assumption was wrong.

Now, are you going to use one of your posts to expand on my question where you claimed a benefit in delaying the WHJC bid further
given
· Mt Buller fell over Saturday last
· Bids close 2pm 11 July

Now, as to my first post about foolishly rushing into things, I made this as a general statement, hence it was separate from my subsequent post about Mt Buller. Some of us do this to make distinctions rather than increase our post count, mr starter..... cough, cough. This should be explanation enough for you to see the error of your own assumptions. If not, I elaborate further - since I added the ;) for your benefit it should have been enough to plainly see my comment about the backup plan was sarcastic - i.e. of course you would have had it on ice, as it would be improbable to organise things so quickly, hence my comment about 'it would be nice if there were a little more time for the bids'. !! It's all coming together now, isn't it?

ursogr8
04-07-2004, 09:18 PM
It was here:



Something you've hinted at many times before in other posts. First you make a ridiculous generalisation and second it may be implied you're suggesting I don't think things through. However, I've never whined about your veiled innuendos before, unlike yourself who seem to continue to kick up a fuss at the slightest indiscretions, almost as much as you carry on about postcount (ggray remarked to me he is quite tired of it himself...). This is the final time I will get drawn in, consider the matter closed.




Now, as to my first post about foolishly rushing into things, I made this as a general statement, hence it was separate from my subsequent post about Mt Buller. Some of us do this to make distinctions rather than increase our post count, mr starter..... cough, cough. This should be explanation enough for you to see the error of your own assumptions. If not, I elaborate further - since I added the ;) for your benefit it should have been enough to plainly see my comment about the backup plan was sarcastic - i.e. of course you would have had it on ice, as it would be improbable to organise things so quickly, hence my comment about 'it would be nice if there were a little more time for the bids'. !! It's all coming together now, isn't it?

Thanks BD for taking the time to explain all that.
It certainly puts a different light on many of your previous statements. And now I see that you do in fact read between the lines of some of my posts; a remarkable achievement given that I don't intend nor put any more information than I actually write. Never mind, I could get lucky in some future posts in that you may interpolate good stuff between the lines.

gg'' 's comments would be more believable if there was not the strong correlation between the differential shrinking to 150 and his bouts of increased posting activity. He can have a rest for a while from his tiredness, the differential is back to 200+.

starter

Garvinator
04-07-2004, 09:25 PM
gg'' 's comments would be more believable if there was not the strong correlation between the differential shrinking to 150 and his bouts of increased posting activity. He can have a rest for a while from his tiredness, the differential is back to 200+.

starter
or i could keep posting in an effort to keep up with your crap posts about post counts, but i cant be bothered, so just keep blabbering away. Maybe you and cl do have something in common. :whistle:

ursogr8
04-07-2004, 09:29 PM
or i could keep posting in an effort to keep up with your crap posts about post counts, but i cant be bothered, so just keep blabbering away. Maybe you and cl do have something in common. :whistle:

You could look at this way > it is very Australian to bet on two flies crawling up the wall.
How much have ya got onya?
starter

Kevin Bonham
05-07-2004, 03:21 AM
You could look at this way > it is very Australian to bet on two flies crawling up the wall.

But is it Australian for the flies to bet on themselves? :eek:

ursogr8
05-07-2004, 08:21 AM
But is it Australian for the flies to bet on themselves? :eek:


Baz
That is a very observant remark of yours and very pertitent to the events of the past 4 days.

All
The President of Chess VICTORIA now has two formal bids in his hands for the AUS Junior. <Brighton Grammar from the GURU, and the Box Hill Town Hall from the Whitehorse Junior Chess Club>.

How does he decide which to put forward to the ACF as CV-blessed?



''''****Think music***''''



Of course! He must call the CV Executive to a vote. (Now where are those those minutes so that I can remember their names, mutters Gazza. That is the trouble with democracy, 'you've gotta have paperwork').

The composition of the CV Executive is interesting. CG will vote for his second-choice after Mt Buller. Whereas there are 3 Box Hill members also on the Committee. Now if Gazza calls for those with a conflict of interest to step aside then he will be left with jammo and Gazza as the only voters. The casting vote will decide........and that is Gazza's because he is the President.

This is good news for Gazza........he does not have to bother with the tiresome Committee (the one that even firegoat will not join). Gazza can decide on his own vote!!!

Deadline is 11 July; but we don't want to rush you.


starter

Rincewind
05-07-2004, 08:27 AM
Baz
That is a very observant remark of yours and very pertitent to the events of the past 4 days.

Startz,

I've been studiously silent on this issue. Perhaps you should have played the think music before you replied. ;)

ursogr8
05-07-2004, 08:35 AM
Startz,

I've been studiously silent on this issue. Perhaps you should have played the think music before you replied. ;)

Bazzzzzzzzzzz

I agree. Saw the problem myself, and corrected on the third edit. Now should be OK.
Must be careful that the moderator is not compromised.


starter
ps re your 'perhaps' >> is this a new guideline for posters? Will knock out at least half of us. ;)

Commentator
05-07-2004, 01:59 PM
just curious , this may be of no concern to whitehorse, but have you considered how this might affect the complete mt buller bid?

From memory the Box Hill Town Hall complex is now effectively abandoned as the Council has consolidated to Nunawading.
Box Hill Town Hall has been maintained in pristine.
Sufficient room to hold the AUS OPEN and the AUS Junior concurrently. Room for 400 players last time I looked.

Is this an option under consideration?

C

george
05-07-2004, 02:19 PM
Hi All,

Im sure the ACF Council would be keen to see as many bids as possible. The only thing of importance is that the outcome best benefits Australian Chess and Aussie Chessplayers both in the Short/Long term.

All other issues (apart from financials) are really irrelevant.

George Howard
President ACF

ursogr8
05-07-2004, 06:14 PM
when is the next cv committee meeting if this is the case? is it before july 11? If not and my hypothesis is correct, that a new bid must have state approval before being considered by the acf, then how can the new bid get passed by cv before being considered by the acf?

Interesting times ahead :hmm:



An important update in response to gg'' 's question.

The Chess VICTORIA Executive now plans to meet next Saturday night 10/7/4 to consider their options.

Another important update, in respect to the gg'' question of whether Whitehorse Junior Chess had an opinion on the Mt Buller >>> since I passed a comment, that WHJC had little to say on Mt Buller and were prepared to leave it to the ACF, I have suffered with phone calls from Victorian parents who point out quite strongly that the Aus. Junior rotates to VICTORIA only once every 5 years and on those occasions there is welcome finanicial relief that the VICs don't have travel costs. On this score, many VIC parents are facing an unwelcome travel and accommodation cost if the tournament is at Mt Buller.

I was given an earful about the cost of recent travel to Perth etc and there are certainly plenty of VIC parents who would vote strongly for the opportunity to have Victoria's turn at hosting actually located in the Metropolitan area rather than the bush. As a few made clear to me....the economics of Mt Buller were predicated on parent funding being channelled to premium commercial level accommodation.


(So, apologies to gg’’………..I definitely brushed off your question, and my constituency have put it back on the front burner).

starter

george
06-07-2004, 02:02 PM
Hi All,

We live in interesting times. What appears one day to be dead can be resurrected and brought to life bigger better and more affordable than ever.

Mt Buller option has NO component of filling rooms as a pre condition for it to work. People could stay wherever but obviously Mt Buller would need to make their accomodation as attractive as possible if they want people staying on the mountain.

Look to this thread for an announcement on friday.

Regards to ALL
George Howard
President ACF

arosar
06-07-2004, 02:56 PM
We live in interesting times...

Indeed! We are cursed.

AR

ursogr8
06-07-2004, 04:19 PM
Hi All,

We live in interesting times. What appears one day to be dead can be resurrected and brought to life bigger better and more affordable than ever.

Mt Buller option has NO component of filling rooms as a pre condition for it to work. People could stay wherever but obviously Mt Buller would need to make their accomodation as attractive as possible if they want people staying on the mountain.

Look to this thread for an announcement on friday.

Regards to ALL
George Howard
President ACF

George

Not sure if your post was in response to points I have made on behalf of parents (for juniors headed to the AUS. Junior); maybe not as you have not quoted mine.

But, just let me repeat on their behalf
> VIC parents are concerned about the extra cash-outflow from their pockets for a bush solution relative to a City solution (if Melbourne). The would like the rotation from State to State to give them for 1 year in 5 a lower cost outlay.
>> The bush/mountain solution will see a significant amount of money transferred from the pockets of parents, of juniors, to a commercial concern outside the chess community (i.e Mt Buller accommodation and travel).

starter

Bill Gletsos
06-07-2004, 04:25 PM
But, just let me repeat on their behalf
> VIC parents are concerned about the extra cash-outflow from their pockets for a bush solution relative to a City solution (if Melbourne). The would like the rotation from State to State to give them for 1 year in 5 a lower cost outlay.
If I recall correctly the Aus Junior was not VIC's turn anyway, therefore if it had gone to anoither state they would have bene out of pocket to a greater degree.
Also its the Aus Junior not the VIC junior so what is important is what is good for Australian chess overall and not what is good for VIC.

Garvinator
06-07-2004, 04:52 PM
George

Not sure if your post was in response to points I have made on behalf of parents (for juniors headed to the AUS. Junior); maybe not as you have not quoted mine.

But, just let me repeat on their behalf
> VIC parents are concerned about the extra cash-outflow from their pockets for a bush solution relative to a City solution (if Melbourne). The would like the rotation from State to State to give them for 1 year in 5 a lower cost outlay.
>> The bush/mountain solution will see a significant amount of money transferred from the pockets of parents, of juniors, to a commercial concern outside the chess community (i.e Mt Buller accommodation and travel).

starter


starter,

this was posted by Ian Rogers, its the mt buller side of the offer (i have quoted what is relevant to my post)



Since the original offer to the Chess Federation we have increased the offer substantially-

1. Four free rooms at the Chalet for the 26 nights (Value $13,000)

2. Free use of the Heli House for 26 nights (17 beds)) (Value $18,000)

3. Other lodge accommodation at $25 per night per bed (50% discount)

4. Free use of photocopier and internet facilities

5. Hotel vouchers as prizes to the value of $10,000 for accommodation at Accor Hotels around Australia.

6. Printing of tournament programs by Independent Distillers to the value of up to $45,000.

I also pointed out to David that Accor sponsor the Sunrise program on Channel Seven and Mt Buller has a contra financial arrangement with Channel Seven. We were well under way in the process to see if we could get the program to televise from Mt Buller during the event in order to give Chess major exposure in the main stream.

We were looking at a long term agreement at the end of this event and it is well known Accor worldwide is a major sponsor of chess. Our association could only have gotten bigger and better and Chess Australia would have been a big winner.

Yours sincerely,

Roman Solczaniuk
Event and Tournaments
Mercure Grand Chalet Mt Buller

With this deal, we will finally have an opportunity for chess to be televised. Also with the accommodation packages that have been listed here, i believe that the states other than victoria are better off as it wont cost them much more, if anything more, than it would be to stay in melbourne. I am fairly confident that buses or alike will be provided to take people from melbourne city to mt buller (this is an assumption).

Remember also that this deal about mt buller is meant to be for more than just one tournament and I think it would be in the best interest of australian chess to at least give this one opportunity a go instead of sticking with what has been done in the past.

ursogr8
06-07-2004, 05:08 PM
If I recall correctly the Aus Junior was not VIC's turn anyway, therefore if it had gone to anoither state they would have bene out of pocket to a greater degree.
Also its the Aus Junior not the VIC junior so what is important is what is good for Australian chess overall and not what is good for VIC.


Bill
You are on the ACF, right?
You will be deciding on which proposal is accepted, right?
You could be upset if I pointed out the error in your thinking, right?

I don't want you upset while you are considering our proposal.

So, I am going to let your post go through to the wicket-keeper, right.
And then I am going to tell the parents (of the juniors) who rang me to just lie back and think of cash outflow going to the greater good, right.

At another time and place, Bill I would have commented on your post, but considering you hold our proposal in your hands I am not going to point out the error of your post.

starter

ursogr8
06-07-2004, 05:16 PM
starter,

this was posted by Ian Rogers, its the mt buller side of the offer (i have quoted what is relevant to my post)



With this deal, we will finally have an opportunity for chess to be televised. Also with the accommodation packages that have been listed here, i believe that the states other than victoria are better off as it wont cost them much more, if anything more, than it would be to stay in melbourne. I am fairly confident that buses or alike will be provided to take people from melbourne city to mt buller (this is an assumption).

Remember also that this deal about mt buller is meant to be for more than just one tournament and I think it would be in the best interest of australian chess to at least give this one opportunity a go instead of sticking with what has been done in the past.

gg''

So what are you asking me to do, gg''?

starter

Garvinator
06-07-2004, 05:30 PM
gg''

So what are you asking me to do, gg''?

starter

i did have a question in mind but forgot to post it :uhoh: :uhoh:


Can you work out how much more it will cost for vic juniors to go to mt buller with the accommodation packages i have listed. Btw couldnt the vic junior chess league help (or doesnt vic have one? i genuinely dont know, i know of chess world chess ed etc but not sure if there is a vic junior chess league?)

Please also factor in that some of the vic junior players will already be present in mt buller from the australian open.


I think from my reading of all this that the mt buller deal is dependant on all three tournaments.

Garvinator
06-07-2004, 05:32 PM
i cant find it, but can someone point me in the right direction for the last ten or so australian junior championships eg venue hosts all that stuff please.

Bill Gletsos
06-07-2004, 05:44 PM
I think from my reading of all this that the mt buller deal is dependant on all three tournaments.
I dont believe this to be the case, with regards the ASCC which is after all just a 2 day event.

ursogr8
06-07-2004, 05:50 PM
i did have a question in mind but forgot to post it :uhoh: :uhoh:


Can you work out how much more it will cost for vic juniors to go to mt buller with the accommodation packages i have listed. Btw couldnt the vic junior chess league help (or doesnt vic have one? i genuinely dont know, i know of chess world chess ed etc but not sure if there is a vic junior chess league?)

Please also factor in that some of the vic junior players will already be present in mt buller from the australian open.


I think from my reading of all this that the mt buller deal is dependant on all three tournaments.

gg''

There were 97 juniors at the recent VIC OPEN. Many strong juniors missed because of EXAM clashes.

No, there is no VIC Junior League. And no cash surplus from schools.......remember the debate where GURU offered to take over the CV problem.

You do the maths on the assumptions you make.

But one family spent $4,500 to transport/house/feed all to the PERTH AUS Junior.

starter

Bill Gletsos
06-07-2004, 06:12 PM
Bill
You are on the ACF, right?
Yes, I'm the NSW delegate.


You will be deciding on which proposal is accepted, right?
You could be upset if I pointed out the error in your thinking, right?

I don't want you upset while you are considering our proposal.
When it comes to junior matters the NSWCA virtually always votes as recommended by the NSWJCL.


So, I am going to let your post go through to the wicket-keeper, right.
And then I am going to tell the parents (of the juniors) who rang me to just lie back and think of cash outflow going to the greater good, right.

At another time and place, Bill I would have commented on your post, but considering you hold our proposal in your hands I am not going to point out the error of your post.
The original bid went to Mt. Buller.
Cost wise it remaining there wont be any worse than before for Vic juniors.

Bill Gletsos
06-07-2004, 06:35 PM
i cant find it, but can someone point me in the right direction for the last ten or so australian junior championships eg venue hosts all that stuff please.
2004 - Perth
2003 - Adelaide
2002 - Sydney
2001 - Canberra
2000 - Melbourne
1999 - Hervey Bay, QLD
1998 - Unley, SA
1997 - Perth
1996 - Sydney
1995 - Canberra
1994 - Mudgeeraba, Gold Coast, QLD
1993 - Melbourne
1992 - Adelaide
1991 - Perth
1990 - Sydney

Garvinator
06-07-2004, 06:44 PM
2004 - Perth
2003 - Adelaide
2002 - Sydney
2001 - Canberra
2000 - Melbourne
1999 - Hervey Bay, QLD
1998 - Unley, SA
1997 - Perth
1996 - Sydney
1995 - Canberra
1994 - Mudgeeraba, Gold Coast, QLD
1993 - Melbourne
1992 - Adelaide
1991 - Perth
1990 - Sydney

do you know where in the rotation cycle we are? It does appear from looking at these venues that there has been some sort of rotation cycle. was 1990 the first australian junior championship?

Oepty
06-07-2004, 06:56 PM
Just so people who don't know Adelaide are not confused, Unley is a suburb of Adelaide just south of the CBD. I am not sure why Adelaide wasn't listed but the venue was probably closer to the CBD than the 2003 venue.

Also I did some research on Mt Buller and one interesting thing I found was Mt Buller aparently has one supermarket, and that is only open during winter. Other times things have to be ordered in from a near by town. This doesn't sound ideal to me.

Is there are possibility that if the Mt Buller option was some how ressurected it could be for just the open with the juniors being in Melbourne? This seems better to me than having both tournaments up there.

