Rook
Hi Peter:
On the important issue, I also had a description of " junior member ". I inquired of Chris if it could be fixed .......now I am " senior member " !!
As to tournament membership projections, I am not aware of any breakdown. I just know they are substantially used from input from organizers, and that annual members should not be subsidizing the tournament memberships. And it is more money for the CFC if they now will have to take out annual/life memberships.
Bob
Pawn
or they will most likely just stop playing in CFC events. I would count on a large drop in tournament participation. Most people I have talked to said they would just play in non CFC events.Originally Posted by Bob Armstrong
Knight
Bob, I guess I wasn't paying attention to the extent I should have been to your previous posts on this topic because I'm very surprised that you would move to cancel something with no data on how many people or $ will be impacted per year. Don't you think it would be advisable to have this data first? Also, could you please explain (or direct me to the post where you explained it previously) why regular CFC members are subsidizing the tournament memberships? I'm not sure I see a fixed connection between the two.
Knight
Tournament Memberships
Annual memberships are not subsidizing tournament memberships. There is almost zero overhead with a T membership. Its clear profit as we no longer send these people a magazine. On top of the $10, add another $5 for ratings. So the CFC would kiss 90% of this money goodbye. Eliminate the T membership would be like dropping a rook, you loose. Eliminate the T membership and watch attendance drop at tournaments. That is a fact!!!
Rook
What interests me is how doid the tournament membership come to be the creature it is today? ie. people have multiple accesses to it. To the best of my understanding such a sytem has never been approved.
Knight
Tournament Memberships
r54I know why it was created, and I know it isn't being used the way it was intended. That doesn't bother me at all. The fact is there are players who are playing in one or two tournaments per year who wouldn't if they had to pay the full cfc fee. Its kind of like Zyban which was invented and marketed as an anti-depressent, and later they found out it helped you stop smoking.
I know what you are concerned about. Whoever made the decision to allow these memberships to be sold over and over should be commended. I blame the governors from the 90's for not creating a motion instituting the T membership as another anytime option, not the ED, or whoever it was that started processing them. In fact, I think it was Troy Vail.
With the reduction in services from the cfc, the T makes more sense today than in the 90's.
Mr T
Rook
Is that all covered in your membership report? I'd be interested in an analysisof T memberships vs O and L memberships. In most areas making unilateral policy decisions re. income is known as insubordination. I'm yet to be convinced one way or the other what our fee structure should be. Part of theissue is what doe sit mean to be a "member"? Is paying a fee to play in a tournament synonymous with membership? I don't think so personally. Membership entails financially contributing to the health of the organization to which you belong.
CFC Voting Member
I would prefer to see no tournament memberships at all. The CFC must sell its rating and not the privilege to play in tournaments (except for Closed and CYCC). The rating fee can be different for members and non-members, or it can be even, juniors may have own fee in their only-juniors tournaments.
Rook
Tournament Playing Fee
Hi Ken:
Here is the relevant section of the CFC Handbook on " tournament playing fee " ( assuming it is up-to-date ):
375. Tournament Playing Fee: A tournament fee for first time players in CFC events, for foreign players, and for players whose name does not appear on the last Annual List, of $10.00 may be paid in lieu of CFC membership. The player will then receive a rating, one copy of the magazine, and an invitation to join the CFC. [see Motion 90-9, as amended, GL, September 1990, p.1-12]
It says " in lieu of membership ". So you are right that " tournament membership " , which has become the popular handle for " tournament playing fee ", is really misleading. Someone paying the tournament playing fee does NOT become a member. However, because they get a rating, they are given a CFC membership no. as far as I can see, and this adds some confusion to the pot. So there is some administration to processing a tournament playing fee.
You stated: " Membership entails financially contributing to the health of the organization to which you belong. " Well those paying a tournament membership fee pay $10 vs $36 for an annual adult member. So who is paying for the CFC to run?? Yet both want the benefits of getting their games rated and having a CFC membership no. Why are there 2 classes, both using the CFC the same way, and paying differently?
All those playing in CFC-rated tournaments should join and help pay the costs of running the organization.
It is interesting to note that both CFC President David Lavin, and CFC Secretary, Lyle Craver, have come out publicly in favour of eliminating the tournament playing fee.
Bob
Last edited by Bob Armstrong; 10-10-2008 at 06:12 PM.
Rook
Hi Tony:
See my reply to Ken's post below - I set out why I say annual/life members subsidize tournament playing fee players.
Why shouldn't those paying a TPF be paying a regular membership, and helping to finance the organization that runs the national rating system for them?
Bob
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote