ECF Vacancies

[Stewart Reuben]

I, and a number of others, have often thought the federation was at its most effective when providing an umbrella which entrepenurs could work under independently. Another example is Poker Stars IOM Congress. Like Gibraltar, the ECF is the link to FIDE by those events.
But there is another matter. Chess in England became hugely successful in 1972 and for some years subsequently. It would be totally foolish to think that could be maintained indefinitely. From my perception, going back to the 1950s, we are still well ahead of the game then.
There were regular TV programmes. There have been none on British TV for about 20 years. BUT, CHECKMATE, if successful, may generate more TV coverage and that would result in more sponsorship.

[Michael Farthing]

I think it might be interesting to hear also comments on the type of sponsorship we should look for. One aspect of this thread that I think is misguided is the hope for high end professional level sponsorship. I don't believe it is there, but in addition I don't think it would help. For chess to thrive it needs a large user base. Surely we can make better progress by attempting to get some equivalent to the Sunday Times schools competition? Getting a lot of juniors going seems to me a much more useful activity than big prizes for the top players. Also, I suspect the sponsorship might be slightly easier: the sponsor is getting noticed by a lot of people who would be actively enjoying and participating in an event they have provided: they would get much rosier glows!

[Stewart Reuben]

It has recently been agreed in Gibraltar that there be one lesson a week in chess in primary schools. That is the type of thing Michael has in mind, but I wouldn't describe that as sponsorship.
The UK Chess Challemge is sponsored and very valuably so. The National Schools Competititon goes well and could have sponsorship as it once had.
A shopping list can be drawn up. Each of us would have a different list and different priorities. One thing I have said to people seeking financial support for chess, is to choose what you believe in.
SHOPPING LIST
BRITISH CHAMPIONSHIP attracts 1000 entrants, plus there are all the qualifying events. A great deal of publicity throughout the year. A great many players.
HASTINGS attracts 400 entrants. It is a bottomless well, badly needs money. But there is an existing sponsor, Tradewise.
GRAND PRIX. Another bottomless well. But there is an existing sponsor, Tradewise.
ENGLISH COUNTIES CHAMPIONSHIP. i don't know how many people play. Publicity over 8 months.
ANY LOCAL LEAGUE. I don't know whether banks and building societies still have funds available for local support. It is best tied in to junior activiity as well. Probably thinking of £1000 a year.

The best value sponsrships have usually been new events. Then the branding is easy. LLoyds Bank Masters was one of the few chess events in the world always known by the name of the sponsor. Even after 10 years, The Smith & Williamson British Championship was still often referred to without the sponsor's name in front.

Don't for one moment think the above is exhaustive.

[Andrew Zigmond]

Junior chess is probably the easiest area to attract sponsorship and/ or funding as it is more naturally charitable as an enterprise and the benefits are more obvious (in that you'll see the children enjoying themselves and improving). There is more scope for arranging sponsorship locally as the funds needed are less and local companies benefit from the name recognition.

In some clubs and leagues you really see the benefit when somebody with a business background gets involved. I sometimes think that there is a dearth of people in chess who have professional backgrounds - it is true that potential sponsors and benefactors are put off by amateurism and incompetence.

[Joey Stewart]

Would these roles not be more easily filled if they were paying jobs? I could see somebody happily willing to take on several of these tasks as a full time occupation, but reluctant to do even one thankless task for free - it adds so much more incentive to do a decent job when you are being rewarded for your work, plus not so easy to just up and leave the position.

[MartinCarpenter]

Well yes, but (to make a genuine difference) that would require non trivial amounts of money Even harder to find than volunteers!

[Michael Farthing]

I don't think it would need to be a six figure salary.
The Board put forward membership fee increases for the rather more dubious ambition of having a six figure reserve sum.
A £30000 salary for just the CEO, for example, involves a fee increase of about £3 per member. I agree this is non-trivial but it is also not totally unrealistic.

[Roger de Coverly]

A £30000 salary for just the CEO, for example, involves a fee increase of about £3 per member.

I think it's probably nearer £5 or £ 6, because there's VAT to pay on membership income and there would be additional costs for National Insurance and employee benefits.

[LawrenceCooper]

I don't think it would need to be a six figure salary.
The Board put forward membership fee increases for the rather more dubious ambition of having a six figure reserve sum.
A £30000 salary for just the CEO, for example, involves a fee increase of about £3 per member. I agree this is non-trivial but it is also not totally unrealistic.

I think that we are very lucky to have Mike Truran, even more so as we aren't paying him. I'm not at all sure offering a salary would lead to anyone better.

I did find it a bit strange that I received a small honararium for my short time as I.R.O. but nothing as International & Junior Director. I'm not sure that had the directorships been paid that I could have given anything more than I already did, as both involved effectively being on call 24/7 365 days a year.

[Michael Farthing]

I hope that nothing I have said on this matter should be seen as a reflection on any person voluntarily giving of their time, especially not Mike. Nevertheless, he had to be dragged to the chair like the Speaker of the House: he didn't put up for CEO of his own accord and indeed declined a suggestion to do so (by me, actually, but probably by others too).

The point is that, whatever the current situtaion, finding someone to do the job is a regular problem. Also, one of the advantages of payment is that more time can usually be given to the job in consequence. This must be seen as a long term discussion not a response to the current (unusually rosy) situation.

[LawrenceCooper]

I hope that nothing I have said on this matter should be seen as a reflection on any person voluntarily giving of their time, especially not Mike. Nevertheless, he had to be dragged to the chair like the Speaker of the House: he didn't put up for CEO of his own accord and indeed declined a suggestion to do so (by me, actually, but probably by others too).

The point is that, whatever the current situtaion, finding someone to do the job is a regular problem. Also, one of the advantages of payment is that more time can usually be given to the job in consequence. This must be seen as a long term discussion not a response to the current (unusually rosy) situation.

It's a reasonable point for many of the jobs, not just CE. At the moment though the only way to finance it would be increasing membership fees or cutting funding to the international teams. Even cutting out the rent of the office and having the staff work from home wouldn't be much of a saving in terms of an additional paid employee.

[Roger de Coverly]

Reviving this thread, there's a vacancy that has been filled that has attracted record (43 and counting) comment on the Streatham & Brixton blog.

http://www.streathambrixtonchess.blogsp ... ckett.html

It cross references an earlier thread here that has been locked.

For what it's worth, it's part of the Home Director's responsibilities, although I wouldn't know whether it's an autonomous appointment or subject to the approval of the CEO or the rest of the Board.

[Brian Towers]

Look on the bright side, Roger. You can't accuse the new incumbent of not having been an active chess player

[NickFaulks]

I'm surprised and a little disappointed that there has been no reference to this, an excellent development.

"The ECF Board has appointed Robert Stern to fill the vacant position of Chairman of the Governance Committee."

[NickFaulks]

Look on the bright side, Roger. You can't accuse the new incumbent of not having been an active chess player

I find myself saying this too often nowadays, but you couldn't make it up.