Scott

Bill Gletsos
06-07-2004, 06:57 PM
do you know where in the rotation cycle we are? It does appear from looking at these venues that there has been some sort of rotation cycle.
The rotation cycle simply gives the nominated state the right to hold it. If they decide not to it then goes to bids.


was 1990 the first australian junior championship?
Sometimes you amaze me gg. :doh: :doh:

It would seem you clearly were not paying attention when starter was discussing the Aus junior trophy (in the thread a challenge for forensic historians) and the the discrepancy between dates on it and the ACF web site.
The Aus junior as a tournament name has been around since 1951.
It first started in 1949 as the Schoolboys’ Championship of Australia.

Bill Gletsos
06-07-2004, 06:58 PM
Just so people who don't know Adelaide are not confused, Unley is a suburb of Adelaide just south of the CBD. I am not sure why Adelaide wasn't listed but the venue was probably closer to the CBD than the 2003 venue.\
Scott
Thanks for that Scott.
The report listed it as the City of Unley.

Garvinator
06-07-2004, 07:03 PM
Sometimes you amaze me gg. :doh: :doh:

It would seem you clearly were not paying attention when starter was discussing the Aus junior trophy (in the thread a challenge for forensic historians) and the the discrepancy between dates on it and the ACF web site.
The Aus junior as a tournament name has been around since 1951.
It first started in 1949 as the Schoolboys’ Championship of Australia.
or i just plain forgot, or more likely didnt put the two together :doh: yes i did follow that thread, obviously i should have paid more attention :oops:

or less likely but just to irritate starter, i was just trying to increase my post count ;) :lol: :whistle: :uhoh:

Bill Gletsos
06-07-2004, 08:16 PM
Btw
1991 was an U18 event but 1990 was U20.
1989 - Brisbane, no girls events only an Open with a best girl prize. This was an under 20 event not the usual U18.
1988 - Adelaide, Open and girls. Not sure if U18 or U20.
1987 - Open in sydney, Girls in Melbourne. Appears to have been U18 but not sure.
1986 - Melbourne, not sure if incorportaed girls events and if it was U18 or U20.
1985 - Perth, both Open and Girls. Appears to have been U18.

ursogr8
06-07-2004, 10:26 PM
Hi All,

We live in interesting times. What appears one day to be dead can be resurrected and brought to life bigger better and more affordable than ever.

Mt Buller option has NO component of filling rooms as a pre condition for it to work. People could stay wherever but obviously Mt Buller would need to make their accomodation as attractive as possible if they want people staying on the mountain.

Look to this thread for an announcement on friday.

Regards to ALL
George Howard
President ACF

When Matthew Sweeney commented that the GURU perhaps pulled out because the Mt Buller deal got too big for him I rather scoffed at the idea. I reasoned that the GURU could always scale it down in size to reduce his RISK, even though that would necessarily scale down the profits too.

But the scale of the exercise was indeed large as can be seen by inspecting some of the earlier versions of the Mt Buller proposals. Maybe the GURU did get cold feet because the figures got to the unbelievable stage.

If you visit the library you have a choice of versions to read.
For the SENIOR OPEN you can read the version where entry fees were $260 and anticipated 120 souls would pay this. Or a later version where entry fees were speculated at $190 and $142.50 concession.
Generates a lot of money this level of charge, but you need to if on the outgoing $15,000 is to visiting GM’s and $10,000 to the GURU management.

But the best reading is on the JUNIOR event. And is it any wonder that the bundle of events is being fought for so strongly. Try this on for size, $195 entry fee: total expected REVENUE $80,000; Junior prizes $2,000 in cash, and $2000 in kind (i.e. coaching vouchers). Where on earth does the surplus go you ask. Well, a big whack to the rooms guarantee; and a sizeable amount is transferred to the Australian OPEN prize money source. Aha. Understandable why some adults would like this approach…but not those adults who are parents of players.

My guess is that these early proposals were replaced by the GURU. He could have scaled down the junior entry to a high but feasible $90 for Juniors. If that was his most recent proposal, and it has the imprimatur of the ACF, does that mean he can charge this amount at Brighton Grammar…….his city proposal. $90 would generate a tidy surplus for the GURU; let us remember it is a building that is vacant in January, as are many other opportunities for lease.

The lesson from all this?
It is time for parents of junior players to band together and ask for the Aus Junior not be used as a slush fund to divert money to Australian OPEN. Until there is full and open disclosure of budgets for each it would be safer to stage them at separate venues.

starter

ursogr8
06-07-2004, 10:27 PM
Cost wise it remaining there wont be any worse than before for Vic juniors.

Bill,
So is the deal that is going to be put forward >> Each time the event is rotated or awarded to VICTORIA then the event heads to one of the winter resorts managed by the hotel group. Will we ever see an AUS. JUnior in Metropolitan Melbourne again?
Or, put another way, the VIC Juniors will always be travelling to this event; whether it be interstate or a winter resort. Because if someone does pick up this Buller proposal one of its rationale is that it gets replicated a number of times. That is what a relationship means, does not it?

Cost wise I think a lot folk will have doubts about repeated vistis to an expensive ski resort, now matter how often we feature on the evening news hunched over a chess board.

starter

ursogr8
06-07-2004, 10:37 PM
I think from my reading of all this that the mt buller deal is dependant on all three tournaments.

gg''
A good observation of yours.

BTW, have you added up the duration of the bush-stay of strong juniors if they wish to participate in the AUS. Junior and the Aus SENIOR. It almost corresponds to the length of the average Big Brother participant.
4 weeks stuck in Mt Buller and we may have a new reason why juniors drop out of chess.

And the parents of low-rated juniors will have been fully exploited with no significant prizes, high entry fees, and commercial accommodation costs to boot. I hope George's revelation of a new manager to take over this deal on Friday brings some equity into play for the parents of juniors.

starter

Garvinator
06-07-2004, 10:39 PM
Cost wise I think a lot folk will have doubts about repeated vistis to an expensive ski resort, now matter how often we feature on the evening news hunched over a chess board.

starter
this first one is at mt buller, but the idea from reading the posts here is for the events to be held at accor(i think) places. Now i guess that accor would be located in major cities as well.

Bill Gletsos
06-07-2004, 10:52 PM
Bill,
So is the deal that is going to be put forward >> Each time the event is rotated or awarded to VICTORIA then the event heads to one of the winter resorts managed by the hotel group. Will we ever see an AUS. JUnior in Metropolitan Melbourne again?
Dont be stupid thats not what I said.
I said the vent was originally scheduled in 2005 for Mt Buller so it remaining there makes no difference.


Or, put another way, the VIC Juniors will always be travelling to this event; whether it be interstate or a winter resort. Because if someone does pick up this Buller proposal one of its rationale is that it gets replicated a number of times. That is what a relationship means, does not it?
Thats not my current understanding but even if it was, it would certainly be cheaper for you mexicans than going to sydney, Brisbaane, Adelaide or Perth.


Cost wise I think a lot folk will have doubts about repeated vistis to an expensive ski resort, now matter how often we feature on the evening news hunched over a chess board.
Given you have no clue what the new organisers planned charges might be this seems like just idle speculation.

Garvinator
06-07-2004, 10:57 PM
If you visit the library you have a choice of versions to read.
For the SENIOR OPEN you can read the version where entry fees were $260 and anticipated 120 souls would pay this. Or a later version where entry fees were speculated at $190 and $142.50 concession.
Generates a lot of money this level of charge, but you need to if on the outgoing $15,000 is to visiting GM’s and $10,000 to the GURU management.

But the best reading is on the JUNIOR event. And is it any wonder that the bundle of events is being fought for so strongly. Try this on for size, $195 entry fee: total expected REVENUE $80,000; Junior prizes $2,000 in cash, and $2000 in kind (i.e. coaching vouchers). Where on earth does the surplus go you ask. Well, a big whack to the rooms guarantee; and a sizeable amount is transferred to the Australian OPEN prize money source. Aha. Understandable why some adults would like this approach…but not those adults who are parents of players.

My guess is that these early proposals were replaced by the GURU. He could have scaled down the junior entry to a high but feasible $90 for Juniors. If that was his most recent proposal, and it has the imprimatur of the ACF, does that mean he can charge this amount at Brighton Grammar…….his city proposal. $90 would generate a tidy surplus for the GURU; let us remember it is a building that is vacant in January, as are many other opportunities for lease.

starter

what do you think is an acceptable and fair entry fee for the australian open, australian junior and ascc?

ursogr8
06-07-2004, 11:02 PM
Given you have no clue what the new organisers planned charges might be this seems like just idle speculation.

Bill

The Whitehorse Junior Chess proposal to hold the Australian Junior at Box Hill, Victoria, has now been sent to the ACF President. I will wait till he has a chance to read, and then I will post on public view here tomorrow morning.

Do you know if the new Manager of the Mt Buller proposal will publish his proposal when George announces on Friday? Will he give entry fees and prize fund details? Will he indicate a guaranteed payment to the ACF for the privilege of holding this great title event? Will there be full accounting for the seniors and juniors separately?
starter

Bill Gletsos
06-07-2004, 11:04 PM
gg''
A good observation of yours.

BTW, have you added up the duration of the bush-stay of strong juniors if they wish to participate in the AUS. Junior and the Aus SENIOR. It almost corresponds to the length of the average Big Brother participant.
4 weeks stuck in Mt Buller and we may have a new reason why juniors drop out of chess.
This is just plain silly.
If the gurus plan to hold the Open and junior in melbourne is supported by CV then this 4 week agenda is valid for any interstate juniors wishing to play on both.
In fact it would have been true in the past when the junior and Open have been held in the same city.



And the parents of low-rated juniors will have been fully exploited with no significant prizes, high entry fees, and commercial accommodation costs to boot.
Isnt the Aus junior supposed to be for the elite juniors and contenders. Therefore not too many low rated juniors would likely consider entering.



I hope George's revelation of a new manager to take over this deal on Friday brings some equity into play for the parents of juniors.
Lets wait and see what eventuates.

Bill Gletsos
06-07-2004, 11:10 PM
When Matthew Sweeney commented that the GURU perhaps pulled out because the Mt Buller deal got too big for him I rather scoffed at the idea. I reasoned that the GURU could always scale it down in size to reduce his RISK, even though that would necessarily scale down the profits too.
Perhaps that is just the danger of having an organiser who has profit as an apparent major motive.


But the scale of the exercise was indeed large as can be seen by inspecting some of the earlier versions of the Mt Buller proposals. Maybe the GURU did get cold feet because the figures got to the unbelievable stage.

If you visit the library you have a choice of versions to read.
For the SENIOR OPEN you can read the version where entry fees were $260 and anticipated 120 souls would pay this. Or a later version where entry fees were speculated at $190 and $142.50 concession.
Generates a lot of money this level of charge, but you need to if on the outgoing $15,000 is to visiting GM’s and $10,000 to the GURU management.

But the best reading is on the JUNIOR event. And is it any wonder that the bundle of events is being fought for so strongly. Try this on for size, $195 entry fee: total expected REVENUE $80,000; Junior prizes $2,000 in cash, and $2000 in kind (i.e. coaching vouchers). Where on earth does the surplus go you ask. Well, a big whack to the rooms guarantee; and a sizeable amount is transferred to the Australian OPEN prize money source. Aha. Understandable why some adults would like this approach…but not those adults who are parents of players.

My guess is that these early proposals were replaced by the GURU. He could have scaled down the junior entry to a high but feasible $90 for Juniors. If that was his most recent proposal, and it has the imprimatur of the ACF, does that mean he can charge this amount at Brighton Grammar…….his city proposal. $90 would generate a tidy surplus for the GURU; let us remember it is a building that is vacant in January, as are many other opportunities for lease.

The lesson from all this?
The lesson is dont assume that another organiser would budget in a manner similar to the Guru.



It is time for parents of junior players to band together and ask for the Aus Junior not be used as a slush fund to divert money to Australian OPEN.
Can you show where this has occurred in the past, or are you simply referring to the Gurus now defunt plans.

Bill Gletsos
06-07-2004, 11:16 PM
Bill

The Whitehorse Junior Chess proposal to hold the Australian Junior at Box Hill, Victoria, has now been sent to the ACF President. I will wait till he has a chance to read, and then I will post on public view here tomorrow morning.
Personally I would have thought it would have been wiser to wait for CV to decide which Victorian bid it would be supporting.


Do you know if the new Manager of the Mt Buller proposal will publish his proposal when George announces on Friday? Will he give entry fees and prize fund details? Will he indicate a guaranteed payment to the ACF for the privilege of holding this great title event? Will there be full accounting for the seniors and juniors separately?
The requirement was for the bids to reach the ACF by the 11th July so that the ACF Council can decide at its meeting on the 12th, not to have them available by the 9th so that the bulletin board pundits can be appeased.

ursogr8
07-07-2004, 07:57 AM
Personally I would have thought it would have been wiser to wait for CV to decide which Victorian bid it would be supporting.



Bill
There are two (at least) competitors to the WHJC bid.
1 The GURUs Brighton Grammar bundled bid. And who would rely how CV votes on looking after Junior chess.
2 The new Mt Buller bundled-bid with a new Manager to be announced by George Friday 9 July. We will not get sufficient chance to see nor evaluate this new deal before the decision making on the w/e. Therefore it is next best logic to look at what were the entrails of Mt Buller bids previously.





The requirement was for the bids to reach the ACF by the 11th July so that the ACF Council can decide at its meeting on the 12th, not to have them available by the 9th so that the bulletin board pundits can be appeased.

Not looking for appeasement Bill. Just looking for transparency, and equity for the junior players community. Juniors were the big losers who were exploited in previous Mt Buller proposals.

starter

ursogr8
07-07-2004, 08:03 AM
The lesson is dont assume that another organiser would budget in a manner similar to the Guru.



Bill
Am I to infer from this that you are privy to the deal to be put forward George on Friday? The GURUs budget was driven (to fool-hardiness in the end) by the claw-back required by the hotel management. Are you saying the claw-back is significantly reduced in Friday's announcement?






Can you show where this has occurred in the past, or are you simply referring to the Gurus now defunt plans.
The GURUS plans.

starter

ursogr8
07-07-2004, 08:11 AM
Bill

The Whitehorse Junior Chess proposal to hold the Australian Junior at Box Hill, Victoria, has now been sent to the ACF President. I will wait till he has a chance to read, and then I will post on public view here tomorrow morning.

starter
Here is the letter sent to the CV PREZ.

Dear Gary

The Box Hill Chess Club, supported by its junior organisation Whitehorse Junior Chess inc., wishes to lodge a bid for the 2005 Australian Junior Championships and seeks approval of Chess Victoria for this application to go forward.
In anticipation of our bid being successful we have secured the lower Box Hill Town Hall a carpeted and well-lit venue, which will accommodate 200 players. The venue will be partly sponsored by the City of Whitehorse [nice touch that] for the tournament period and has a commercial value of $7000.
Accommodation is being negotiated with St Leo International College that has dormitory, shared room, and single room accommodation available during the tournament. Rates for occupancy of a minimum of 80 people are still under negotiation but will be quite reasonable and will not go beyond the following:
Dormitory accommodation $25 / night including breakfast.
Shared room accommodation $30 / night including breakfast
Single room accommodation $35 / night including breakfast.
Analysis rooms for visiting coaches will be available at moderate prices
Although the accommodation is some distance away from the venue a bus service connects the 2 places and the local shopping centre with food court and the local swimming pool is reasonably close.
The tournament has been set from January 10 to January 22 and we have made preliminary booking for that time
If required we will be able to run the national schools competition over the weekend of January 8 and 9 at the Box Hill Chess club with which you are familiar.
We are a serious applicant for these events and would have applied originally were it not for the exclusive nature of the Mount Buller package. We have a proven track record of tournament organisation as the success of the just completed Victorian Junior and Victorian Open indicates.
We have copied this letter to the President of the Australian Chess Federation
Please let me know if you need any further information.

Kind Regards Gerry Hartland

ursogr8
07-07-2004, 08:15 AM
And Here is the letter sent to the CV President subsequent to his inspection of the intended venue >

Dear Gary

Further to our bid for the 2005 Australian Junior Championships we put the following further information.
As it is now our understanding that it is not proposed to have the schools competition in January we submit a preliminary playing schedule prepared with the object of keeping the use rate of the very expensive town hall accommodation [even with a council grant] to a minimum. Scheduling the blitz and the rapid play tournament at the beginning and the end of the tournament at the Box Hill Chess Club will reduce the venue use and will also help to minimise the accommodation cost of visiting players who may not wish to participate in these supporting events
Rates of play will be the standard 90 minutes plus 30 seconds from move one and we have therefore allowed for 5 hour sessions
We are in the process of preparing a budget which we will submit if and when our bid becomes the official Chess Victoria approved bid, however we propose prize fund and entry fees within the range of these items in the last few tournaments.
Accommodation still under negotiation and we have no further information to add to our previous letter.
As you have inspected the venue you should have no doubt as to its suitability and we can only add that plenty of good quality tables and chairs are available, the transport of Box Hill Chess Club equipment is no problem and the use of Chess Victoria equipment can be kept to a minimum.
In addition we believe that if the ACF reverts to the Mount Buller proposition it will do great disservice to Victorian junior chess players and their families as this would be the second time in 5 years where they are faced with an away game as it were. Last year they had to fork out big money to go to WA. This year if the tournament is held at the mountain they would have to fork out big money again.


