Chess fans and members of the Chess Federation of Canada may be very interested to know that huge changes are planned for the CFC. These changes, as outlined by the CFC Executive, are as follows:
1. Outsource our daily operations.
2. Broker our merchandise business
3. Sell the CFC Office
4. Replace the printed magazine with an online version.
5. Strategic alliances with CMA (and the FQE, see move 6.)
6. Comprehensive review of our membership structure and revenue split with the provinces, including Quebec.
7. Better support for organizers and arbiters in pursuit of better tournaments.
The most recent Governor's Letter can be downloaded online and includes much more details about the plan of action.
The 2007/08 GL7 can be downloaded here.
It should be noted that there are some complaints about the lack of consultation with the Governors themselves. However, it is only fair to point out that the Executive views the current situation of the CFC as an emergency. WHAT DO YOU THINK? Please feel free to post remarks on this blog or elsewhere, such as on ChessTalk.
4 comments:
from ChessTalk
Jonathan Berry: After the current Executive's 8 months in power and some years observing the decline of the CFC, we are presented in one fell swoop, no voting, with more changes in the form of "forced moves" than the CFC normally sees in a decade. Needless to say, the facts behind the need to restructure were obvious to almost everyone in July 2007, and if in having to wait until April 2008 for the Executive to spring it on us, we had hoped for some deep insight, we were to be sadly disappointed.
In general terms, the steps were all necessary. Sure, outsource the daily operations. In other words, return to a central pillar of the Pugi Plan, a pillar that was abandoned by the CFC Executive in 1984. But why the cloak-and-dagger dealings? Why not have a real Pugi Plan, with everything out in the open? The implementation has given the CFC a black mark that won't easily wash away.
Sure, rationalize sales. But why throw out equipment sales (the baby) with the bathwater (books)?
Sure, sell the CFC office. That has been a black mark against the CFC Executive for over a decade. But if you're downsizing from an office that is too big, down to nothing, what do you do with the books and papers, often of historical value? If experience is a teacher, the books and papers will disappear or be dumpstered.
Sure, rationalize the magazine. But making it non-paper is not the only option.
In short, the CFC Executive has taken several reasonable options and stuffed very specific versions of those options down the throats of CFC members and governors. All this based upon the say so of an unrepresentative informal working group. It isn't even a full plan. In my opinion, the CFC Executive has gone too far.
Thanks for posting the CFC story, Nigel. When an organization suddenly moves toward the liquidation of assets, without a consultation with its board, one is right to be a bit suspicious. My own alarm is increased by a recent incident: Several weeks ago I received a letter from CFC, signed by "Paul Bonnie for Stijn de Kerpel," asking me for the payment of dues. I'd paid dues near the end of October last year, and the question I asked the president in my e-mail reply was, Would the MCA have allowed me to play in four (now six) CFC-rated events if I weren't a paid-up member? In fact, the CFC should have been checking its own accounts and its communications with MCA, and asking MCA for assistance. I jestingly remarked that I would dismiss the idea that the CFC was trying to dun me twice. Now I'm not so sure. In Neil Kirton and Glenn Johnstone we have two former Manitoba masters who have become master accountants in Ottawa. I think the Manitoba governors, in concert with other CFC governors, should ask Neil and Glenn--or other equally skilled and trustworthy persons--if they would be willing to do a "pro bono" audit of CFC. As for the CFC's "financial crisis," if there is one at this moment, I find it a bit hard to understand. There must be a number of competent professional fundraisers across Canada who would be willing to get on the phone for a reasonable percentage of the contributions to a country-wide non-profit organization with a long history, thousands of members, and tens of thousands of well-wishers.
Les Mundwiler
Peter Stockhausen, former CFC President, made the following remarks on ChessTalk. They bear repeating:
Following GL 7 I send my comments to the Governors. I got some requests to post these comments here. Here they are:
Dear Fellow Governors,
The GL7 has arrived and it contained a lot of "meat and veggies". I reviewed it and also the chorus of the cheerleader's comments. Here are my comments on the first four items mentioned in the President's message:
1, Outsourcing
How many entities/people received an RFP? (I did not, for example)
How many different entities/people submitted an RFP?
