Author: Scott Gasch
Date: 17:22:36 07/17/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 17, 2002 at 17:57:06, Andrew Williams wrote: >On July 17, 2002 at 16:43:32, Scott Gasch wrote: > >>On July 17, 2002 at 04:52:52, Andrew Williams wrote: >> >>>On July 16, 2002 at 21:26:15, Peter Kappler wrote: >>> >>>>On July 16, 2002 at 19:38:38, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>> >>>>>On July 16, 2002 at 19:36:23, Bruce Moreland wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On July 16, 2002 at 19:35:46, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On July 16, 2002 at 19:30:17, Bruce Moreland wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On July 16, 2002 at 19:28:08, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On July 16, 2002 at 19:22:18, Bruce Moreland wrote: >>>>>>>>>[snip] >>>>>>>>>>A very strong message is sent by simply having a successful event. The ICCA is >>>>>>>>>>of the opinion that computer chess is dead outside of Europe. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Why not get the ICCA involved? Why can't they officially sanction it? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>They won't allow it to be a WCCC, because they already have that set up for next >>>>>>>>year, presumably because Donninger asked for the 2003 event last year, and the >>>>>>>>ICCA said yes, without exploring the possibility of doing an event in North >>>>>>>>America, because computer chess outside of Europe is dead. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>It does not have to be a WCCC. In FIDE or USCF not every event is a >>>>>>>championship, and yet we have huge events. Consider Hoogovens, Wijk An Zee, >>>>>>>Linares, etc. Big, earth-shaking events but not necessarily having any >>>>>>>connection to a world championship. >>>>>> >>>>>>That being the case, why not? This is another reason NOT to call it a WCCC. >>>>> >>>>>I don't see an ICGA sactioning and a WCCC as being the same thing. The ICGA >>>>>could give official sanction to an event which is not a WCCC. That was the >>>>>point I was trying to make. >>>>> >>>>>I think it will be more interesting to the best professional programs if it is >>>>>an "official" event, rather than: >>>>>"The world championship of somebody's basement in Edmonton." >>>> >>>> >>>>Bob Hyatt posted last week that ICCA charges a $35,000 fee to have their name >>>>associated with an event. >>>> >>>>I don't know if they actually do anything in return for this money. They sure >>>>as hell don't use it to promote the event, or to subsidize travel fees, or to >>>>support any type of live internet coverage. >>>> >>> >>>They have never made any secret of the fact that they use this money to >>>subsidize the production of the ICCA (now ICGA) Journal. The Journal publishes >>>an annual accounts statement which makes this clear. >>> >>>Andrew >>> >> >>This is a serious question, not a troll: >> >>Is this the same ICCA Journal that costs $40 for a yearly subscription? And >>comes out 4 times per year? Or is there some other publication these tournament >>fees are subsidizing? >> > >Yes. It's just the one Journal. > > >>If we are talking about the ICCA Journal I know of then $10 an issue certainly >>should be adequate to cover costs. I don't blame people for making a living but >>to say these huge tournament association fees cover publication costs of a >>journal that is also grossly overpriced is naive -- if we're talking about the >>same journal here. >> >>Scott > >Do you mean I'm being naive? I'm actually paraphrasing what the accounts say. >The financial report ends by stating that ICCA costs, (mostly secretarial >support for editing the Journal), exceed subscription income by about $20000. > >Andrew Well either the circluation is really low or someone is laughing all the way to the bank. Scott
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.