Kind Regards Gerry Hartland

Garvinator
07-07-2004, 11:00 AM
what do you think is an acceptable and fair entry fee for the australian open, australian junior and ascc?

when do i get an answer to this question starter? :confused:

Bill Gletsos
07-07-2004, 11:20 AM
Bill
Am I to infer from this that you are privy to the deal to be put forward George on Friday? The GURUs budget was driven (to fool-hardiness in the end) by the claw-back required by the hotel management. Are you saying the claw-back is significantly reduced in Friday's announcement?
I'm simply saying that you should not assume what the Guru proposed as entry fees/accommodation conditions will be the same with another organiser.

As George noted:

Mt Buller option has NO component of filling rooms as a pre condition for it to work. People could stay wherever but obviously Mt Buller would need to make their accomodation as attractive as possible if they want people staying on the mountain.

ursogr8
07-07-2004, 11:38 AM
when do i get an answer to this question starter? :confused:

g''''g''''
I think this is issue belongs on a thread of its own.
For the Australian Junior I would like to see most entrants come into a two week tournament for $60. So, if it was up to me I would set
.........Early Bird = $60
.........Normal = $80

starter

ps..............I am not involved in a bid for the AUS OPEN SENIORS, so I am not sure why you asking me the question?

Garvinator
07-07-2004, 11:44 AM
g''''g''''
I think this is issue belongs on a thread of its own.
For the Australian Junior I would like to see most entrants come into a two week tournament for $60. So, if it was up to me I would set
.........Early Bird = $60
.........Normal = $80

starter



If you visit the library you have a choice of versions to read.
For the SENIOR OPEN you can read the version where entry fees were $260 and anticipated 120 souls would pay this. Or a later version where entry fees were speculated at $190 and $142.50 concession.
Generates a lot of money this level of charge, but you need to if on the outgoing $15,000 is to visiting GM’s and $10,000 to the GURU management.


ps..............I am not involved in a bid for the AUS OPEN SENIORS, so I am not sure why you asking me the question?

I asked cause of the above quote about the aussie open entry fees, i thought you might have some general thoughts anyway about what would be a fair entry fee.

george
07-07-2004, 12:25 PM
Hello All,

Please be patient - any of the conditions for a Mt Buller new proposal if one originates will try to address many of the issues people have raised.

I will put something in this thread on Friday , so launch criticisms after that if you feel so inclined but dont try to preempt problems and issues where there may not be any.

If anyone feels like speculating etc thats there choice but in my opinion it serves no purpose.


Regards to ALL
George Howard
ACF President

arosar
07-07-2004, 12:35 PM
...so launch criticisms after that if you feel so inclined but dont try to preempt problems and issues where there may not be any.

Tell that to that bloody Queenslander!

AR

ursogr8
07-07-2004, 01:41 PM
Tell that to that bloody Queenslander!

AR


Unfair Amiel

Bill and I have speculated more.
And George with his 'I will release it so close to midnight that scrutiny will be limited', are more culpable.

starter

ps.........did I just defend gg'''''''''''? :eek:
It must be the sinister sky getting at me. ;)

george
07-07-2004, 02:06 PM
Hi Starter,

The Council will decide on 12th what happens with the bids. It is up to the ACF Council to scrutinise the bids , then when all the details of the successful bid are known people can analyse all they like and make up there own minds whether they wish to participate or not.

It is certainly not up to posters here to demand information be supplied before it is supplied to the ACF Council.

So as I said before i will post information here as a courtesy on friday.

You see Starter we live in a regime of democratically elected representatives so if you wish to have input into the decision making please contact your ACF Council Representative and let them know in no uncertain terms the extent and ferocity of your feelings. I am sure they will take due notice of your concerns.

Regards
George Howard

ursogr8
07-07-2004, 02:47 PM
Hi Starter,

You see Starter we live in a regime of democratically elected representatives so if you wish to have input into the decision making please contact your ACF Council Representative and let them know in no uncertain terms the extent and ferocity of your feelings. I am sure they will take due notice of your concerns.

Regards
George Howard

hi george
You are probably a very busy man and did not notice that I posted our formal bid for the Aus.Junior on this BB (see thread you started Mt Buller - updated ACF Announcement + CALL FOR NEW BIDS ) this morning...posts #78 and #79.
This bid was written to our formal representatives, Gary Wastell and yourself.
I am confident Gary will take due notice.
I am hopeful you will read our bid.

starter

george
07-07-2004, 03:03 PM
Hi Starter,

You are right , since the Executive meeting I have been extremely busy but will with great interest and diligence examine yours and anybody elses proposals of that you can be absolutely and positively assured. I will formally receive all bids on the morning of 12th as will all other Council members.

Kindest Regards
George Howard

Commentator
07-07-2004, 06:52 PM
Hello All,

If anyone feels like speculating etc thats their choice but in my opinion it serves no purpose.


Regards to ALL
George Howard
ACF President

Mr Howard
To be fair to bulletin board posters, the chess population expected due diligence and risk management was in place when you, the ACF, previously allocated the Mt Buller proposal to Victoria.
Obviously there was a fault in process that we would want to see corrected by the same decision-makers this time round.
Thus public speculation may be a valuable way of improving the due diligence and risk mitigation by Victoria and the ACF.

C

paulb
07-07-2004, 07:14 PM
the chess population expected due diligence and risk management was in place when you, the ACF, previously allocated the Mt Buller proposal to Victoria

Small organisations operate under limitations. Due to finite resources, organisations like the ACF have to *trust* that others will do what they claim; and orgs like the ACF often don't have a huge choice of competing proposals when allocating events, and have to make the best call they can given certain unknowns. And sometimes even though you make the best call you can - given the info and resources available - sometimes things still go wrong. Getting all huffy about it doesn't help much.

ursogr8
08-07-2004, 09:56 PM
Hello All,


The ACF now officially declares that the agreed Tournaments which were allocated to Chess Victoria to be held at Mt Buller no longer are valid.

The ACF calls on all States/Territories to submit a proposal to hold all or any of the Australian Open , Australian Junior or Schools Finals.

Submissions need to reach the ACF Secretary before 2.00pm on the 11th July.



George Howard
President ACF

Hi ALL

Just to summarise, the best bid you will see this week for the 2005 events is

AUS. Junior > Whitehorse Junior Chess at the Box Hill Town Hall......important details as per their letter to George Howard and published previously on this BB.

AUS. SENIOR OPEN > managed by David Cordover at the Caulfield Town Hall as per details supplied previously by the GURU.

Both of these are low risk, can-be-made-to-work options that share the load.

Whitehorse organisers have successfully run a Junior OPEN at Churchill, a VIC Junior, and plenty of events up to 150 participants.

The GURU has run the Australian Masters and other high profile events.

Both organisations have tabled their proposals with full visibility and have allowed public scrutiny over past weeks to evaluate.
Both organisations are here for the long haul. Box Hill (the senior club in partnership with Whitehorse Juniors) is into its 52nd year and has >160 financial members.

Ask yourself when you vote, or when you ring your delegate, have you been able to look closely at anything better.

starter

jeffrei
08-07-2004, 11:25 PM
Dear Mr Howard,

Attracting people to events at Mt Buller is a difficult task. It is abundantly clear that no matter what you do kids and parents will not be happy about the Australian Juniors being held there. Having both events at Mt Buller could only be a reasonable move if it meant that the Open was going to be such a huge success that we could disregard the disservice we are doing to the parents/kids. It is true that people might be happy about attending the Open in Mt Buller if the tournament could be hyped up enough, like the old Lidums events (lots of GMs, great organization, information available well in advance, etc). The planning that is being done for the 2006 Queenstown Chess Classic shows the sort of things needed to attract people to a remote location: http://badbishop.com/queenstownchess/. This tournament is scheduled for January 15-24 2006, but it already has a website, at least one guaranteed GM and $30,000 prizemoney! It is far too late for you or anyone else to resurrect the Mt Buller bid to the level where decent numbers of people would be happy to go there. In fact, looking at the NZ website makes we wonder why we don’t consider postponing the Mt Buller initiative until 2006, just before the Queenstown tournament. We might be able to feed off some of that event's hype, since GMs going to New Zealand might consider getting more value for their airfares by also competing at Mt Buller. It also would provide time to rebuild the Mt Buller bid’s reputation and generate some of the interest necessary to attract people to such a remote location.

I am also concerned about that 'late charge' of $28,000 David said he incurred.

Basically that is my position. Despite the inherent unsuitability of the location, an Australian Open at Mt Buller could be successful if everything went right from the beginning. About a month ago it became obvious to David Cordover that holding the Australian Open in Mt Buller was no longer a viable option. It’s even less viable now, for the following reasons:

a) The bubble has well and truly burst with regard to the tournament’s reputation. Whereas a month ago fellas like A.Rosario could still be excited about the Open in Mt Buller, now no one is excited about it and there are no countervailing factors to balance out the remote location. Even in nearby Melbourne there are very few people interested in going to Mt Buller.
b) You’ve lost all (almost all?) of the GMs originally intending to come.
c) You’ve got a month’s less time to make arrangements.
d) Bargaining power has been lost in relation to the hoteliers.

Having the Australian Open in Mt Buller could only be justified if it was going to be the kind of spectacular success that generates its own momentum. That is clearly not going to happen for 2005, and the only decent solution which remains is to go with ‘no frills’ options for the Open and the Juniors. The Box Hill Chess Club is guaranteed to do a very good job with the Australian Juniors, as they’ve done with so many other events in the past few years - the core volunteers there G.Hartland, T.Stanning and P.O'Connor are at their peak organization-wise. The Melbourne bid for the Open promises to be a plain-but-successful event in the mould of Penrith 2003. Both of these events already have sponsorship! It might not be as much as the sums being flashed around by the rival bid, but it's enough to make for some decent events. And I guarantee you’ll get many many more players at a bog-standard Open in Melbourne than you’d get at a bog-standard Open in Mt Buller (and, with changed circumstances, that is all the tournament in Mt Buller can now be).

Yours truly,
Geoff Saw.

PS: A final thought. Regardless of what you think of him, does David Cordover strike you as the sort of person who throws away genuine financial opportunities when they are placed before him?

Kevin Bonham
09-07-2004, 12:11 AM
I agree strongly with many of these points, I have just one question and one comment.



b) You’ve lost all (almost all?) of the GMs originally intending to come.

What do we know about the situation with the GMs? Is there any realistic hope of attracting any of them to the revised events? There may have been some discussion on this point but I've completely missed it.


PS: A final thought. Regardless of what you think of him, does David Cordover strike you as the sort of person who throws away genuine financial opportunities when they are placed before him?

He doesn't strike me as that at all but equally he doesn't strike me as the sort to be slaving away for weeks and weeks over an event if he knows that he'll get only a very small profit out of it. That's in contrast to the attitude of the amateur organiser who reckons that if a tournament runs smoothly and has a bottom line of zero then that's great. So just because David pikes on a bid alone, doesn't convince me that the bid must be unworkable.

However as you point out it's very late in the day to be taking a chance on this. Some people seem to be keen on the ACF taking over Mt Buller but I will need a lot of convincing that it's worth it.

AES
09-07-2004, 12:16 AM
Personally i think these kind of comments should have been sent to Mr Howard in a PRIVATE email. You even started with "Dear Mr Howard". This perhaps reflect some of the attitudes on this BB whereby privacy comes second to rumours, a good post tally and the tall poppy syndrome.

It certainly will be hard for people to come, particularly when you send such negative comments on here. With a new team running it and with the right commitment, i am sure a good turnout can be ensured.

Don't fall into the mistake of making it even harder for the new organisers to run this event-they are not to blame for the mistakes of others.

jeffrei
09-07-2004, 12:16 AM
What do we know about the situation with the GMs? Is there any realistic hope of attracting any of them to the revised events? There may have been some discussion on this point but I've completely missed it.

He doesn't strike me as that at all but equally he doesn't strike me as the sort to be slaving away for weeks and weeks over an event if he knows that he'll get only a very small profit out of it. That's in contrast to the attitude of the amateur organiser who reckons that if a tournament runs smoothly and has a bottom line of zero then that's great. So just because David pikes on a bid alone, doesn't convince me that the bid must be unworkable.

Thanks Kevin. I've replied to both your points PM since they relate to things which were told to me in confidence. Most likely I'll get the all-clear from the people who talked to me about these issues and I'll make my explanations here.

jeffrei
09-07-2004, 12:23 AM
Personally i think these kind of comments should have been sent to Mr Howard in a PRIVATE email. You even started with "Dear Mr Howard". This perhaps reflect some of the attitudes on this BB whereby privacy comes second to rumours, a good post tally and the tall poppy syndrome.

I don't think my motivations have anything to do with the above. I just think that:

a) Holding the events in Mt Buller would be a total disaster, for the reasons I've mentioned (and for some that - you're right - I can't mention in a public forum, but which have surely been expressed to Mr Howard and co already by other people).
b) There's some chance that what I say might make a difference and stop this from happening.

Trust me, I've got much better things to do! And no one is impressed by my post count.

AES
09-07-2004, 12:30 AM
No worries Jeff mate. I'm just playing Devil's advocate.

"Mr Howard, the trust you are placing in certain people is totally misplaced. " This is hard to justify. Back it up.

Don't compare with the NZ tournament. That's an argument by an analogy-an error in logical reasoning.

Ian_Rogers
09-07-2004, 01:08 AM
In view of Geoff's disparaging comments about the Mt Buller people, I would like to say that I have spoken to them a number of times and I find them absolutely sincere.
The Mt Buller people were not even told by David Cordover that he was intending to move the tournament to Melbourne - when I rang them after George Howard's press release cancelling the tournament they assured me it must be a mistake as they believed there had been no problems between them and David Cordover.
When the horrible truth was confirmed to them by David - two days later! - they were shocked and terribly disappointed. Despite all this they are still really keen to hold the tournaments.
Mt Buller have already put in writing that there are no minimum rooms to be filled by the ACF, so I think Geoff is just spreading rumours when he suggests that they will suddenly spring this on the ACF.
By all means Geoff can promote the Melbourne bid but disparaging other bids the way he has done in his open letter (and survey) seems very dirty politics.

Bill Gletsos
09-07-2004, 01:11 AM
Well said Ian.

jeffrei
09-07-2004, 01:22 AM
In view of Geoff's disparaging comments about the Mt Buller people, I would like to say that I have spoken to them a number of times and I find them absolutely sincere.
The Mt Buller people were not even told by David Cordover that he was intending to move the tournament to Melbourne - when I rang them after George Howard's press release cancelling the tournament they assured me it must be a mistake as they believed there had been no problems between them and David Cordover.
When the horrible truth was confirmed to them by David - two days later! - they were shocked and terribly disappointed. Despite all this they are still really keen to hold the tournaments.
Mt Buller have already put in writing that there are no minimum rooms to be filled by the ACF, so I think Geoff is just spreading rumours when he suggests that they will suddenly spring this on the ACF.
By all means Geoff can promote the Melbourne bid but disparaging other bids the way he has done in his open letter (and survey) seems very dirty politics.

I've decided that you're right - an open letter is an inappropriate forum to discuss the Mt Buller people.* However, I think it's naive in the extreme to think that you can learn anything about anyone from a few phone calls compared to what G.Wastell and D.Cordover have learnt about them from months of dealings. If people want to learn more about this issue I suggest they contact G.Wastell or D.Cordover. Unless you don't trust them?

I don't think disparaging the Mt Buller bid is dirty politics at all. I've simply made a number of points about the location and specifically I've contended that the location has a near-total lack of grassroots support. I stand by this. We had Mt Buller thrust on us as a fait accompli once before and we tried in vain to make the best of it. I'll be damned if I'm going to let the same thing happen again. If someone else wants to try to demonstrate that Box Hill as a venue lacks grassroots support, well...GOOD LUCK!

*In case anyone reading later is wondering, I did nothing more than suggest that I personally would distrust them, IF David is telling the truth when he mentions that $28,000 surcharge at the end of their negotiations.

AES
09-07-2004, 01:25 AM
It took a grandmaster for you to work that out?

I said that just a few posts before!

Kevin Bonham
09-07-2004, 01:46 AM
I reserve my judgement about the Mt Buller people; I haven't dealt with them, and I'm getting very conflicting messages here.

I've said it before though - had CV/CG had a contract with Mercure specifying no additional charges then the additional charge issue would surely not have come about. I still want to know why there was no contract before I take any shifting of the blame to Mercure too seriously. It's obviously a very different kettle of fish to hiring some non-profit hall or something like that.