On what basis was the bid of Three Knights Services deemed the best?
What exactly are the "other daily functions?"
Who really is Three Knight Services and what are their qualification to do this particular line of work?
What are the set standards of the quality of work?
What are the remedies if these standards are not met?
What is the split of revenues and expenses?
Who controls changes in member's fees and the above mentioned split?
What are the terms and conditions of the contract with Three Knight Services?
What are the exit clauses and non performance clauses?
What bothers me is the fact that the one Executive Member who is an EXCEPTIONALLY successful owner and manager of a small business,
voted AGAINST this contract.
2, Brokering the merchandise business
What is the commission?
Based on what sales?
How is this audited/controlled?
What are the other terms and conditions of the contract?
What are the exit clauses and non performance clauses?
The concern here is that "we", the CFC, have tried to get to some terms with CMA for years and never even come close to a win-win agreement. What makes
this deal, whatever the details, all of the sudden so compelling?
3, Sale of the CFC Building
If the above works, obviously "the CFC" will not need a commercial condominium.
Has the alternative been investigated (if allowed by the Condo By Laws) namely keeping the condo and leasing it out?
What should be noted here that we do not carry a mortgage and we do not pay taxes on our income. So we could offer exceptionally competitive rental rates to
a top quality renter and still have a reasonable rate of return on our asset and participate in the future appreciation or our real estate.
Of course asking a listing agent for advise is silly, since his/her interest is "churning" a piece of property now, not the best interest of the current owner.
4, Online Magazine
Can a printed version be kept, at an extra charge?
How much experience in producing top class on line magazines does Three Knight Services have?
Do we assume that Membership rates remain the same after the termination of the printed magazine?
Number 4 is an integral part of Number 1 in terms of the actual contract?
General Remarks
A, Does the Executive have a three year proforma that shows how the CFC will be better off from the current set up?
B, Has a lawyer (maybe Les Bunning) reviewed the contracts for pit falls?
C, Has a lawyer (maybe Les Bunning) established that the Executive has the power to execute these changes without Governor's vote?
(A three time 14 days comment and final vote would take 6 weeks and therefore would not materially worsen the CFC's financial picture, so why
has it been done that way?)
The Executive deserves credit for at least facing our problems, but it has failed totally in providing critical details and getting the above voted upon by the Governors.
Cheers
Peter
from ChessTalk today ... Mark Dutton: The Secretary has asked me to send out the results of the Governors' vote on the Restructuring Plan.
Yeas 16, Nays 32, Abstentions 1.
Motion is defeated.
Yes (16): Ilia Bluvshtein, Hal Bond, Stijn De Kerpel, Mark S. Dutton, Gary Gladstone, Micah Hughey, Herb Langer, Christopher Mallon, Patrick McDonald, Fred McKim, Caesar Posylek, Gordon Ritchie, Nava Starr, Alick Tsui, Eddie Urquhart, Michael von Keitz.
No (32): Michael Barron, Les Bunning, Francisco Cabanas, Ken Craft, Lyle Craver, Valer Demian, Pierre Dénommée, Nathan Divinsky, Ken Duff, Ken Einarsson, Yves Farges, Philip G. Haley, Iuri Lebedev, Hugh Long, Larry Luiting, Yevhen Molchanov, Ellen Nadeau, John Niksic,
Halldor Peter Palsson, Alfred Pechisker, Brian Profit, Adrien Regimbald, Maurice Smith,
David Steer, Peter Stockhausen, Lynn Stringer, Bruce D. Thomas, Barry Thorvardson, Nicholas
Varmazis, Ford Wong, Stephen Wright, Howard Wu.
Abstentions (1): Igor Zugic.
49 of 56 Governors participated in the vote.
Post a Comment