ECF finance meeting 2024

[Ian Thompson]

Voting for £33 rather than £35 makes good sense as a representative for silver members.

Why? Voting for a £2 lower membership fee for combined Silver/Gold members is also a vote to reduce the ECF's income by £10K-£15K (depending on exact membership numbers). How can that be said to make good sense without also knowing what the consequences are for the ECF of the loss of planned income?

[Paul Cooksey]

Voting for £33 rather than £35 makes good sense as a representative for silver members.

Why? Voting for a £2 lower membership fee for combined Silver/Gold members is also a vote to reduce the ECF's income by £10K-£15K (depending on exact membership numbers). How can that be said to make good sense without also knowing what the consequences are for the ECF of the loss of planned income?

A bit easier than usual this year, a reduction in the 140k the ECF has in its grassroots development fund:
https://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-cont ... opment.pdf

[John Swain]

Voting for £33 rather than £35 makes good sense as a representative for silver members.

Why? Voting for a £2 lower membership fee for combined Silver/Gold members is also a vote to reduce the ECF's income by £10K-£15K (depending on exact membership numbers). How can that be said to make good sense without also knowing what the consequences are for the ECF of the loss of planned income?

I was commenting from the perspective of a representative for silver members. There were other ways for the ECF to raise its necessary income rather than hit silver members disproportionately hard. Perhaps a bit more might have been asked of bronze members like myself.

The paradox is that you might generate more income from gold/silver members if the fee was slightly less than £35, perhaps £33. We cannot assume that silver members will all renew as gold/silver members next season; some may opt for bronze membership. Gold members will enjoy a slight reduction in fees but the ECF is treating its silver members as cash cows. No one has a crystal ball, knowing whether the silver members who support their local non-FIDE rated Congress and perhaps just play one, or maybe two, events requiring silver membership, will flinch at the extra £15 (rather than £9) and decide to play in their local league only next season and therefore choose bronze membership. This is the big unknown. It may have a critical effect on the viability of some congresses, especially with some events experiencing much higher costs for their venues. It's the last few entries which determine whether a Congress makes a loss or is in profit so it will not take a huge switch from silver to bronze membership to make an appreciable difference.

[IM Jack Rudd]

It is a big unknown, but my guess would be that the price elasticity of demand for ECF membership tends to be on the low side.

[Roger Lancaster]

It is a big unknown, but my guess would be that the price elasticity of demand for ECF membership tends to be on the low side.

I think that's the assumption that's being made for financial forecasting purposes. It's probably because, despite all the fuss over the level of ECF fees, these will continue to account for only a small proportion of most people's chess-related expenditure. Club subscriptions and congress entry fees are likely to account for rather more and even 'league only' players typically (except for those who ride in others' cars without offering to contribute towards petrol) incur travel costs to away matches.

[John Townsend]

Chess is not a cheap hobby these days, if you take into account club membership, travel to and from matches and congresses, congress entry fees, hotel expenses - and, of course, the ECF.

I reckon it compares unfavourably with other hobbies I have pursued in recent years, including tennis, bridge, and chess historical research.

[John Upham]

Chess is not a cheap hobby these days, if you take into account club membership, travel to and from matches and congresses, congress entry fees, hotel expenses - and, of course, the ECF.

I reckon it compares unfavourably with other hobbies I have pursued in recent years, including tennis, bridge, and chess historical research.

What are the membership, travel and other costs for chess historical research?

[John Townsend]

John, much depends on how much travelling you undertake, but, roughly, it includes journies to record offices and libraries, search fees, costs of documents and copying, postage, purchases of books, magazines articles, and membership of appropriate societies. It can also include production costs of books and articles, if you are that way inclined.

[John Upham]

I reckon it compares unfavourably with other hobbies I have pursued in recent years, including tennis,

What is a typical annual tennis club membership?

Have you spent anything on tennis equipment, tennis clothing, entry fees to events, membership of the LTA?

For those who play regularly LTA membership is £30 per annum. For those who don't the fee is less.

[John Townsend]

John, I don't know what is typical, but I used to pay about £100. However, I haven't played since Covid. I played about weekly at club sessions, travelling about ten miles. I was a L.T.A. member but was not asked for dough. I (very) occasionally bought a racket or footwear, or (once) had a racket re-strung.

Yours,
Drobny.

[Roger Lancaster]

Chess is not a cheap hobby these days, if you take into account club membership, travel to and from matches and congresses, congress entry fees, hotel expenses - and, of course, the ECF.

I reckon it compares unfavourably with other hobbies I have pursued in recent years, including tennis, bridge, and chess historical research.

How chess compares, cost-wise, against other activities is (although not uninteresting) a separate matter. I think John's list just supports the notion that the odd £2 more or less on ECF fees is, for most chess players, a drop in the ocean.

[NickFaulks]

A bit easier than usual this year, a reduction in the 140k the ECF has in its grassroots development fund

I hope this comment was made with tongue firmly in cheek. It is absolutely clear that DCMS has not made the grant in order to allow membership fees to be kept down.

[Mick Norris]

Chess is not a cheap hobby these days, if you take into account club membership, travel to and from matches and congresses, congress entry fees, hotel expenses - and, of course, the ECF.

I reckon it compares unfavourably with other hobbies I have pursued in recent years, including tennis, bridge, and chess historical research.

How chess compares, cost-wise, against other activities is (although not uninteresting) a separate matter. I think John's list just supports the notion that the odd £2 more or less on ECF fees is, for most chess players, a drop in the ocean.

I'm not sure it is a separate matter, if people are choosing between chess and bowls/tennis/bridge, but when my daughter was younger, most of the stuff she did (dancing, swimming, roller-skating, drama, rainbows/brownies/guides) was more expensive than chess, so I'm a bit surprised about John T's view on the alternatives

Back on topic, silver membership is currently £27 for adults, that's going up to £35, so the question is would the £8 increase put off a significant number of people from entering a congress? If so, would this be sufficient to affect the viability of congresses, as posed by John S?

I reckon for most people, congresses are an expense due to travel, and possibly accommodation, as well as entry fees, but I'm not sure that applies to an individual who might enter only their local congress once a year

[Ian Thompson]

Back on topic, silver membership is currently £27 for adults, that's going up to £35, so the question is would the £8 increase put off a significant number of people from entering a congress? If so, would this be sufficient to affect the viability of congresses, as posed by John S?

I reckon for most people, congresses are an expense due to travel, and possibly accommodation, as well as entry fees, but I'm not sure that applies to an individual who might enter only their local congress once a year

If someone is only entering one congress a year then it's not £8 extra to play in the congress, it's £15 - Gold membership at £35 if they play in the congress; Bronze membership at £20 if they don't play in it.

To me, the issue here is not the difference between Bronze and Gold membership costs. It's the pay to play fee being £15, which is excessive. I'd set it at maybe £5 so it's cost effective for the occasional congress player to be a Bronze member and to pay it once or twice as an alternative to paying £15 to upgrade to Gold membership.

[Roger de Coverly]

I'd set it at maybe £5 so it's cost effective for the occasional congress player to be a Bronze member and to pay it once or twice as an alternative to paying £15 to upgrade to Gold membership.

That's not an argument accepted by those who make decisions for the ECF. It's contradictory though. At one level they profess to being in favour of extending chess, at another they create financial disincentives to new and occasional players. With the popularity of chess.com and lichess, you might suspect the existence of an untapped market of those who have never played OTB chess. Local Congresses can be a way of attracting them to OTB chess.