Alan Shore
09-07-2004, 02:16 AM
It took a grandmaster for you to work that out?

I said that just a few posts before!

Quite true...

arosar
09-07-2004, 10:48 AM
Whereas a month ago fellas like A.Rosario could still be excited about the Open in Mt Buller, now no one is excited about it and there are no countervailing factors to balance out the remote location.

You're right about that. That woman Libby, in another thread, has completely captured the initial fears I had about Mt Buller: no social life, nothing to do, no shopping, etc...etc.

I still think that this is a corporate relationship that the ACF should pursue. But there is no reason to rush into it this time and have a tourn at Mt Buller this summer. To my mind, it's too late to do a good job of it. So my travel money will go to a Melbourne bidder.

AR

Rincewind
09-07-2004, 12:30 PM
You're right about that. That woman Libby, in another thread, has completely captured the initial fears I had about Mt Buller: no social life, nothing to do, no shopping, etc...etc.

Are you that intimidated by your own company?

Garvinator
09-07-2004, 12:50 PM
Are you that intimidated by your own company?
arosars avatar answers that question ;)

firegoat7
09-07-2004, 01:16 PM
structure peoples structure!

Hello again,

(thanks Jeo ;) )

Look I have said it a million times and I will say it again the structure of Australian chess is not good enough. Let us consider the Oz open as an example.

Ian Rogers has elucidated clearly that the ACF/CV/hoodooguru were welcome at MT Buller. Has anybody talked to them from the ACF? Anyone not connected with CV talked to them about the bid? Are hoodoogurus reasons for cancelling genuine? Did the ACF have any contract with CV or Hoodooguru signed in writing? or to put it more bluntly- To whom is everyone in chess accountable to? If Ian is right (and I see no reason to doubt him) then Oz chess is missing out on a significant opportunity that it promised it would meet. This reflects badly on us as an organisation. It also casts doubt on our ability to foster meaningful corporate relationships.

This has significant consequences. How can Oz chess present itself professionally if people renege on business dealings without any penalty. If Oz chess wants to be taken seriously, professionally and relational then it has to be accountable for its decisions in a mature and level headed way.

Some people say hoodooguru should run the event, wherever, I disagree. His bids should know be null and void since the ACF only accepted the Buller event. If he cannot make his promises work when representing the ACF then he should forfeit any rights to this specific event. Any event that takes 6 months to become unfeasible is simply poor management. (By the way I do not think this ought to prevent future bids from hoodooguru).

Should the ACF run the event? Ideally yes. This is the structural reform that is needed in OZ chess, the ACF ought to be more pro-active in growing its product. However, practically they are very inexperienced in running the day to day reality of tournament chess, not to mention the long term planning, as an organised collective group. But, maybe this is the long awaited straw that broke the camels back. Maybe this is the moment where the ACF says to itself "We need to behave professionally and organise at a national level".

Should CV run the event. In my opinuion no! CV has shown again that it is manipulative and simply unable to keep in check individual egos. Furthermore, having people involved at all levels of the chain is problematic and a symptom of the unregualted nature of OZ chess. Ie GW on ACF and CV. Hoodooguru is the bidding company and also on CV. When will people say " Hey focus on this position or that position, not both". It is in our (the chess communitys) best interest to enforce this principle.

Notice however 1 more important point. Notice that people are keen to run the junior but not so keen to run the Open. Why? well the answer is obvious. Money. Junior chess makes more of it. Senior chess drains the finances. The irony of course is that senior chess is the product that is the real thing. Junior chess which is a good thing, is not comparable to senior chess when it comes to quality. By quality I am talking about the actual games. This fact needs to be recognised. For sure we need to promote junior chess, but let us not forget the Australian Open is one of our most important events on the Australian calender.

Our challenge ought to be this. Rule with the sword ACF, your capable of leading us to a new era. Utilise this moment to change the structure of Australian chess. Lead by example and get the basic mechanisms of your house in order. The rest will follow automatically.

Garvinator
09-07-2004, 01:28 PM
structure peoples structure!

Hello again,

(thanks Jeo ;) )



Ian Rogers has elucidated clearly that the ACF/CV/hoodooguru were welcome at MT Buller. Has anybody talked to them from the ACF? Anyone not connected with CV talked to them about the bid? Are hoodoogurus reasons for cancelling genuine? Did the ACF have any contract with CV or Hoodooguru signed in writing? or to put it more bluntly- To whom is everyone in chess accountable to? If Ian is right (and I see no reason to doubt him) then Oz chess is missing out on a significant opportunity that it promised it would meet. This reflects badly on us as an organisation. It also casts doubt on our ability to foster meaningful corporate relationships.
firegoat, have you read alot of the previous posts, especially from George Howard?

arosar
09-07-2004, 01:41 PM
firegoat, have you read alot of the previous posts, especially from George Howard?

You are a true talent gray. Such deep and powerful riposte with your usual economic assymetry: a one-line burst to an essay. But more important is the +1 on the post count.

AR

Garvinator
09-07-2004, 01:45 PM
You are a true talent gray. Such deep and powerful riposte with your usual economic assymetry: a one-line burst to an essay. But more important is the +1 on the post count.

AR
i prefer ppl to read about history when they come on and ask alot of questions that have been previously answered. that is part of the reason bill has to keep repeating himself in debates about ratings, cause ppl might believe what other ppl have posted is right, when bill has actually answered the questions previously, but the questioner has not read the previous responses, even in the same thread :eek:

NOTORIOUS
09-07-2004, 02:27 PM
If Ian is right (and I see no reason to doubt him) then Oz chess is missing out on a significant opportunity that it promised it would meet.

I SEE EVERY REASON TO DOUBT HIM SINCE HIS OPINION WAS BASED ON JUST A FEW CONVERSATIONS. IF YOU WANT TO KNOW THE REAL NATURE OF THE "OPPORTUNITY" YOU NEED TO ASK PEOPLE WHO HAVE HAD A REAL INVOLVEMENT. I DONT KNOW WHO THAT IS BUT ITS NOT HIM.

JUST THINK ABOUT IT: IF THE DEAL BEING OFFERED BY THE HOTEL IS SO GOOD THEN WHY DID DAVID CORDOOVER BACK OUT OF IT AFTER WASTING HALF A YEAR ON IT?

IT SEEMS ROGER'S LOGIC WORKS LIKE THIS:
1. CORDOVER IS UNTRUSTWORTHY.
2. CORDOVER DOESN'T TRUST THE BULLER DEAL.
3. THEREFORE THE BULLER DEAL IS GOOD.

THIS DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE!!!!!!!!

george
09-07-2004, 02:43 PM
Hello ALL,

Jey the ACF Secretary has emailed this important news to all Councillors and I now make it available to the Australian Chess public.

There will be a revised bid formally submitted to stage the Schools Finals,Junior and Aust Open at Mt Buller.
The entry fees will be the lowest fees these tourneys have seen for over a decade.
The accomodation costs have been addressed especially for Juniors and will make staying at the Chalet irresistable.
The transport from Melbourne to Mt Buller to the Events at the commencement and conclusion will be covered with special bus transport laid on by the Organisers at no cost to the participants.
The secured playing area will be in the Abom restaraunt which can handle up to 400 players and will be provided at NO cost to the Organisers.
The Main Organiser of these three Events will be George Howard.

Regards to ALL
George Howard
President ACF

pax
09-07-2004, 03:21 PM
If you want something done properly, do it yourself eh George?

Best of luck for the success of the bid and the tournament.

george
09-07-2004, 04:28 PM
Hi All,

No matter what happens on Monday Evening all Aussie Chessplayers and indeed the ACF is grateful to David Cordover for bringing the original Mt Buller proposal to the ACF because without his work and establishing contacts etc a new improved bid would never have eventuated. So I am only too happy to give credit where credit is due - he got off his behind and went for it and now we have an updated version as a consquence of much early work by David.

Regards to ALL
George Howard
President ACF

Garvinator
09-07-2004, 04:35 PM
Hi All,

No matter what happens on Monday Evening all Aussie Chessplayers and indeed the ACF is grateful to David Cordover for bringing the original Mt Buller proposal to the ACF because without his work and establishing contacts etc a new improved bid would never have eventuated. So I am only too happy to give credit where credit is due - he got off his behind and went for it and now we have an updated version as a consquence of much early work by David.

Regards to ALL
George Howard
President ACF
ill agree with these sentiments and had similar thoughts myself.

arosar
09-07-2004, 05:00 PM
. . . [I] had similar thoughts myself.

Well of course you did!

gray for ACF prez?

AR

Libby
09-07-2004, 05:22 PM
You're right about that. That woman Libby, in another thread, has completely captured the initial fears I had about Mt Buller: no social life, nothing to do, no shopping, etc...etc.

Ah - now I feel truly part of the landscape - "that woman Libby."

ursogr8
09-07-2004, 05:28 PM
Notice however 1 more important point. Notice that people are keen to run the junior but not so keen to run the Open. Why? well the answer is obvious. Money. Junior chess makes more of it.



hi firegoat 7

Welcome back.And with your usual skill to put your finger on a key issue.
The various threads on the promotion of the forthcoming tournaments have certainly highlighted that some chess promoters are keen to transfer funds from the junior community to the senior community. Openly the GURU and jase strongly supported this idea of a funds transfer as a way of increasing the funds available to the Seniors OPEN.

On the other hand, the previous Whitehorse Junior Chess events in Victoria, if they have achieved a profit, have been ploughed this profit back into junior chess.
The ploughback has taken the form of
> assisting juniors to travel to world championships, and
>> subsidising coaching programmes
>>> seeding the funds of a new junior event
But we have not transferred money to senior activities, and we are not sitting on large reserves.

So jase and the GURU have made their position clear;and it seems to me that you are on their side?
WHJC has made their no cross-subsidy position clear.
It will be interesting to see how 'Mt Buller circa 12July 2004' detail pans out.

Perhaps this will generate debate from others on a new thread? Or is WHJC alone in wanting to keep junior money in the junior events/activities?

starter

Kevin Bonham
09-07-2004, 05:42 PM
Ah - now I feel truly part of the landscape - "that woman Libby."

Just that man AR being sexist as usual. Let me know if you want him to be muzzled.

arosar
09-07-2004, 05:45 PM
Look, I already got me mate Bazza on me case....I don't need you too! Sheesh...can't win with youse blokes.

AR

Kevin Bonham
09-07-2004, 05:51 PM
... if the ACF (or some ACF personnel) are going to be willing to step in and organise an Open at Mt Buller (with all the potential risks that entails), is there any scope for the ACF to instead pick up the Sydney Town Hall idea for the Open, which as far as we know involves far less risk (if bookings are available) but keeps falling over because no-one in NSW wants to put their hand up to run it? Then we could give the Juniors to Whitehorse and not have to worry about any of the risks involved in unravelling the unclear history between CG and Mt B. The downside, of course, is that the long-term sponsorship offers involving Mercure would probably not come to pass.

Sorry. Just want to explore all possible options ... especially in case some people who are pushing Mt B II are doing so because they want to avoid dealing with David C.

skip to my lou
09-07-2004, 06:22 PM
The Main Organiser of these three Events will be George Howard.

Hi George,

I have already done so much work for Cordover on the Open 05 site which has all gone to waste now. If you want me to do the site, let me know. I hope my work (1 month) is not completely wasted.

Bill Gletsos
09-07-2004, 06:28 PM
You are a true talent gray. Such deep and powerful riposte with your usual economic assymetry: a one-line burst to an essay. But more important is the +1 on the post count.

AR
It would appear GG's question to firegoat was valid.
He appears to have not read george howards previosu posting on the matter.

Bill Gletsos
09-07-2004, 06:30 PM
I SEE EVERY REASON TO DOUBT HIM SINCE HIS OPINION WAS BASED ON JUST A FEW CONVERSATIONS. IF YOU WANT TO KNOW THE REAL NATURE OF THE "OPPORTUNITY" YOU NEED TO ASK PEOPLE WHO HAVE HAD A REAL INVOLVEMENT. I DONT KNOW WHO THAT IS BUT ITS NOT HIM.

JUST THINK ABOUT IT: IF THE DEAL BEING OFFERED BY THE HOTEL IS SO GOOD THEN WHY DID DAVID CORDOOVER BACK OUT OF IT AFTER WASTING HALF A YEAR ON IT?

IT SEEMS ROGER'S LOGIC WORKS LIKE THIS:
1. CORDOVER IS UNTRUSTWORTHY.
2. CORDOVER DOESN'T TRUST THE BULLER DEAL.
3. THEREFORE THE BULLER DEAL IS GOOD.

THIS DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE!!!!!!!!
Perhaps Cordover no longer saw the potential to make a massive profit.
Perhaps he couldnt get along with the Mt. Buller people.

The bottom line is why would anyone listen to a unknown quantity like you as opposed to Ian. :whistle:

BroadZ
09-07-2004, 06:52 PM
Perhaps Cordover no longer saw the potential to make a massive profit.
Perhaps he couldnt get along with the Mt. Buller people.

The bottom line is why would anyone listen to a unknown quantity like you as opposed to Ian. :whistle:


no [deleted] hes sayin we should believe cordover and wastell since theyve actually had to deal with those dodgy people. it aint surprisin that ian finds the mt buller people so lovely since hes only had to deal with em on the phone and since he went in there wanting to like them caus he hates cordover.

i dont like cordover either but that doesnt mean hes always wrong

Bill Gletsos
09-07-2004, 06:58 PM
no [deleted] hes sayin we should believe cordover and wastell since theyve actually had to deal with those dodgy people. it aint surprisin that ian finds the mt buller people so lovely since hes only had to deal with em on the phone and since he went in there wanting to like them caus he hates cordover.

I dont like cordover either but that doesnt mean hes always wrong
If anyone is a [deleted] it is you.
I didnt say he was always wrong.
I questioned his motivation and his negotiation/people skills
And if I was going to take anyones opinion I would certainly take Ian's over some obnoxious little twerp like you. :whistle:

skip to my lou
09-07-2004, 07:31 PM
... if the ACF (or some ACF personnel) are going to be willing to step in and organise an Open at Mt Buller (with all the potential risks that entails), is there any scope for the ACF to instead pick up the Sydney Town Hall idea for the Open, which as far as we know involves far less risk (if bookings are available) but keeps falling over because no-one in NSW wants to put their hand up to run it? Then we could give the Juniors to Whitehorse and not have to worry about any of the risks involved in unravelling the unclear history between CG and Mt B. The downside, of course, is that the long-term sponsorship offers involving Mercure would probably not come to pass.

Sorry. Just want to explore all possible options ... especially in case some people who are pushing Mt B II are doing so because they want to avoid dealing with David C.
Didn't Peter Parr make an offer to run it in the Sydney CBD? Wouldn't this bid be a wise choice?

Kevin Bonham
09-07-2004, 07:38 PM
Didn't Peter Parr make an offer to run it in the Sydney CBD? Wouldn't this bid be a wise choice?

Peter offered to be involved as an organiser but was not willing to assemble the bid for NSWCA approval.

skip to my lou
09-07-2004, 07:59 PM
So basically no one is interested, so George is doing it himself?

peanbrain
09-07-2004, 08:12 PM
I SEE EVERY REASON TO DOUBT HIM SINCE HIS OPINION WAS BASED ON JUST A FEW CONVERSATIONS. IF YOU WANT TO KNOW THE REAL NATURE OF THE "OPPORTUNITY" YOU NEED TO ASK PEOPLE WHO HAVE HAD A REAL INVOLVEMENT. I DONT KNOW WHO THAT IS BUT ITS NOT HIM.
THIS DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE!!!!!!!!

What are you notorious for? Are you so notoriously stupid that you can't find the key to unlock the "caps Lock" when you type? :whistle:

If you want to know why guru back out of the deal why don't you just ask him?!

Alan Shore
09-07-2004, 08:17 PM
You are a true talent gray. Such deep and powerful riposte with your usual economic assymetry: a one-line burst to an essay. But more important is the +1 on the post count.

AR

Firstly he made a valid point, secondly your irony of your post is hilarious.

Bill Gletsos
09-07-2004, 08:19 PM
What are you notorious for? Are you so notoriously stupid that you can't find the key to unlock the "caps Lock" when you type? :whistle:
Ha ha ha.

Welcome back pean. ;)


If you want to know why guru back out of the deal why don't you just ask him?!
Of course that would only be his side of the story. :whistle:

skip to my lou
09-07-2004, 08:20 PM
I SEE EVERY REASON TO DOUBT HIM SINCE HIS OPINION WAS BASED ON JUST A FEW CONVERSATIONS. IF YOU WANT TO KNOW THE REAL NATURE OF THE "OPPORTUNITY" YOU NEED TO ASK PEOPLE WHO HAVE HAD A REAL INVOLVEMENT. I DONT KNOW WHO THAT IS BUT ITS NOT HIM.
THIS DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE!!!!!!!!

