ECF finance meeting 2024

[Mick Norris]

I haven't heard anything from the Gold reps

[Roger Lancaster]

So is Junior Bronze being abolished?

It appears to have already been abolished as Bronze membership is £18, but Junior Silver is £6 at present

ECF membership rates

It used to be that Junior Bronze and Junior Silver rates were the same and it didn't seem there was any point in acquiring the former as the latter gave extra rights such as the right to play in non-FIDE-rated tournaments. So I guess a decision was taken to remove the Junior Bronze category... But, could there now (with the merging of Silver and Gold categories) be a case for reintroducing it to have a reduced rate for juniors playing league chess only? My guess is probably not as I think it would likely benefit very few players.

Junior bronze, although it continued to be available, fell into disuse as junior silver offered greater benefits at the same price. However, the constitutional position as I understand it is that - when Council voted to amalgamate silver and gold but leave bronze unaltered - this decision applied equally (in the absence of any proviso or qualification to the contrary) to the junior equivalents. Consequently, no decision has yet been made to abolish junior bronze which of course becomes relatively more attractive since the alternative offer of greater benefits at the same price is no longer there.

My understanding, and I stand to be corrected by those who know better, is that junior bronze will reappear at tomorrow's meeting alongside a proposal to abolish this. It will be interesting to see how many of those who argued vehemently in favour of the retention of bronze for adults argue the same way when it comes to juniors where, as far as I can see, much the same logic pertains.

[John Reyes]

meeting started

35 people but can't see the gold rep members on at the moment

[John Reyes]

we onto the BCF meeting now

[John Reyes]

on to membership fees

[John Swain]

meeting started

35 people but can't see the gold rep members on at the moment

There must be quite a few representatives who cannot attend for a variety of perfectly good reasons, some of whom will have offered their apologies. Why single out the gold representatives for comment, and so soon into the meeting when they might be late arriving?

Could it be that, as a representative for silver members who contributed in a major way to the merging of silver membership with gold and a large increase in fees for ex-silver members, you are now looking to become a representative for gold members and hence wish to discredit the existing gold representatives?

[John Reyes]

meeting started

35 people but can't see the gold rep members on at the moment

There must be quite a few representatives who cannot attend for a variety of perfectly good reasons, some of whom will have offered their apologies. Why single out the gold representatives for comment, and so soon into the meeting when they might be late arriving?

Could it be that, as a representative for silver members who contributed in a major way to the merging of silver membership with gold and a large increase in fees for ex-silver members, you are now looking to become a representative for gold members and hence wish to discredit the existing gold representatives?

because they was not on but the gold reps turn up after 2:15pm but they have told that they have not canvances there members. and there a big increased for membership

which membership are you? did you get canvessed?

[John Reyes]

the amended Motion for Silver members fees to be £33 from £35 for the 2024-25 season was lost by 3 hand to 17 against

[Ian Thompson]

Could it be that, as a representative for silver members who contributed in a major way to the merging of silver membership with gold and a large increase in fees for ex-silver members, you are now looking to become a representative for gold members and hence wish to discredit the existing gold representatives?

I don't see why discrediting the existing Gold representatives would be necessary when there will be 4 Gold members representatives, instead of 2, once Silver membership has been abolished.

As I've received no communications from the current Gold representatives they're certainly not encouraging me to vote for them if they stand for re-election.

[John Swain]

the amended Motion for Silver members fees to be £33 from £35 for the 2024-25 season was lost by 3 hand to 17 against

How did you vote?

[John Reyes]

That Council amends the Membership fees table in the agenda to add a Junior Bronze Membership free in the first year and at £6 per annum thereafter and to add a junior non-members game fee of £6 has gone up and has gone to a card vote

For 98
Against 88

[John Reyes]

the amended Motion for Silver members fees to be £33 from £35 for the 2024-25 season was lost by 3 hand to 17 against

How did you vote?

i voted for the £33 as i felt an 30% increase for Silver members was too high.

are you a silver member john? as you will see it in our report for the reason about it

[John Upham]

Unfortunately I was unable to join the meeting.

Are notes of proceedings available anyone?

[John Swain]

the amended Motion for Silver members fees to be £33 from £35 for the 2024-25 season was lost by 3 hand to 17 against

How did you vote?

i voted for the £33 as i felt an 30% increase for Silver members was too high.

are you a silver member john? as you will see it in our report for the reason about it

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

However, if silver membership had been retained, silver members might have been looking at a £2 increase to £29, rather than £33 or £35 (effectively paying for the reduced membership fees for gold members). This is of significance to those of us who help to organise rapidplays and congresses which currently require silver but not gold membership and who are legitimately concerned about what uptake there might be for 2024-25 events.

[Roger Lancaster]

Junior bronze, although it continued to be available, fell into disuse as junior silver offered greater benefits at the same price. However, the constitutional position as I understand it is that - when Council voted to amalgamate silver and gold but leave bronze unaltered - this decision applied equally (in the absence of any proviso or qualification to the contrary) to the junior equivalents. Consequently, no decision has yet been made to abolish junior bronze which of course becomes relatively more attractive since the alternative offer of greater benefits at the same price is no longer there.

My understanding, and I stand to be corrected by those who know better, is that junior bronze will reappear at tomorrow's meeting alongside a proposal to abolish this. It will be interesting to see how many of those who argued vehemently in favour of the retention of bronze for adults argue the same way when it comes to juniors where, as far as I can see, much the same logic pertains.

With the support of other junior organisers, an amendment to retain junior bronze (free for first year, £6 thereafter) was voted through - although only by a narrow majority - 16-12 on a show of hands and then by 98-88 on a card vote. I believe that avoids sending the wrong signal to juniors.