FIDE accounts

[Angus French]

I don't know. I'm only one such Director, and it would be wrong of the Director of Home Chess to speak on behalf of the more appropriate Directors to put this to the meeting.

If the ECF directors announced support for Kirsan, that would be extremely divisive amongst the wider English chess community. On the other hand, there would be reservations about support for Kasparov, if not him personally then for his announced policies and running mates. I'm suggesting that the ECF Directors take advantage of the only scheduled public opportunity between now and the FIDE elections to indulge in some limited consultation with those who put them in office.

Hear! Hear!

[Alex Holowczak]

I don't know. I'm only one such Director, and it would be wrong of the Director of Home Chess to speak on behalf of the more appropriate Directors to put this to the meeting.

If the ECF directors announced support for Kirsan, that would be extremely divisive amongst the wider English chess community. On the other hand, there would be reservations about support for Kasparov, if not him personally then for his announced policies and running mates. I'm suggesting that the ECF Directors take advantage of the only scheduled public opportunity between now and the FIDE elections to indulge in some limited consultation with those who put them in office.

Hear! Hear!

I don't have a problem with consultation at all. I just think there are more effective platforms for consultation than a 6-monthly meeting where the person Council wants to speak to is unable to attend. For example, there has been a poll on this Forum recently. As we've seen in recent years, open-ended consultation items tend to have the result of Council rushing through the budget and membership rates at 10-to-6, which is one of the main reasons for having the meeting in the first place. Other things get missed out altogether.

If this happens, then the consultation should be done in advance of the meeting. That said, I don't think there will be many regional variations on what you've said.

[Chris Rice]

contrasts the openness of FIDE's accounts with the alleged secrecy regarding the funding of the Kasparov Chess Foundation.

I don't know that the current President ever publishes accounts of how much he spends of his own money on FIDE re-election, still less of how much he has spent in the past on prizes for the World Cup.

Looking at the accounts though, membership fees paid from Federations aren't a large part of FIDE's income, selling titles seems quite lucrative by contrast.

The highly entertaining 2013 FIDE Executive Board minutes (link below) indicates that the current President (in election mode and should one choose to believe him of course) has spent US$70 million of his own money over the past 18 years none of which seems to be recorded in the FIDE accounts. He then spouts on about how the current FIDE accounts are showing surpluses due presumably to his fiscal prowess and how the previous President was basically corrupt. The accounts were audited by Ernst & Young one of the top audit firms in the world but they clearly indicate that their audit opinion is based on the figures they are presented with and its FIDE's responsibility to decide whether these figures are the result of error or fraud.

http://www.fide.com/images/stories/NEWS ... inutes.pdf

[NickFaulks]

The highly entertaining 2013 FIDE Executive Board minutes (link below) indicates that the current President (in election mode and should one choose to believe him of course) has spent US$70 million of his own money over the past 18 years none of which seems to be recorded in the FIDE accounts. He then spouts on about how the current FIDE accounts are showing surpluses due presumably to his fiscal prowess and how the previous President was basically corrupt. The accounts were audited by Ernst & Young one of the top audit firms in the world but they clearly indicate that their audit opinion is based on the figures they are presented with and its FIDE's responsibility to decide whether these figures are the result of error or fraud.

http://www.fide.com/images/stories/NEWS ... inutes.pdf

While you're there, please scroll down to page 11, where it was revealed that the annex to the QC minutes, which contained some quite extraordinary recommendations, was a fake, inserted after the meetings, and had not been seen, let alone discussed, by the Commission. Having signed the minutes as correct, I was not happy.

Notably, not one single EB member felt this was worthy of comment, and they duly voted unanimously to approve the whole thing. The Kirsan camp see this as normal practice, and their opponents hope to gain power so that they can behave in exactly the same way. The common factor is of course the QC Chairman - this took place immediately before the party where he was unveiled as Kasparov's running mate.

[JustinHorton]

Notably, not one single EB member felt this was worthy of comment, and they duly voted unanimously to approve the whole thing.

Of course, because this is normal for the chess community. Malpractice is akmost inevitably overlooked until the money runs out.

[NickFaulks]

Notably, not one single EB member felt this was worthy of comment, and they duly voted unanimously to approve the whole thing.

Of course, because this is normal for the chess community. Malpractice is akmost inevitably overlooked until the money runs out.

I'm not sure what point you're making. The silent ones included representatives from Western Europe and North America, who presumably do not consider themselves to be on the Kirsan gravy train.

[JustinHorton]

I'm not sure what point you're making.

Apparently not, though I'm not sure why.

[NickFaulks]

"Malpractice is akmost inevitably overlooked until the money runs out."

I'm sorry if I am the only reader not to understand this gnomic comment, but please humour me. Wouldn't it be overlooked only by those who think they are getting some of the money or benefitting from the malpractice?

[JustinHorton]

Not normally, no.

Overlooking malpractice is a fine chess-community tradition, like the club blitz tournament or complaining about your rating being too low.

[David Sedgwick]

"Malpractice is akmost inevitably overlooked until the money runs out."

I'm sorry if I am the only reader not to understand this gnomic comment, but please humour me. Wouldn't it be overlooked only by those who think they are getting some of the money or benefitting from the malpractice?

The point is that that includes almost everyone who has even a remote connection with FIDE.

By going public about the fake document, firstly at the EB meeting itself and now on here, you must surely have jeopardised your prospects of continuing to hold an important position on a FIDE Commission after Tromso, whatever the outcome of the elections.

Most people (and I include myself) are too self-interested to do that.

[NickFaulks]

David, you are too kind, but doesn't this apply to most politicised organisations ( and which aren't? )? MPs who wish to be ministers, or barristers who wish to be judges, generally temper their behaviour even if they are not natural supporters of the establishment. A few seem to get away with not doing so.

[Roger de Coverly]

The allegation, disputed (?) by FIDE apologists, is that votes are available for a suitable payment. In this case, aren't the ten voters allegedly being delivered by Leong to the Kasparov camp being short-changed as surely they should get the pay-off rather than the Leong Chess Academy?

Apparently it's only a draft contract that was leaked and the Kasparov team will reveal all on Friday 24th.

It's probably not a surprise that the contract was leaked, after all sending a "change of side" document via the FIDE server cannot be the most secure method of communication.

[David Sedgwick]

The allegation, disputed (?) by FIDE apologists, is that votes are available for a suitable payment. In this case, aren't the ten voters allegedly being delivered by Leong to the Kasparov camp being short-changed as surely they should get the pay-off rather than the Leong Chess Academy?

Apparently it's only a draft contract that was leaked and the Kasparov team will reveal all on Friday 24th.

It's probably not a surprise that the contract was leaked, after all sending a "change of side" document via the FIDE server cannot be the most secure method of communication.

Isn't this comment in the wrong thread?

[Mick Norris]

Possibly, and Kasparov's press conference is tomorrow I think