What are you notorious for? Are you so notoriously stupid that you can't find the key to unlock the "caps Lock" when you type? :whistle:

If you want to know why guru back out of the deal why don't you just ask him?!

http://maddox.xmission.com/keyboard4.jpg

Part of response to Hate Mail from JEREM20576@aol.com:


That's the distance you'd have to move your pinky in order to not sound like an idiot. I know the burden of pressing shift to capitalize is a great one, but c'mon Turing, you can do better than that. I used to type emails in caps like yours, but then I decided that I didn't want a job mixing concrete.

:pirate: :pirate: :pirate:

peanbrain
09-07-2004, 08:22 PM
Hi All,

No matter what happens on Monday Evening all Aussie Chessplayers and indeed the ACF is grateful to David Cordover for bringing the original Mt Buller proposal to the ACF because without his work and establishing contacts etc a new improved bid would never have eventuated. So I am only too happy to give credit where credit is due - he got off his behind and went for it and now we have an updated version as a consquence of much early work by David.

Regards to ALL
George Howard
President ACF

Have you lost your marbles George?! What kind of crap are you trying to spin here given the facts in front of us?!

Listen - this guy thought he could have us all up in the middle of nowhere and rip us off for every penny. Tried his best to cover up secret deals involving charging what he liked for the rooms and pocket the difference from accommodation to entry fees etc etc.

George as the president didn't see it coming and we ended up with the crisis on our hands - and now he's grateful ...... FOR WHAT?! :doh:

Not forgetting the idiots from CV who had their sirty hands in all of this .... :wall:

george
09-07-2004, 08:25 PM
Hi All,

No I am not doing this by myself. If you think I would put forward a bid without having at least the basic nucleus of a committed young talented team of exceptional organisers already in place you underestimate the few abilities I possess.

Regards
George Howard

skip to my lou
09-07-2004, 08:26 PM
this guy thought he could have us all up in the middle of nowhere

It seems that is still the case. Isn't George trying to make the Mt Buller deal work?

Bill Gletsos
09-07-2004, 08:29 PM
Have you lost your marbles George?! What kind of crap are you trying to spin here given the facts in front of us?!

Listen - this guy thought he could have us all up in the middle of nowhere and rip us off for every penny. Tried his best to cover up secret deals involving charging what he liked for the rooms and pocket the difference from accommodation to entry fees etc etc.

George as the president didn't see it coming and we ended up with the crisis on our hands - and now he's grateful ...... FOR WHAT?! :doh:
I simply took it that George was being ever the diplomat. :hmm:

Bill Gletsos
09-07-2004, 08:31 PM
It seems that is still the case. Isn't George trying to make the Mt Buller deal work?
I think your truncated quote of peanbrain is taking peanbrains comment out of context.
You should have continued to the fullstop. :whistle:

skip to my lou
09-07-2004, 08:32 PM
It doesn't change the fact that it is still out in the middle of nowhere! :P

george
09-07-2004, 08:36 PM
Hi Jeo - Jeo,

If either of you have done a great deal of work developing the site for Open , Juniors or Schools Finals then please email me on
georgeshoward@hotmail.com
I would be very interested in discussing what you have done what our requirements might be and how you might wish to proceed and what recompense you may wish for further complete developement and maintenance of a thorough Website.

But please dont contact me till Tuesday because by then we will all know the official status of bids after the ACF Council vote.

Regards
George Howard

Garvinator
09-07-2004, 08:44 PM
Hi Jeo - Jeo,

If either of you have done a great deal of work developing the site for Open , Juniors or Schools Finals then please email me on
georgeshoward@hotmail.com

George, jeo- Jeo are the same person :hmm:

Bill Gletsos
09-07-2004, 08:51 PM
It doesn't change the fact that it is still out in the middle of nowhere! :P
I didnt take that part of it as the main point pean was making. :whistle:

skip to my lou
09-07-2004, 08:52 PM
George, jeo- Jeo are the same person :hmm:
I think he knows that.

peanbrain
09-07-2004, 08:59 PM
Hello ALL,

Jey the ACF Secretary has emailed this important news to all Councillors and I now make it available to the Australian Chess public.

There will be a revised bid formally submitted to stage the Schools Finals,Junior and Aust Open at Mt Buller.
The entry fees will be the lowest fees these tourneys have seen for over a decade.
The accomodation costs have been addressed especially for Juniors and will make staying at the Chalet irresistable.
The transport from Melbourne to Mt Buller to the Events at the commencement and conclusion will be covered with special bus transport laid on by the Organisers at no cost to the participants.
The secured playing area will be in the Abom restaraunt which can handle up to 400 players and will be provided at NO cost to the Organisers.
The Main Organiser of these three Events will be George Howard.

Regards to ALL
George Howard
President ACF

Sounds to me we have a done deal - no need to wait till next week to find out which bid the ACF is going to accept.

Now George, can you please confirm the following for us:

1. You said the entry fee will be the lowest in decade and accommodation price "irresistable". How about food? Are we not forced to eat there at the venue given no shops selling even milk and bread?

2. Why only free bus to/from melbourne? how about a free bus from sydney, brisbane and canberra as well?

3. guru in his original DREAM promised daily entertainment - is this still the case? (May be you can have guru appearing as the clown?) :lol:

4. how many GMs are you confirming?

5. Do you get to keep the profits like guru or are you doing this for love? ;)

Garvinator
09-07-2004, 09:00 PM
Of course that would only be his side of the story. :whistle:
well at least notorious would have one more side of the story than he has now :whistle:

Garvinator
09-07-2004, 09:03 PM
2. Why only free bus to/from melbourne? how about a free bus from sydney, brisbane and canberra as well? umm bus from sydney or brisbane :eek: no thanks and i live in brisbane.

5. Do you get to keep the profits like guru or are you doing this for love? ;)
isnt the normal deal that half the profits go to the acf and half to the organisers? I thought that was in the constitution somewhere or something like that :confused:

george
09-07-2004, 09:09 PM
Hi Jeo,

I didnt know that actually. But never mind Jeo please email me Tuesday or call me on 0414841575 and lets have a chat.

Bill is right - diplomacy is very very important but the fact remains irrespctive of what happened if David had not initiated things we would never have had the opportunity we have now.

I was not commenting on methodology or process etc but the simple fact he introduced the ACF to the concept and established links - what or how he progressed those links is history and can be debated and analysed but that is not why I thanked him.

I always have been about moving on and being positive.

George Howard

skip to my lou
09-07-2004, 09:23 PM
Hi Jeo,

I didnt know that actually. But never mind Jeo please email me Tuesday or call me on 0414841575 and lets have a chat.

OK Then. Will email you on tuesday.

Kevin Bonham
09-07-2004, 09:23 PM
Sounds to me we have a done deal - no need to wait till next week to find out which bid the ACF is going to accept.

It will be decided by a vote of ACF Council. I wouldn't assume it's a done deal until the numbers become clearer. Remember ACF Council consists of the Executive (currently 6 votes) plus the state reps (currently 7 with NT inactive.) I have no idea what several people on Council would be thinking on this. I don't even know how I'm going to vote on it yet.


1. You said the entry fee will be the lowest in decade and accommodation price "irresistable". How about food? Are we not forced to eat there at the venue given no shops selling even milk and bread?

I'd also like to know what the situation with food is - whether people are allowed to bring their own and also what costs will be involved for those who don't.

george
09-07-2004, 09:27 PM
Hi All,

I will only answer the more serious question if you dont mind.

ALL the profits go to the ACF - END OF STORY.

George Howard

george
09-07-2004, 09:34 PM
Hi All,

Actually the food question is serious. About half the Chalet rooms have kitchens - and yes if you so desire you can bring whatever food you want.

Least I think this question about food was serious.

George Howard

skip to my lou
09-07-2004, 09:45 PM
Hi All,

I will only answer the more serious question if you dont mind.

ALL the profits go to the ACF - END OF STORY.

George Howard
How much profit are you expecting? (Roughly)

george
09-07-2004, 09:53 PM
Hi Jeo,

That answer depends on the number of entries but all Organisers will be paid for their time and effort and ALL Organisers will have free accomodation.

In framing a budget you look at the probable numbers based on past attendences and the product you have to offer in comparison with other products (Events). Then you are very conservative adjust the number and there you have the added income on top of Sponsorship - profit is income after costs.

Sorry to be basic but its not rocket science.

George Howard

Bill Gletsos
09-07-2004, 09:56 PM
Sorry to be basic but its not rocket science.
Clearly you dont need to be some sort of guru. ;)

Commentator
09-07-2004, 10:02 PM
Hi All,

I will only answer the more serious question if you dont mind.

ALL the profits go to the ACF - END OF STORY.

George Howard

Mr Howard

Could I ask a few questions before I am called on to advise my delegate for the ACF meeting?

1 Will your proposal for Mt Buller use the ACF accounts for receipt of all monies and payment of relevant costs? Or are you intending to set up separate accounts outside of the ACF accounting (as was intended by Chess World)?

2 Is the $10,000 management fee still on the table as offered by Mt Buller hotel?

3 If ACF is to write a contract with Mt Buller how will the decision-making of tournament conditions be handled within the ACF? Will it be your trio of helpers, or are basic conditions going to be referred back to delegates.

C

skip to my lou
09-07-2004, 10:08 PM
Hi Jeo,

That answer depends on the number of entries but all Organisers will be paid for their time and effort and ALL Organisers will have free accomodation.

In framing a budget you look at the probable numbers based on past attendences and the product you have to offer in comparison with other products (Events). Then you are very conservative adjust the number and there you have the added income on top of Sponsorship - profit is income after costs.

Sorry to be basic but its not rocket science.

George Howard

What I was asking was if you had calculated how much profit you expect. Anyway, is that $10k management fee still on offer? How much are you planning to pay the organisers / arbiters?

Bill Gletsos
09-07-2004, 10:11 PM
Mr Howard

Could I ask a few questions before I am called on to advise my delegate for the ACF meeting?
I'll put my 2 cents in here. ;)


1 Will your proposal for Mt Buller use the ACF accounts for receipt of all monies and payment of relevant costs? Or are you intending to set up separate accounts outside of the ACF accounting (as was intended by Chess World)?
I believe this is covered by ACF By-Laws that were brought in after the last Australian Championship in Melbourne.
If I recall correctly there should be a seperate bank account of which an ACF nominated member must be a required signatory.
However when NSW ran the last Open at Penrith the ACF permitted all monies to go thru the NSWCA accounts given the NSW treasurer was also the ACF Treasurer


3 If ACF is to write a contract with Mt Buller how will the decision-making of tournament conditions be handled within the ACF? Will it be your trio of helpers, or are basic conditions going to be referred back to delegates.
What exactly do you mean by tournamnet conditions e.g time controls?

george
09-07-2004, 10:20 PM
Hi Commentator,

The answers to your questions will be made clear in the information the Council Members receive monday morning. But to clear up one thing The Organisers will be paid for their time and effort and ALL profits go to the ACF.

It will not operate through the ACF Accounts , if you knew about ACF by-laws you would know (you may anyway) that that would be unworkable. I wont explain but proceeduraly it would not work - as the Organiser I would be responsible for the distribution of monies but its an interesting point. There will be an auditable financial trail but Organisers have only to present a financial report to the ACF at the end of the Event. Interesting !!

Because if approved by ACF Council this will be the first time an Organiser has run an Event directly for the ACF. Perhaps an Audited statement is the way to go but certainly the direction of spend is at the discretion of the Organiser.

I have worked out some figures but the best answer is The Budget is a work in Progress.

Regards
George Howard

Commentator
09-07-2004, 10:27 PM
What exactly do you mean by tournament conditions e.g time controls?
I had more in mind the entrance fees and prize fund schedule.

C

Garvinator
09-07-2004, 10:29 PM
I had more in mind the entrance fees and prize fund schedule.

Cwell commentator, as has been said previously, the entry fees will be on the lower end ever charged, so that should give some idea to how much.

skip to my lou
09-07-2004, 10:31 PM
I have a bad feeling about this whole Mt Buller thing.

Commentator
09-07-2004, 10:35 PM
Hi Commentator,

The answers to your questions will be made clear in the information the Council Members receive monday morning. But to clear up one thing The Organisers will be paid for their time and effort and ALL profits go to the ACF.

It will not operate through the ACF Accounts , if you knew about ACF by-laws you would know (you may anyway) that that would be unworkable. I wont explain but proceeduraly it would not work - as the Organiser I would be responsible for the distribution of monies but its an interesting point. There will be an auditable financial trail but Organisers have only to present a financial report to the ACF at the end of the Event. Interesting !!

Because if approved by ACF Council this will be the first time an Organiser has run an Event directly for the ACF. Perhaps an Audited statement is the way to go but certainly the direction of spend is at the discretion of the Organiser.

I have worked out some figures but the best answer is The Budget is a work in Progress.

Regards
George Howard

My delegate tells me that the information pack was promised soon after the Council meeting that approved the re-bidding process. He is disappointed to read that it is necessary to wait till monday morning before the vote.


I am taking your statement that the organisers will be paid for their time to mean that the arbiters will be paid an arbiters fee and you will receive the $10,000 management fee.

C

george
09-07-2004, 10:42 PM
Hi Commentator,

As I said Organisers will be paid for their time and Effort.

An Information Pack as you suggest has not been envisaged to be available immediately prior or immediately after monday.

It will be available ASAP after Monday assuming the ACF Council approves the New Mt Buller bid. Council will be given a broad proposed Budget including Entry Fees and Sponsorship as against proposed expenditure.

George Howard

george
09-07-2004, 10:45 PM
Hi Commentator,

To answer one question specifically for you - I am not claiming an Organisers fee but again all Organisers will be paid for their time and effort and the proposed expenditure in this area will appear as a Line Item in the proposed Budget to go to Council.

George Howard

Bill Gletsos
09-07-2004, 10:49 PM
My delegate tells me that the information pack was promised soon after the Council meeting that approved the re-bidding process. He is disappointed to read that it is necessary to wait till monday morning before the vote.
I would suggest your delegate was mistaken. :whistle:
The call for new bids only happend last Friday 2nd July therefore to expect the new organisers to provide information "soon" is totally unrealistic.
Today is only 5 business days later. Any professional would take full advantage of the timeframe for the bids and the deadline for bids is the 11th July.

BTW arent you Victorian.
In which case your ACF delegate is the guru.

george
09-07-2004, 10:52 PM
Hi Jeo,

Your suspicions could be justified but if you knew how I operate and my life ethics you would realise your suspicions are unjustified.

You appear very embittered by previous actions of previous organisers.

I intend to make finances as transparent as is practically possible - the right thing must be seen to be done as well as actually be done.

George Howard

george
09-07-2004, 11:01 PM
Hi All,

I will go veg out in front of TV so have a good evening all!!

George Howard

Commentator
09-07-2004, 11:09 PM
I would suggest your delegate was mistaken. :whistle:
The call for new bids only happend last Friday 2nd July therefore to expect the new organisers to provide information "soon" is totally unrealistic.
Today is only 5 business days later. Any professional would take full advantage of the timeframe for the bids and the deadline for bids is the 11th July.

BTW arent you Victorian.
In which case your ACF delegate is the guru.


My delegate is the one that does not make errors.
Parr, Whitehorse and Cordover could construct a bid in response to the thread topic.

Reasonable or unreasonable, it was what was promised.

Concentrate on getting NSW, to show unity instead of split, to support the PARR bid for the SENIORS, and WHJC will now bid for the SCHOOLS, and then we will have safe proposals for all three events.

C

Garvinator
09-07-2004, 11:13 PM
My delegate is the one that does not make errors.
Parr, Whitehorse and Cordover could construct a bid in response to the thread topic.

Reasonable or unreasonable, it was what was promised.

Concentrate on getting NSW, to show unity instead of split, to support the PARR bid for the SENIORS, and WHJC will now bid for the SCHOOLS, and then we will have safe proposals for all three events.

C
and bill has said previously that nswca has no intention of being involved with the aussie open or related bids, is this correct bill?

Bill Gletsos
09-07-2004, 11:25 PM
My delegate is the one that does not make errors.
You are clearly Victorian in which case your ACF delegate is the Guru.


Parr, Whitehorse and Cordover could construct a bid in response to the thread topic.
Well actually they couldnt because my understanding is Parr isnt prepared to actually organise a bid, and I'm not sure many people maintain any faith in the guru.


Reasonable or unreasonable, it was what was promised.
We only have your delegates word for that.


Concentrate on getting NSW, to show unity instead of split, to support the PARR bid for the SENIORS, and WHJC will now bid for the SCHOOLS, and then we will have safe proposals for all three events.

As I said Parr has no bid for the seniors.
WE should select what is best for Australian Chess not what is safe.

Bill Gletsos
09-07-2004, 11:27 PM
and bill has said previously that nswca has no intention of being involved with the aussie open or related bids, is this correct bill?
The NSWCA has no intention of organising any bids for any of the events.

Garvinator
09-07-2004, 11:31 PM
The NSWCA has no intention of organising any bids for any of the events.
did you get my pm by the way?

