Malcolm Pein's CEO manifesto

[JustinHorton]

The DO would need to be seen to be impartial

Within certain definitions of "need"

[Chris Goodall]

Absolutely agree on your first point - and I'm also sure you're right with regard to the second. I'm not at all sure that 'not knowing what to do' is the block to clubs transforming to something that they are not at the moment.

That's the key, innit. You want me to plant a chess club in a coffee shop, don't give me Chairman Mao's Guide To Planting Clubs In Coffee Shops. Give me a second volunteer so we can play 1 minute against each other and see if we can gather some kibitzers. Me sitting on my own with a chess set doesn't work, I've tried it.

If the DO causes a single local volunteer to think "well if they're paying some bloke, they don't need me any more" then it has been a net negative for that locality.

[Hok Yin Stephen Chiu]

There's nothing wrong with spending £20k to get £20k worth of added value. Giving the same £200 worth of top secret chess advice to 100 different people doesn't count as £20k worth of added value.

Ultimately, there are two things delegates have to consider..

(1) The great idea that "We must do something. here is something. we must do it".. This is, not to say we should do nothing, but we do have to assess whether the plans from either candidates are indeed value for money.
(2) Consider, would we have a greater impact on local chess, if instead of providing 10k for 2 chess development consultants, we simply give 50 local leagues/organisations £400 each, to start something new, and, then assess the value of money/ impact of each scheme after the financial year (or each quarter)..? And then share best practice and success stories with the ECF membership/ Local leagues/clubs...

[Adam Raoof]

There's nothing wrong with spending £20k to get £20k worth of added value. Giving the same £200 worth of top secret chess advice to 100 different people doesn't count as £20k worth of added value.

Ultimately, the are two things delegates have to consider..

(1) The great idea tbat "We must do something. here is something. we must do it".. This is, not to say we should do nothing, but we do have to assess whether the plans from either candidates are indeed value for money.
(2) Consider, would we have a greater impact on local chess, if instead of providing 10k for 2 chess development consultants, we simply give 50 local leagues/organisations £400 each, to start something new, and, then assess the value of money/ impact of each scheme after the financial year (or each quarter)..? And then share best practice and success stories with the ECF membership/ Local leagues/clubs...

If you were standing for one of these posts, I would vote for you!

[John Reyes]

There's nothing wrong with spending £20k to get £20k worth of added value. Giving the same £200 worth of top secret chess advice to 100 different people doesn't count as £20k worth of added value.

Ultimately, there are two things delegates have to consider..

(1) The great idea that "We must do something. here is something. we must do it".. This is, not to say we should do nothing, but we do have to assess whether the plans from either candidates are indeed value for money.
(2) Consider, would we have a greater impact on local chess, if instead of providing 10k for 2 chess development consultants, we simply give 50 local leagues/organisations £400 each, to start something new, and, then assess the value of money/ impact of each scheme after the financial year (or each quarter)..? And then share best practice and success stories with the ECF membership/ Local leagues/clubs...

Also you not also mention the Office Staff as at the moment, there are understaff and some of the funds should be used for the office, as they deal with a lot of stuff. if i lived near by i would help as we need the office to do all the stuff that we asked like grading etc

[Chris Goodall]

(2) Consider, would we have a greater impact on local chess, if instead of providing 10k for 2 chess development consultants, we simply give 50 local leagues/organisations £400 each, to start something new, and, then assess the value of money/ impact of each scheme after the financial year (or each quarter)..? And then share best practice and success stories with the ECF membership/ Local leagues/clubs...

I think it goes without saying that we would. In that if something costs £400 to do, it's still going to cost £400 after we've paid two consultants £20,000 to tell us to do it. (Hopefully they don't disagree with each other, eh!) So the £20k isn't the real Development Officer budget, it's the baseline that we need to spend to get to the point where we know how to start spending the real budget.

(It would be classic consultant behaviour to recommend the most expensive course of action, then blame the client when they discover they can't do that because they spent the money on consultants.)

[IM Jack Rudd]

Hmmm.

For what it's worth, I reckon that, excluding known eaters of money like title-norm tournaments, what most chess organizations in this country need is not an injection of capital, it's an injection of enterprise; I suspect most of what is needed to actually revitalize local chess lies in the realm of new ideas about it.

[NickFaulks]

If the DO causes a single local volunteer to think "well if they're paying some bloke, they don't need me any more" then it has been a net negative for that locality.

Difficult to argue with that.

[Matthew Read]

Malcolm Pein New policy document: A way forward to deploy legacy BCF assets with appropriate safeguards for @ecfchess
Simplify the ECF/BCF/Chess Centre structure, save money, minimise tax liability build reserves then develop #Chess See:

https://developingenglishchess.com/bcf-legacy-assets/

[Chris Goodall]

Simplify the ECF/BCF/Chess Centre structure, save money, minimise tax liability build reserves then develop #Chess

Those are certainly all words, but what the document actually says is "I agree that giving the money to Chess Trust is sensible but I just don't want to, I want Council to believe I can lead them to the sunlit uplands, so can we pleeeeeease kick this into the long grass until I get elected?"

[Roger de Coverly]

Those are certainly all words, but what the document actually says is "I agree that giving the money to Chess Trust is sensible but I just don't want to

Transferring the PIF assets to the Chess Trust has been the plan for some years. Ring fencing some of the assets for spending in the near future is in essence a minor tactical detail or operational matter. Loading the Chess Trust board with as many ECF insiders as can legally be added is also a detail. Does it really require a contested election and Malcolm's sidekicks identifying agents of the evil Truran in every email or forum posting?

[John Upham]

Malcolm's sidekicks

Roger,

Is it only MBP who has sidekicks or does MCT also have them? (Presumably not the same ones but you never no).

Is a sidekick the same as a colleague?

[JustinHorton]

Is it only MBP who has sidekicks

It's been a prominent feature of hs operation for some years, John, hard to see anything comparable elsewhere

[John Upham]

Is it only MBP who has sidekicks

It's been a prominent feature of hs operation for some years, John, hard to see anything comparable elsewhere

What are the defining characteristics of sidekicks?

You are asserting that MCT does not also have any of them at all?

[J T Melsom]

Of course MCT has supporters - though none are employed by him. And of course in an election campaign both sides will campaign vigorously and honesty might be compromised. But this isn't the first time the supporters of MBP have conducted the campaign with a significant degree of unpleasantness, such that even those wishing to consider the policy platforms of the candidates find themselves put off by the personalities.