Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 05:38:36 07/18/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 17, 2002 at 20:22:36, Scott Gasch wrote: >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 see my postings to the icga mailing list. the problem is basically that for my chessclub i produce 5-6 magazines a year costing very little, but i don't write down the cost for myself. i don't get $100 an hour to produce the magazine. i get shit. nothing. zero. i don't even get coffee for free. i lose a lot of fuel, phone costs and other stuff to produce my clubs chess magazine. In contradiction, ICGA charges for everything. Storage, phoning, infrastructure, so you can always claim till heaven. In short the whole secretariat gets paid from it. Nevertheless that's acceptible. Simply because from the work the icga is doing, the secretariat is doing 99% of it. So from the $12000 (membership fees) and another $100000 or whatever similar amount of money they get for world champs, a part of that $100000 of the world champ goes to the secretariat. I find this very logically. What i do not find logically, is that they claim it is magazine costs which is making the icga expensive organisation. It's not the magazine costs that make it expensive. It's the fact that people live from the icga funds that make the icga expensive. if from that $100k from a world champ a part goes to the secretariat, my question is obviously how much of the rest gets stolen by Levy from that 100k. My guess is that a part goes to costs. like $10k at most. The rest gets claimed as salary payment to Levy i guess. Note that it is Levy who at the icca/icga meeting mentionned that the total cost of a tournament is about $100k. however organizations usually provide themselves all kind of things. like a floor area to keep the tournament. So icga isn't paying for that. There are no prices either. Only a few cheap medals. So the only 2 big costs other organizations have, the icga isn't having it. In short the entire money gets completely swallowed by salary payments (or whatever you want to call it) to Levy. If first a part of it goes to the persons who did 99% of the effort the icga did for a tournament, then that's fine with me. Best regards, Vincent
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.