Bill Gletsos
09-07-2004, 11:33 PM
did you get my pm by the way?
Yes but I havent done it yet.

Garvinator
09-07-2004, 11:38 PM
Yes but I havent done it yet.
ok cool no problem. ill be posting results as soon as i have double checked it all so that ppl on here can view the provisional results and point out errors :whistle:

Kevin Bonham
10-07-2004, 12:08 AM
You are clearly Victorian in which case your ACF delegate is the Guru.

Given past references on this BB, Commentator is clearly referring to Gary Wastell - who is in fact not a state delegate but the ACF Vice-President.


As I said Parr has no bid for the seniors.
WE should select what is best for Australian Chess not what is safe.

It will be interesting to see what CG and Gary have to say about the supposed risks at Council on Monday night.

CG seems to have gone quiet on this lately.

Bill Gletsos
10-07-2004, 12:21 AM
Given past references on this BB, Commentator is clearly referring to Gary Wastell - who is in fact not a state delegate but the ACF Vice-President.
I'll put my pedants hat on for the moment and point out he is the Deputy not one of the Vices. ;)


It will be interesting to see what CG and Gary have to say about the supposed risks at Council on Monday night.
I spoke to Gary around lunch time today.


CG seems to have gone quiet on this lately.
Indeed.

skip to my lou
10-07-2004, 12:43 AM
Hi Jeo,

Your suspicions could be justified but if you knew how I operate and my life ethics you would realise your suspicions are unjustified.

------------------

I intend to make finances as transparent as is practically possible - the right thing must be seen to be done as well as actually be done.

George Howard

It seems you have mis judged. I was asking those questions to see how much you could compensate my efforts for the website. There is no point running an excellent website and running near loss. At the moment, I have no idea how much value you place on the website.

I expect to get paid atleast as much as other organisers, because I would consider myself an organiser if I am responsible for the entire Open 05 website. If you feel this is too much, you would be better of getting Gary.B or Mal or someone to help you out.


You appear very embittered by previous actions of previous organisers.

The fact is that I wasted one month making a website that may never be used. Enough time wasted?

peanbrain
10-07-2004, 01:02 AM
Hi All,

Actually the food question is serious. About half the Chalet rooms have kitchens - and yes if you so desire you can bring whatever food you want.

Least I think this question about food was serious.

George Howard
You bet the food question is serious!! I once worked in a call centre for a global hotel chain. You will be shocked how much margin hotels and restaurants make from food and bar, not to mention telephone charges! :hmm:

It is highly likely you end up paying more for three meals a day at the hotel than the cost of the room. As for taking our own food there, how the hell are we going to take enough food supply for two weeks with us?

George I suggets you publish a copy of mt buller's menu and prices as part of your bidding package.

skip to my lou
10-07-2004, 01:33 AM
I just read BroadZ's post which was deleted by Kevin for excess swearing. He has a very good point, that I was thinking all along. This Mt Buller deal doesn't feel right at all. If Cordover is walking away from such a deal (which he had already invested so much time and money in), there has to be something majorly wrong with it.

Kevin Bonham
10-07-2004, 01:43 AM
BroadZ - I banned you for excess swearing (to put it very mildly). Got a problem? Talk to someone who cares. Use any other accounts to swear and I will ban them. I can stay up much, much later than you, punk.

skip to my lou
10-07-2004, 01:49 AM
BroadZ, email me at karths@gmail.com and I will help you sort this out.

skip to my lou
10-07-2004, 01:56 AM
BroadZ, contact me on Jeo@chesskit.com instead, I just remembered that hotmail filters GMAIL as junk!

WildStylee
10-07-2004, 02:12 AM
Thing that bothers me about rogers is that he had no hesitation makin the mt buller dudes sound like such a chill bunch of blokes when he doesnt actually know a thing about them. All he did was ring them! And its no surprise that rogers came to the conclusions he did when he started playing sherlock holmes. everyone already knew what he didnt like wastell and cordover so its no surprise that he comes to the immediate conclusion that everything was fine in mt buller until those guys started messin everything up.



now maybe hes right that CV and cordover are pullin the wool over everyones eyes and that all the mt buller people are chill, and that cordovers throwing away lots of money and opportunities. i just dont reckon that makes any sense though. i just reckon theres a lot more to this story than a lot of people are letting on and that your all being dumb about it. If the buller deals SO SWEET then why did cordover run away from it when hed invested so much in it already. way I see it cordovers the sort of guy who could sell fire in hell – he loves big money deals and hell always find some way of getting his cut. So why would he then turn around and think he could make more money off an open in glen eira, where he couldn’t rip everyone off for accomodation? it just dont add up.


btw i aint drugged

Kevin Bonham
10-07-2004, 02:37 AM
I've now unbanned your BroadZ account.

Libby
10-07-2004, 01:15 PM
The ACTJCL have put together a 'no-frills" bid for the Australian Schools in December 2004. By "no-frills" we simply mean that we are bidding to host the event, as has been done before, as a simple, friendly weekend event without any links to hotel chains and with our humble committee of volunteers.

In making this bid, we have no intention of hijacking the new Mt Buller package or any other quality bid by another party. We just don't see why the Schools event should be rolled into this package unless it is essential to the financial or promotional success of the package. (Even then we have reservations about the sound nature of the bid if the schools event is actually critical to a successful outcome.)

The Schools event is a month ahead of the Aus Champs & Aus Jnrs. It attracts a different group of players with some overlap. It is only for a WEEKEND! The offer of buses from Melbourne to Buller is generous but who wants to take a group of kids on a long flight from another major centre and follow that with a long bus ride at the end. And we're not talking 30mins on a bus - we're talking several extra hours travel. And who will coordinate the arrival of all players in Melbourne at a suitable time so half the group isn't sitting there for an extra 5 hours waiting for the final flights to come in so we can all catch the bus together?

The kids get to Buller - exhausted, presumably on the Friday. play all day Saturday and Sunday and then leave Sunday evening? Or Monday for another long bus trip and a flight. Is Mt Buller the most practical venue for a small, school based event like this? How much easier is it for players and families to fly directly in and directly out when you are only staying somewhere for a weekend. Don't forget that the kids have to go back to school afterwards and there is no real prospect of families staying on to enjoy the scenery and attractions.

It was our reading of past events, that the original organisers rolled the Schools event into Mt Buller with the clear intention of expanding the event to a mega "all-in" event attracting a great many more players and holding it to follow the Juniors in January. All these changes were squashed by the ACF but we looked stuck with the event at Mt Buller but in December and with the same format as past events.

Now we have a window of opportunity to consider if Mt Buller is in fact the most sensible place to hold the event and we have at least one alternative (ours). If our bid is considered amateurish, unworkable or frivolous - so be it (we don't think it is). We will float it anyway and see what people think. The ACT last hosted the Schools in 1999 and Victoria in 2002. But for the fabulous, unmissable opportunities presented by David with his original bid we were actually expecting to be in Sydney this year.

Libby :wall:

boardumb
10-07-2004, 01:34 PM
It is highly likely you end up paying more for three meals a day at the hotel than the cost of the room. As for taking our own food there, how the hell are we going to take enough food supply for two weeks with us?

can you say tinned food? :)


BroadZ, contact me on Jeo@chesskit.com instead, I just remembered that hotmail filters GMAIL as junk!

afaik hotmail has never filtered gmail as junk unless you set it on the highest security setting, and i've sent nearly 20 gmail invites out to hotmail accounts.

</digression>

Libby
10-07-2004, 01:52 PM
can you say tinned food? :)

I think we all understand about tinned food etc. As I said in a previous post, we may even be able to get food (by courier) from the IGA in Mansfield - I'm sure they only charge a slight premium for that!

Look, we were looking seriously at how we can make the food situation work to go to Mt Buller. I don't want to say it's all half-baked if I end up on noodle cups and tinned soup for half my stay but it doesn't mean I am looking forward to the event.

We have a long trip to get there, a stay of almost two weeks, no shops, nowhere to visit, no host families to help us out with where to go and what to do. That's not to say it can't or won't be a great event with kids getting to know each other and having a great time. It just means the ACF will not have presented us with an option that helps us - the chequebook-wielders - to get there, look after our family and come out feeling good about it all.

On the advice that this would "definitely not be in Mt Buller" I cancelled all the ACTJCL accommodation arrangements. I hope the kids will still be able to stay somewhere for $13.50/night as that is the deal we have lost with all this messing about.

:wall:

Paul S
10-07-2004, 02:46 PM
The ACTJCL have put together a 'no-frills" bid for the Australian Schools in December 2004.

Hi Libby

You Canberrans get my vote for the Schools Championship! Based on my experiences at the Doeberl you guys in Canberra know how to run successful large tournaments!

BTW, you make some very good points in your posts about the Mt Buller venue and the "jerking around" that you and the ACTJCL (and "chequebook wielding parents") have recieved.

jeffrei
10-07-2004, 02:56 PM
Libby,

Not sure if I’m still persona non grata in the ACT*, but I’m always interested in hearing the ACT folks’ view on things. And OK, over the years I’ve developed a certain sympathy for ‘chequebook/baggage carriers’ (a.k.a. chess parents) in general. Having read with interest your comments on the Schools tournament I’d like to send some comments in your direction with regard to the Australian Junior.

I think it’s just common sense that we are never going to get something for nothing with regard to this kind of sponsorship. It’s just a brute fact that these days most kids travel to Aus Junior with their parents. If the hotel are giving away X amount of dollars, it's because they're getting X+Y dollars back from all the juniors/parents/siblings staying at the hotel for the duration of the tournament. I realize that money is going to be spent on accommodation wherever the tournament is held, but why can't we at least do it somewhere where the parents/siblings of the juniors won't go totally insane with boredom? Not to mention the juniors themselves, who don’t spend ALL their time playing chess.

One of the things Ian Rogers tried to criticize me about was having the audacity to take a survey of what the parents and kids actually thought about having the Australian Juniors at Mt Buller. In fact by then I had already abandoned the survey, not because I was disappointed with the response (out of a sample of about 50 juniors/parents we only had one non-negative response to Mt Buller, and no positive responses), but because I worked out that no one actually cared what the juniors and the parents think! The ACF knows that, as you said, parents/juniors ARE a captive audience who will arrive chequebooks in hand no matter where the event is held.

I just think that it’s extremely immoral for the ACF to take advantage of the fact that parents will go anywhere in Australia if their kids want to play chess there. Presumably they will try to justify this with reference to the ‘fabulous, unmissable opportunities’ you (sarcastically) mention. I should be clear about this: I’m not just stating my belief that the opportunities will turn out – just like last time – to be shadows, I’m also suggesting that even if they were ‘real’ IT STILL WOULDN’T BE WORTH IT!**

I tried to get a wide variety of states in my sample and generally succeeded, but unfortunately I failed to talk to any Canberra people. Could you spell out in more detail how you and your constituency (i.e. Canberra juniors/parents) feel about the Australian Juniors being held at Mt Buller? And about some of the other issues I’ve raised?

/jef

* Readers - if you don't know why, don't ask!
** Having talked to committee member Charles Z more than a few times over the last week I am well aware of what the purported advantages are supposed to be, so the bean-brain boors of the BB can save themselves the obligatory ‘your (sic) just speculating’, ‘you don’t know the full facts’ response!

PS: Agreed that having the Schools tournament in Mt Buller is silly. You probably won't agree, but avoiding this sort of thing is one of the reasons why I'd like to see the event find a permanent home in Canberra (as I've mentioned in a totally different thread).
PPS: Ever wondered why the Aus Open and Aus Juniors and Aus Schools just have to be bundled together for the purposes of the Mt Buller bid, notwithstanding the fact that the latter two are inappropriately located there? OH THAT'S RIGHT BECAUSE THE SUPERFANTASTIC BID JUST COMES PACKAGED THAT WAY AND ANY ATTEMPTS TO TINKER WITH IT WILL CAUSE THE WHOLE DEAL TO UNRAVEL AND WHAT A TRAGEDY THAT WOULD BE! Hmmm...but didn't we hear the same 'all or nothing' argument at an ACF meeting near the start of the year? Wasn't that what sank us into this whole mess in the first place? No doubt we currently have some bargaining strength with the Mercure because no one in their right mind would be going to Mt Buller in the middle of the summer if it wasn't for the tournament! There is absolutely no reason why this leverage could not be used to separate the Open in Mt Buller from the Schools/Juniors somewhere else, and if the ACF had been more firm with D.Cordover right from the start this is what would have happened. All that was required was for the Council to politely-but-firmly say 'Mr Cordover, your Buller bid sounds very nice...now go and renegotiate one that doesn't involve dragging the Juniors/Schools events there, and if you can't do it then TOUGH LUCK and maybe your bid wasn't really any good in the first place.' It's still not too late, but I doubt anyone on the Council will have the guts to actually stand up and say this. Mr Stead, despite current commitments I know you must have some sympathy with this position since (as you pointed out to me earlier in the week) you were one of the few people to take a sensibly critical approach to the 'all or nothing' package back in that longago meeting. Care to comment?

Bill Gletsos
10-07-2004, 03:34 PM
* Having talked to committee member Charles Z more than a few times over the last week I am well aware of what the purported advantages are supposed to be, so the bean-brain boors of the BB can save themselves the obligatory ‘your (sic) just speculating’, ‘you don’t know the full facts’ response!
Do you know if George actually discussed any details of the planned new arrangements of Mt. Buller with Charles?


used to separate the Open in Mt Buller from the Schools/Juniors somewhere else, and if the ACF had been more firm with D.Cordover right from the
I'm interested why you apparently did not take this up with CV before they decided to support Cordovers bid prior to the national conference.

eclectic
10-07-2004, 03:45 PM
so the bean-brain boors of the BB can save themselves the obligatory ‘your (sic) just speculating’, ‘you don’t know the full facts’ response!

.

i think i'll just "boor" myself senseless counting the "beans" i'll save by not going

:evil:

:whistle:

eclectic

Garvinator
10-07-2004, 04:15 PM
its shows a lot about australian chess i think when most ppl have made up their minds about going or not before actually seeing anything concrete about any plans :evil:

dont u guys also remember that the deal with accor is/was mentioned as not just being for the open, but future relationships as well.

peanbrain
10-07-2004, 04:23 PM
dont u guys also remember that the deal with accor is/was mentioned as not just being for the open, but future relationships as well.

Come on, get real. You think a multi national company like accor will want to know you unless you bring them some sort of benefits like the smell of cash?!

Don't tell me accor is doing this because they are mates with ACF. :uhoh:

peanbrain
10-07-2004, 04:37 PM
[QUOTE=boardumb]can you say tinned food? :)
QUOTE]

Sure, I'll eat anything if I am stranded on an island, but why should I travel to a ski resort in the middle of summer just so I can eat out tin cans for two weeks?! :confused:

Come to think of it, mt buller IS a bloody island in the middle of summer! :eek:

BTW - another thing I learned from the call centre - always tell people they got a great bargain by quoting them the "full price" (which nobody pays!!) and then take 25-50% off the rate. The so called freebies worth over $100K from mt buller are based on the prices they charge during the winter. Go on, work it out and see what the real value of these benefits are actually worth!

No rocket science but unfoutunately we have chess administrators who are wannabe poker players! :whistle:

ursogr8
10-07-2004, 04:37 PM
... if the ACF (or some ACF personnel) are going to be willing to step in and organise an Open at Mt Buller (with all the potential risks that entails), is there any scope for the ACF to instead pick up the Sydney Town Hall idea for the Open, which as far as we know involves far less risk (if bookings are available) but keeps falling over because no-one in NSW wants to put their hand up to run it? Then we could give the Juniors to Whitehorse and not have to worry about any of the risks involved in unravelling the unclear history between CG and Mt B. The downside, of course, is that the long-term sponsorship offers involving Mercure would probably not come to pass.

Sorry. Just want to explore all possible options ... especially in case some people who are pushing Mt B II are doing so because they want to avoid dealing with David C.

KB
It is very doubtful that there are people pushing for Mt B. because they want to avoid dealing with the GURU. After all, there really are no strikes against the GURU. He worked in good faith with MT B management until they introduced some extra substantial charges late in the deal. Even george has complemented the GURU's work to try to get the deal signed.
And the GURU has now offered a metropolitan solution to make sure the event has a safe bet option.

The GURU may be a wheeler and dealer; he may be hard to beat commercially; he may be a tall growing poppy; he may be disliked by the MCC; he may have conflicts of interest because others will not join Committees; he might run dumb pointless surveys; he may tread on toes and take markets away from others. But he is a doer, and makes things happen.

No, KB, those who favour Mt B., and have posted on this BB, have a different characteristic > they have a pecuniary interest in the new offer from Mt B., and I will watch with interest to see if they abstain from voting.

starter

Libby
10-07-2004, 04:41 PM
I’d like to send some comments in your direction with regard to the Australian Junior.

Actually I was looking at the WHJC "possible" bid with some optimism. I was a Melbourne girl once (OK - I was 8 yrs old but I'm still an affirmed Carlton supporter!) so I have plenty of easy accommodation options in the southern state.

We never widely canvassed our ACT parents. It was a bit difficult really as we had no idea that Mt Buller was on the table until - whoosh - it's a done deal. In that circumstance, the best thing for us to do was to put the most positive spin on things we could. We actually go out of our way to encourage our juniors to play so we looked at tying down a good, cheap accommodation deal to maximise that outcome - and we'd filled it! We actually had demand we couldn't accommodate and were looking at other options. Down the track I was going to attempt some sort of coordinated "supply convoy" so that we could meet the shopping issue by not all attempting to bring bread and margarine but sharing the food carrying responsibilities.

Also, not all being former Victorians, some of our players and families were very fuzzy on exactly where and what Mt Buller is. I did actually get asked if you went through Melbourne to get there. Also not everybody really realised how small Mt Buller is and I was the one breaking news about lack of shops and other facilities on-site.

I don't think anyone would get the impression I think a place like Mt Buller is a good place for the Aus Jnr. I vastly prefer the option of staying somewhere in Melbourne or at another major metropolitan centre in Australia. Our players will go however (as you quite correctly point out) where we have to. My daughter is in her final year as an U12 which kind-of puts the pressure on to let her give the event a go. It also doesn't seem to take very much for a child to develop the understanding that you will "always" attend and react with deep dismay (laying on a mega guilt-trip) when you propose otherwise (note to self - watch more Dr Phil for tips on saying "no").

However, I don't want to deprive Australian chess of the opportunity to develop a fantastic, long-term relationship with a sponsor with the chance of far-reaching future benefits in a variety of exotic locations around this country - if that's what we are talking about and if Australian chess is actually capable of the professionalism to hold up their end of the deal. I'm not attempting to "bash" the organisers of the new bid (or even those of the old one) but I'm very sensitive about my own position as a person who has chopped and changed advice to ACT junior players and families about these events too many times already. :doh:

jeffrei
10-07-2004, 04:42 PM
KB
It is very doubtful that there are people pushing for Mt B. because they want to avoid dealing with the GURU. After all, there really are no strikes against the GURU. He worked in good faith with MT B management until they introduced some extra substantial charges late in the deal. Even george has complemented the GURU's work to try to get the deal signed.
And the GURU has now offered a metropolitan solution to make sure the event has a safe bet option.

The GURU may be a wheeler and dealer; he may be hard to beat commercially; he may be a tall growing poppy; he may be disliked by the MCC; he may have conflicts of interest because others will not join Committees; he might run dumb pointless surveys; he may tread on toes and take markets away from others. But he is a doer, and makes things happen.

No, KB, those who favour Mt B., and have posted on this BB, have a different characteristic > they have a pecuniary interest in the new offer from Mt B., and I will watch with interest to see if they abstain from voting.

starter

Kevin,

This is the only time I'm ever going to quote an entire post in a reply, and it's because I agree with it that strongly. No one on the ACF Council is actually afraid of dealing with Dave (no matter what they think of him personally), although there could conceivably be some people around who find it convenient to pretend they do. Making a modest-to-good Aus Open happen in Melbourne is not rocket science, especially when you've got no-strings-attached sponsorship to start with.

/jef

PS: I was working on the assumption that they'd have to abstain. That's right, isn't it?

ursogr8
10-07-2004, 04:53 PM
Actually I was looking at the WHJC "possible" bid with some optimism. I was a Melbourne girl once (OK - I was 8 yrs old but I'm still an affirmed Carlton supporter!) so I have plenty of easy accommodation options in the southern state.

:

Libby

I read with interest your long posts; thanks for taking the time to share.

Now, your problem with being a Carlton supporter should not concern you too much; it is a curable condition. :P

Whitehorse Junior Chess Club will be including an offer to stage the SCHOOLS Week-ender, just to make sure this important event is not damaged by all the argy-bargy over Mt B.
It was not on our agenda previously, but we would certainly see an obligation to make sure it was a well-run experience for 2004.

starter

Libby
10-07-2004, 05:09 PM
Libby

I read with interest your long posts; thanks for taking the time to share.

starter

Count yourself fortunate not to receive my weekly ACTJCL bulletin - far longer than my posting. I'm sure I've managed one "short" one.


Now, your problem with being a Carlton supporter should not concern you too much; it is a curable condition. :P

One assumes a cure is sought. Have just enjoyed watching better half's team (Richmond) crushed - unfortunately at the hands of those filthy Bombers.


Whitehorse Junior Chess Club will be including an offer to stage the SCHOOLS Week-ender, just to make sure this important event is not damaged by all the argy-bargy over Mt B.

I guess that makes us competitors in the new race - if we have one. We hope our bid won't be too damaging to the event and we'd also hope to have some advantage over the Vics as it's only been 2 years since your school children enjoyed the opportunity to represent at home. Our ACT kids last had the honour in 1999. Good luck! :hand:

jeffrei
10-07-2004, 05:16 PM
Count yourself fortunate not to receive my weekly ACTJCL bulletin

Umm, well actually I do receive it. And that's why I know that you guys have to some extent been victims of your own good organization...you've been planning for the Aus Juniors for ages! And of course it looks terrible when you explain to parents that the tournament is at X (And they say: "X??? Why are we going there?"), then definitely not at X, then possibly at X or maybe at Y. I know this because I've had to make the same explanation to a large number of parents in the last few weeks.

Garvinator
10-07-2004, 05:21 PM
No, KB, those who favour Mt B., and have posted on this BB, have a different characteristic > they have a pecuniary interest in the new offer from Mt B., and I will watch with interest to see if they abstain from voting.

starter
Who are these ppl that have votes on the council :eek: also can you name the ones who have votes and are for other bids?

Libby
10-07-2004, 05:26 PM
Umm, well actually I do receive it. And that's why I know that you guys have to some extent been victims of your own good organization...you've been planning for the Aus Juniors for ages! And of course it looks terrible when you explain to parents that the tournament is at X (And they say: "X??? Why are we going there?"), then definitely not at X, then possibly at X or maybe at Y.

Goodness - I'll have to be careful with any veiled (or not) sledging of other states now we're in wide circulation.

It goes back to high school days when my english teacher accused me of using 7 words when 2 would do. Jenni makes some similar observations.

And yes, I suffer that control freak syndrome of "shock/horror" liking to make plans, liking to look organised and actually liking to look like I run and/or have an involvement with a sport that conducts itself in a professional manner and is considerate of the needs of its participants. And I guess I felt there was not enough information about when first I was encouraged to enter my child in the Aus Jnrs so I've been trying to plug some holes - real or perceived - in the way we organise our team.

And I have a big mouth. Always getting me in trouble either because I end up in trouble OR I end up with more jobs. Sigh. :D

Bill Gletsos
10-07-2004, 05:29 PM
KB
It is very doubtful that there are people pushing for Mt B. because they want to avoid dealing with the GURU. After all, there really are no strikes against the GURU. He worked in good faith with MT B management until they introduced some extra substantial charges late in the deal.
Remember the Guru planned to have other Mind Sports going on at the same time.
What sort of numbers was he proposing to the Mt. Buller management.
What sort of promises was he making.
It appears the Mt. Buller view of things differs from the Guru's.


Even george has complemented the GURU's work to try to get the deal signed.
As I said I think george was mainly being diplomatic and simply acknowledging that the guru had opened doors, nothing else.


No, KB, those who favour Mt B., and have posted on this BB, have a different characteristic > they have a pecuniary interest in the new offer from Mt B., and I will watch with interest to see if they abstain from voting.
Well the guru sure had a pecuniary interest in Mt. Buller. After all he saw fit not to mention his $10,000 organisers fee.
I seriously doubt he has no pecuniary interest in his metropolitan solution.

George has said he would not be taking an organisers fee. As such it would appear he has no pecuniary interest.

Garvinator
10-07-2004, 05:37 PM
Well the guru sure had a pecuniary interest in Mt. Buller. After all he saw fit not to mention his $10,000 organisers fee.
I seriously doubt he has no pecuniary interest in his metropolitan solution.
According to the acf website, the guru is listed as director of coaching, does this mean he gets a vote at the all important next meeting of acf council :confused:

Bill Gletsos
10-07-2004, 05:42 PM
Who are these ppl that have votes on the council :eek: also can you name the ones who have votes and are for other bids?
It would appear starters comments were aimed at george.
The guru as the ACF CV delegate and as the organiser for the CV endorsed Aus Open bid appears to clearly have a conflict of interest.

All other council members would appear to have no conflict of interest issues whatsoever.

Bill Gletsos
10-07-2004, 05:46 PM
According to the acf website, the guru is listed as director of coaching, does this mean he gets a vote at the all important next meeting of acf council :confused:
Yes but not because of that position, but because he is the CV delegate on the ACF Council.

Likewise I dont have a vote as the ACF Ratings Officer but as the NSW delegate.

Garvinator
10-07-2004, 05:47 PM
Yes but not because of that position, but because he is the CV delegate on the ACF Council.

Likewise I dont have a vote as the ACF Ratings Officer but as the NSW delegate.
either way he has a vote :whistle:

Kevin Bonham
10-07-2004, 05:52 PM
There is absolutely no reason why this leverage could not be used to separate the Open in Mt Buller from the Schools/Juniors somewhere else, and if the ACF had been more firm with D.Cordover right from the start this is what would have happened. All that was required was for the Council to politely-but-firmly say 'Mr Cordover, your Buller bid sounds very nice...now go and renegotiate one that doesn't involve dragging the Juniors/Schools events there, and if you can't do it then TOUGH LUCK and maybe your bid wasn't really any good in the first place.' It's still not too late, but I doubt anyone on the Council will have the guts to actually stand up and say this.

I wasn't at the January meeting (mainland meetings with no hookup often effectively disenfranchise Tas from input on non-notified agenda items), but it is obvious there was some resistance to the package bid because motions were moved for NSW to be granted time to consider and possibly submit rival bids for the Schools and Open at least. However these motions were lost. It should be remembered that Council functions by majority votes which are sometimes close, so assuming that just because Council acts one way that everyone on Council thinks that way is sometimes incorrect.

Kevin Bonham
10-07-2004, 06:01 PM
It is very doubtful that there are people pushing for Mt B. because they want to avoid dealing with the GURU.

I just thought I'd fish for it and see if that was a motive out there. Doesn't seem to be.


No, KB, those who favour Mt B., and have posted on this BB, have a different characteristic > they have a pecuniary interest in the new offer from Mt B., and I will watch with interest to see if they abstain from voting.

Who are they and what is their pecuniary interest? George has said that all profits will go to ACF. I can't take a vested-interest claim like this seriously for even a second unless the people who have vested interests and their pecuniary interests are stated.


No one on the ACF Council is actually afraid of dealing with Dave (no matter what they think of him personally), although there could conceivably be some people around who find it convenient to pretend they do.

Do you know this for sure? Have you asked every individual member of ACF Council? ;)


Making a modest-to-good Aus Open happen in Melbourne is not rocket science, especially when you've got no-strings-attached sponsorship to start with.

Agreed.

Garvinator
10-07-2004, 06:04 PM
Do you know this for sure? Have you asked every individual member of ACF Council? ;)
are you that bored cause there is no goat to argue with that you have to be a nuisance now :lol: :whistle:

Kevin Bonham
10-07-2004, 06:04 PM
I reckon CV should get another delegate. It would still be helpful having David there as an observer with speaking rights at present, but it's a joke to have him having to abstein on so much.

Garvinator
10-07-2004, 06:09 PM
I reckon CV should get another delegate. It would still be helpful having David there as an observer with speaking rights at present, but it's a joke to have him having to abstein on so much.
and that delegate cant come from whitehorse or box hill either.

jeffrei
10-07-2004, 06:20 PM
Probably there’s at least one person who’s been wondering why I haven’t responded to a couple of (perfectly reasonable) questions posed by Bill a few pages ago.

I will be blunt: I am sick of Bill’s CONSISTENTLY boorish behavior and refuse to have anything to do with him here. I am not in a club of one in taking a position like this (Robert Jamieson is another one in recent memory, but I am aware of several more). You can’t argue with Bill any more than you can argue with God, and I am NOT saying that Bill’s a skilled arguer. Bill’s not always wrong either, but that’s beyond the point at this stage. He’s generally quite polite in responses to me (which says a lot), but until he’s willing to extend the same courtesy to everyone on the BB – yep, even the ones he considers ‘morons’ – I won’t have anything to do with him.

However, lest anyone think he’s posed me an unanswerable question, I’ll throw this one out to someone else:


I'm interested why you apparently did not take this up with CV before they decided to support Cordovers bid prior to the national conference.

Libby, I have some reason to believe that your ACT-based answer to this question might be the same as mine. Why didn’t you take action to stop the ACF running into a ‘all or nothing’ deal with Mt Buller the first time around?

/jef

PS: OCCASIONAL boorishness I take to be a natural outcome of existing on this BB! :D
PPS: Regarding your question on the last page...yeh you're right Kevin, it's just speculation :)

Kevin Bonham
10-07-2004, 06:28 PM
and that delegate cant come from whitehorse or box hill either.

That's not quite the same thing. If the delegate came from these clubs then their clubs would have interests, but in David's case, he has the vested interest. It reminds me of an architect who was on Hobart City Council and gave up after one term because he had to abstein on so many building approval issues.

Garvinator
10-07-2004, 06:34 PM
That's not quite the same thing. If the delegate came from these clubs then their clubs would have interests, but in David's case, he has the vested interest. It reminds me of an architect who was on Hobart City Council and gave up after one term because he had to abstein on so many building approval issues.
actually i was thinking that victoria would have to abstein as they have a vested interest,but i was more specifically thinking of whitehorse/box hill.

ursogr8
10-07-2004, 06:41 PM
and that delegate cant come from whitehorse or box hill either.

graygray

What about a member of Box Hill who can't get elected to be a BH delegate to CV AGM meetings? Would he be able to be a CV delegate for CV to the ACF, and meet your criteria?

starter

Garvinator
10-07-2004, 06:45 PM
graygray

What about a member of Box Hill who can't get elected to be a BH delegate to CV AGM meetings? Would he be able to be a CV delegate for CV to the ACF, and meet your criteria?

starter
first of all its not my criteria that you have to worry about ;) :whistle: and dont play hypotheticals as i know you are talking about yourself ;) :P

ursogr8
10-07-2004, 07:05 PM
Remember the Guru planned to have other Mind Sports going on at the same time.



Actually Bill, I thought this an innovative idea. We often rent our clocks to the Australian GO association and the concept of using our (chess) event as the base venue for other mind sports holds quite some promise. Do you have a problem with the idea of expanding the use of the venue?




What sort of numbers was he proposing to the Mt. Buller management.


Well Bill I quoted on the BB from two of the versions of the GURUs paperwork that I had seen. Jase seemed to take exception to my referring to the bids of others so I eased off. So, yes, David, did make assumptions about attendance. But I guess Whitehorse will also, as will george. And yes we could all get it wrong; so what was the point of the question.



What sort of promises was he making.



Again what is your point? We all make promises. We get some wrong.



It appears the Mt. Buller view of things differs from the Guru's.



I don’t recall Mt Buller nor Ian Rogers explaining the late imposition of a new significant charge.
And can you detail what Mt Buller see differently?






As I said I think george was mainly being diplomatic and simply acknowledging that the guru had opened doors, nothing else.



Are you authorised to withdraw george’s complementary post about David’s work on this deal, and class it as just ‘diplomatic’. George sounded more genuine than that in his post.






Well the guru sure had a pecuniary interest in Mt. Buller. After all he saw fit not to mention his $10,000 organisers fee.



I don’t have a problem with a $10,000 organisers fee in principle. I would be fascinated to hear any poster say he did not expect David to have a pecuniary interest in a deal like Buller. Did you at any stage think David was doing the deal for altruism? (And if you are going to respond to this particular question please don’t give me an answer that is a variant of " I did not hear that it was $10,000).




I seriously doubt he has no pecuniary interest in his metropolitan solution.



Same comment from me > I anticipate that we all think David hopes to make a profit personally. Paying an organisers fee is not a principle I have a problem with.




George has said he would not be taking an organisers fee. As such it would appear he has no pecuniary interest.


I must have missed this part Bill. Can you post again.

starter

Bill Gletsos
10-07-2004, 07:08 PM
Probably there’s at least one person who’s been wondering why I haven’t responded to a couple of (perfectly reasonable) questions posed by Bill a few pages ago.

I will be blunt: I am sick of Bill’s CONSISTENTLY boorish behavior and refuse to have anything to do with him here.
Good for you.
However werent you the one who started the junior selection thread last year by casting aspersions and claims of bias against certain selectors.


I am not in a club of one in taking a position like this (Robert Jamieson is another one in recent memory, but I am aware of several more).
Jammo's lack of posting to me or others does not concern me.
BTW jammo obviously thought Mt. Buller was a good idea because he sent me and others an email prior to the National Conference asking us to support it.


You can’t argue with Bill any more than you can argue with God, and I am NOT saying that Bill’s a skilled arguer. Bill’s always wrong either, but that’s beyond the point at this stage.
Oh you can argue with me provided you put up valid points and not just idle speculation.


He’s generally quite polite in responses to me (which says a lot), but until he’s willing to extend the same courtesy to everyone on the BB – yep, even the ones he considers ‘morons’ – I won’t have anything to do with him.
I dont see that as any great loss on my part.


However, lest anyone think he’s posed me an unanswerable question, I’ll throw this one out to someone else:
Good for you.
So I'll ask you another question you cannot palm off to others.

Do you have any working arrangement with the guru.

Kevin Bonham
10-07-2004, 07:13 PM
He’s generally quite polite in responses to me (which says a lot), but until he’s willing to extend the same courtesy to everyone on the BB – yep, even the ones he considers ‘morons’ – I won’t have anything to do with him.

Without wishing to take a stand either way on every comment Bill has ever made to any person I will say this.

Bill puts a lot of work into running the ratings system and does so voluntarily. In this capacity he has been subject to some vitriolic and very headstrong accusations of incompetence over the years on these BBs. Several of these accusations have turned out to be demonstrably false. Many have been made by people too lazy to research the most basic facts about the system (which, I acknowledge, is not straightforward) and some of those accusations have been repeated even after they have been disposed of.

I've been in equivalent situations in my professional life at times, and I know exactly what it is like to have people who are not in that position tell you you should be nice to everyone, no matter how wilfully lazy, ignorant and abusive they may be. You'd have to be both an idealist and a saint to be courteous to them all.

If anyone wants to respond to this in detail I'll copy this and the response(s) to the offtopic section.

ursogr8
10-07-2004, 07:17 PM
I just thought I'd fish for it and see if that was a motive out there. Doesn't seem to be.



Well KB you have fished for any poster who says he would oppose David running some Melbourne CBD events, just because it is David. And got none.
So, as I said in another post, there is good and bad in the GURU but he is a doer and makes things happen.




Who are they and what is their pecuniary interest? George has said that all profits will go to ACF. I can't take a vested-interest claim like this seriously for even a second unless the people who have vested interests and their pecuniary interests are stated.



This question is still w.i.p.
But, I make the observation, profits are simply what is left over after costs. If one cost is an organisers fee then while it is true that all profits may go to the ACF, that still leaves the organisers fee as a pecuniary interest. I have asked Bill to clarify his claim that george has said he will not be charging an organisers fee. I can’t recall seeing the quote.

starter

ursogr8
10-07-2004, 07:21 PM
first of all its not my criteria that you have to worry about ;) :whistle: and dont play hypotheticals as i know you are talking about yourself ;) :P

gg''
After 25 words and 4 emoticons we still don't know your opinion, which is what I asked for.
Any reason you don't want hypotheticals, apart from the problem you have with answering?
Your post is close to being gratuitous, and mine isn't this time.

starter

jeffrei
10-07-2004, 07:22 PM
Several of these accusations have turned out to be demonstrably false. Many have been made by people too lazy to research the most basic facts about the system (which, I acknowledge, is not straightforward) and some of those accusations have been repeated even after they have been disposed of.

Thanks Kevin, I should have made this more clear. I read basically every thread on this BB except for the ones related to ratings squabbles. I've been inside that thread for a few seconds, but it seems to me that D.Richards might be the only person on here with an arguing style just as bad as B.Gletsos's (although rather different). So my comments aren't related to all of that nonsense - I'm referring to everything else.

I have no interest in any contact with B.Gletsos whatsoever, including anything on the non-chess section. Life's too short! As for interested readers wanting to make a judgment, I suggest they just casually browse through the forum (including THAT RATINGS THREAD, although I won't be going near it!).

Kevin Bonham
10-07-2004, 07:22 PM
Do you have any working arrangement with the guru.

Geoff is a member of the original Mt Buller bid committee. The full composition was D. Cordover, C. Depasquale, G. Wastell, G. Saw, G. Bekker, R. Jamieson (source Mt Buller minutes 15/2/04).

I am not aware of any other potential interest he has in this matter.

jeffrei
10-07-2004, 07:28 PM
i wish to respond to Geoff's post, so can you move both this post and jeffrei's to a off chess topic please?

No, Bill junior. The topic is closed. I think it should stay here as it's a personal post that's related to this thread (hint: read Bill's replies to people besides me earlier in this thread).

Now let's get back to more important business. I will continue to write posts on the Mt Buller issue and Bill will continue to jot down one-line replies. I just want people to know why I'll be ignoring them (regardless of how politely or impolitely they are written).

Garvinator
10-07-2004, 07:30 PM
graygray

What about a member of Box Hill who can't get elected to be a BH delegate to CV AGM meetings? Would he be able to be a CV delegate for CV to the ACF, and meet your criteria?

starter
actually my first answer was part of my answer. To claify, you have been very vocal in support of the whitehorse bid and we know that you are a member of box hill. So it would be clear that you would be voting for the whitehorse bid and your opinion would be made up before you sat at the table/on the phone to decide any matters.

It could then be argued that you would be voting in a certain way no matter what the constitution matters are.

This is just my opinion and again my opinion doesnt count in this case, a situation i am happy to be in :D


on a different topic, what does w.i.p mean?

Garvinator
10-07-2004, 07:31 PM
No, Bill junior. bill junior, hardly. i thought that title was owned by chesslover
:whistle:

Kevin Bonham
10-07-2004, 07:32 PM
It's a bit tricky to unravel which posts are relevant to this topic and which are completely off-topic so I am going to copy and paste some material to the OT section. This will take a little while.

Bill Gletsos
10-07-2004, 07:32 PM
Actually Bill, I thought this an innovative idea. We often rent our clocks to the Australian GO association and the concept of using our (chess) event as the base venue for other mind sports holds quite some promise. Do you have a problem with the idea of expanding the use of the venue?
No I'm just asking if its failure contributed to the breakdown in relations between Mt. Buller and the guru.



Well Bill I quoted on the BB from two of the versions of the GURUs paperwork that I had seen. Jase seemed to take exception to my referring to the bids of others so I eased off. So, yes, David, did make assumptions about attendance. But I guess Whitehorse will also, as will george. And yes we could all get it wrong; so what was the point of the question.
My point was how realistic were his figures with regards, the Mind Sports and the fact he was attempting to make a profit out of the room rentals.



Again what is your point? We all make promises. We get some wrong.
Same point as above. How realistic was he.



I don’t recall Mt Buller nor Ian Rogers explaining the late imposition of a new significant charge.
And can you detail what Mt Buller see differently?
I'm simply saying that what I'm hearing from people who have spoken to the people at Mt. Buller differs from the guru.



Are you authorised to withdraw george’s complementary post about David’s work on this deal, and class it as just ‘diplomatic’. George sounded more genuine than that in his post.
Yes I suggested it was george being diplomatic and he replied

Bill is right - diplomacy is very very important but the fact remains irrespctive of what happened if David had not initiated things we would never have had the opportunity we have now.

I was not commenting on methodology or process etc but the simple fact he introduced the ACF to the concept and established links - what or how he progressed those links is history and can be debated and analysed but that is not why I thanked him.
All that seems to be doing is acknowledging that the guru opened doors and established links and the last sentence makes it clear that he wasnt thanking him for how he progressed them.



I don’t have a problem with a $10,000 organisers fee in principle. I would be fascinated to hear any poster say he did not expect David to have a pecuniary interest in a deal like Buller.
I was expecting that he would pay himself a fee out of the income and not thru some undisclosed arrangement.


Did you at any stage think David was doing the deal for altruism?
David being altruistic was never considered as an option.


Same comment from me > I anticipate that we all think David hopes to make a profit personally. Paying an organisers fee is not a principle I have a problem with.
Neother do I, except I expect such a fee to be disclosed up fromt.



I must have missed this part Bill. Can you post again.
Refer post #165 in this thread.

jeffrei
10-07-2004, 07:32 PM
bill junior, hardly. i thought that title was owned by chesslover
:whistle:

:P Just messin with ya, man!

Bill Gletsos
10-07-2004, 07:33 PM
Geoff is a member of the original Mt Buller bid committee. The full composition was D. Cordover, C. Depasquale, G. Wastell, G. Saw, G. Bekker, R. Jamieson (source Mt Buller minutes 15/2/04).

I am not aware of any other potential interest he has in this matter.
I was aware of that.
I was specifically interested in whether the guru employed him as a coach.

Bill Gletsos
10-07-2004, 07:39 PM
No, Bill junior. The topic is closed. I think it should stay here as it's a personal post that's related to this thread (hint: read Bill's replies to people besides me earlier in this thread).

Now let's get back to more important business. I will continue to write posts on the Mt Buller issue and Bill will continue to jot down one-line replies. I just want people to know why I'll be ignoring them (regardless of how politely or impolitely they are written).
The problem was that the majority of posters I replied to on this thread were just making comments based on speculation rather than any actual facts.
And when it came to some posters they clearly had vested interests.

Kevin Bonham
10-07-2004, 07:48 PM
Discussion regarding Bill's posting style has now been copied so those who moving any further discussion of it here unless it mushrooms significantly.

BroadZ
10-07-2004, 07:53 PM
I was aware of that.
I was specifically interested in whether the guru employed him as a coach.

thats some weak bullcrap. if anything their competition, but not really cause cordovers all in schools whereas jef just has private students. i think 10 out of the 10 kids who won titles at the vic juniors last month were his students. trust me, hes not working for cordover.

also I don’t like what youre implying, you need to check yourself before you wreck yourself. jef was much more polite to you than you deserved

jeffrei
10-07-2004, 07:55 PM
i think 10 out of the 10 kids who won titles at the vic juniors last month were his students.

Not going to dignify this topic of discussion with a direct reply, but this is the only thing you wrote that I disagree with: Box Hill won 10/10 titles, only 7 of them were my kids. The others were D.Bourmistrov, D.Stojic and E.Galiabovich.

/jef

Garvinator
10-07-2004, 07:57 PM
thats some weak bullcrap. if anything their competition, but not really cause cordovers all in schools whereas jef just has private students. i think 10 out of the 10 kids who won titles at the vic juniors last month were his students. trust me, hes not working for cordover.

also I don’t like what youre implying, you need to check yourself before you wreck yourself. jef was much more polite to you than you deserved
so let me understand this, ppl can make wild claims regarding bill, but then bill cant ask questions in return :confused: about possible conflicts of interests. :uhoh:

Bill Gletsos
10-07-2004, 08:00 PM
thats some weak bullcrap. if anything their competition, but not really cause cordovers all in schools whereas jef just has private students. i think 10 out of the 10 kids who won titles at the vic juniors last month were his students. trust me, hes not working for cordover.
Given starters raising of pecuniary interests, it was an entirely reasonable question. After all many on here are not Victorians.


also I don’t like what youre implying, you need to check yourself before you wreck yourself.
I dont care what you think.


jef was much more polite to you than you deserved
I have been as polite to jef as he has to me.

jeffrei
10-07-2004, 08:11 PM
so let me understand this, ppl can make wild claims regarding bill, but then bill cant ask questions in return :confused: about possible conflicts of interests. :uhoh:

Oh he can ask...it's just that as far as I'm concerned he's forfeited the right to a reply (and hitherto I would have replied to his questions, no matter what I thought of them or the way they were expressed). This is a cumulative decision that I've come to over several months. I suggest you read the fine print of my reply to BroadZ if you want to know what's going on with 'conflicts of interest' in this instance. :D

PS: Wild claims???! Dude u crack me up :P . You-all have yourself a sweet night...

arosar
10-07-2004, 08:14 PM
Boys! I only have this to say before I go...it's the friggin' weekend. So go away and enjoy yourselves. If you're in Sydney, there's a coffee carnival at the Rocks tomorrow. I'll be at the Duke of Cornwall pub after that for the oldest jazz band in the world....Wherever you are....pls go have yourselves some fun....

Cheers boys.

AR

jeffrei
10-07-2004, 08:16 PM
Boys! I only have this to say before I go...it's the friggin' weekend. So go away and enjoy yourselves.

:lol: Point taken, man, but I was going out later anyway. I'm only here under extreme duress - once this Mt Buller thing gets decided (either way) I am going to take a loooooooooooooooooooong holiday from this BB.

BroadZ
10-07-2004, 08:21 PM
Boys! I only have this to say before I go...it's the friggin' weekend. So go away and enjoy yourselves. If you're in Sydney, there's a coffee carnival at the Rocks tomorrow. I'll be at the Duke of Cornwall pub after that for the oldest jazz band in the world....Wherever you are....pls go have yourselves some fun....

Cheers boys.

AR

when its the holidays the weekend becomes the 2 restin up days man

Kevin Bonham
10-07-2004, 08:52 PM
Wherever you are....pls go have yourselves some fun....

Hey Amiel, this morning I went down south past Huonville for lunch. The mountains were beautiful all covered with snow and I had abalone soup then later, somewhere else, the best apple/cinnamon pancake I've ever come across. No fun deficit here. ;)

(Was going to go see a band tonight too, but they cancelled, so I think I'll stay home and watch the SOLCC instead.)

jenni
10-07-2004, 09:31 PM
Libby, I have some reason to believe that your ACT-based answer to this question might be the same as mine. Why didn’t you take action to stop the ACF running into a ‘all or nothing’ deal with Mt Buller the first time around?

/jef

Geoff,

I was President at the time, so I guess my responsibility. I felt the schools was totally wrong - I think I have made that clear. After the meeting in Perth where no-one voted for Mt Buller for the schools comp, I embarked on a lobbying exercise. Basically many of the states were very unhappy with the way the schools comp had been hi-jacked, however they did not want to be divisive and cause the sort of bunfight that is now happening.

At one point in the lobbying process, Cordover said he was prepared to delink the schools comp and he took this back to CV, but CV were not prepared to give up the schools comp.

After a month of talking to various states, I became convinced that to try to do anything about the schools comp (other than to try and get the date moved to Dec), would be harmful.

As far as the juniors go - I thought it was worth giving David's concept a go. The juniors in Morwell was one of the best we have ever been to and initially it sounded as though Mt Buller might be the same.

Now the whole thing seems a disaster - we are going to end up with some dodgy juniors at a hotel, without all the junior friendly things we were hoping for.

Garvinator
10-07-2004, 09:40 PM
As far as the juniors go - I thought it was worth giving David's concept a go. The juniors in Morwell was one of the best we have ever been to and initially it sounded as though Mt Buller might be the same.

Now the whole thing seems a disaster - we are going to end up with some dodgy juniors at a hotel, without all the junior friendly things we were hoping for.
im genuinely asking, if davids idea was worth giving a go, why isnt the mt bullers new proposal worth giving a go at the same venue? or have i misunderstood your post? :confused:

jenni
10-07-2004, 11:53 PM
im genuinely asking, if davids idea was worth giving a go, why isnt the mt bullers new proposal worth giving a go at the same venue? or have i misunderstood your post? :confused:
I have quite literally just come back from hols, and I am still not up to speed on my e-mails and the BB. I have had a bit of a debriefing from Libby. I am not even sure what the new Mt Buller bid consists of, or who is running it.

However to explain my remarks.

The Aus Juniors held in Morwell in 2000 was fantastic, because everyone stayed at the venue. We (my family), have never been to one like that and my kids still vote it the best ever. We stayed in student accommodation, but they were separate huts, with cooking facilities. You could stay as a group, or as a family, but were able to socialise with all the other kids. You had juniors from all the different states playing basketball, tennis, going swimming together. Of course the chess was still the most important thing (Gareth won the Aus under 12 that year, so definitely a priority), but the bonding and socialising was very important too. Of course a lot of this can happen when the Aus Juniors is held in a good environment, even if you don't stay together, as the kids do socialise after their games and if sports facilities are available they tend to get together and kick a ball or whatever.

What sold me (and many others) on Cordovers concept, was that (initially), I thought everyone would stay together and some of the atmosphere of Morwell would be recreated. In addition we had the other mindsports happening, so there was something for kids and non chess playing siblings to do.

Now I'm not sure - I've heard the new accommodation packages are going to be very cheap, but will it be cheap enough to tempt everyone to stay there? The Mindsports stuff has all died, so what is there going to be to do, when the kids need a break from chess or on rest days?

It might all be OK, but to be quite honest the whole thing is quite embarrassing. We've been pushing a number of "new" parents to take their kids and I think they are kind of stunned at this messy situation.

Mischa
11-07-2004, 12:27 AM
as a parent of a promising junior I can say that Mt buller is a bad optionfor a family

Mischa
11-07-2004, 12:28 AM
the cost is extreme and the options limited

Mischa
11-07-2004, 12:28 AM
And I am from Melbourne

george
11-07-2004, 12:58 AM
Hi Jenni,

Im here completeing forms , budgets etc etc.

I am the person putting together the new bid for Mt Buller.

Cheers
George Howard