Ag. Item # 11 – Discussion on Motion 2010-06 – Discounted Membership/TPF

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Chris:

Sorry but I see a constitutional mess here.

CFC is a federation. So the CFC can set its own membership fee structure. But the provinces have the absolute right to set their own provincial fee structure.

All CFC can do is start to refuse to collect the provincial portion when they sell memberships.

Bob

[Les Bunning]

This matter has been a problem for years. Having to pay a large fee to join the CFC for a new member certainly discourages new members. The difficulty with the tournament membership fee is that it enables existing CFC members to pay less if they are less active. In one sense I agree with Gordon Ritchie that we should offer Tournament memberships and Reduced fees for first timers. However I also agree with Chris Mallon that our fee structure is too complicated. I also agree that scrapping Tournament memberships will effect those few events that we have in Quebec. I do not believe that organisers have to collect a provincial membership fee when collecting tournament membership fees as this in reality is not a membership fee but a usage charge to cover the cost of setting them up in the CFC rating system. Perhaps the tournament membership should be set at $15 and there would be no provincial fee. With respect to the province of Quebec we should reduce the CFC membership fee to $10-$15 provided that the Quebec resident was also a FQE member. This would help to defray the cost of sending top Quebec players to international events.
Les Bunning

[Jason Lohner]

Most of the tournament membership people (at least at the adult level) from before the rate hike are now becoming full members. I think we should continue for a couple of years with the present situation.

Here in BC this is just the opposite, most tournaments are becoming unrated events. In the interior of BC all events have become unrated events. Down in the lower mainland I just received another invitation to a non CFC rated event. Just look at the BC Chess Federation web page... 9 events listed only TWO of them are CFC events now.

[Christopher Mallon]

I lived in Vancouver for a year and other than the Keres and the UBC weekly events which I couldn't attend, there wasn't a single adult CFC rated event for the whole year. So I don't see how it's really any different?

[Patrick McDonald]

BTW: most juniors that I know of pay $14 in Ontario ... Not $27 ...

[John Coleman]

BTW: most juniors that I know of pay $14 in Ontario ... Not $27 ...

In GL3, there was a motion to discontinue the participating junior menbership (in Ontario, the $14 option), and IN THE SAME GL the ED advised "By order of the CFC President, effective immediately the Junior Participating membership option has been eliminated."

[Garvin Nunes]

I agree with those who are saying to keep the fee structure the same except reduce the single tournament fee to 10 dollars. Raising it to 20 was a mistake imho.

Let new chess players pay 10 dollars and see what a tournament is like. If they think they will play in 4 more events they will get a CFC membership. This also resolves the issue of Quebec players crossing into Ontario for an occasional tournament.

I will not support a more complicated solution than this when this one is easily available.

--

I disagree with the idea of having a 30 dollar fee and the elimination of the single tournament fee. This will simply lead to a big drop in CFC income. I quite frankly do not understand the "compensation' in return for this loss of material.

--

I strongly oppose the elimination of the "Junior Participating membership option" ($14 fee In Ontario). In this situation we already have a low fee structure in place so lets just keep this one the way it is.

I should note the differences here to the above debate are 1. You have a competitor (Chess and Math Association). 2. You already have a fee structure in place. (So don't mess with a good thing.)

While we aren't in "direct" competition with the Chess and Math Association I do think we should keep things comparable (ie. relatively cheap for juniors).

Because Hamilton has quite a few low income kids who play chess it will definitely be hard to move me on this one.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

It is generally seen in chess circles, that juniors are given a financial benefit in comparison to adults - for example, the Scarborough CC has a lower annual fee for Juniors, than for adults.

I am not sure of the exact rational for this, but I think it is based on the assumption that families wiith kids have less disposable income than adults generally, and so even if the parent has to pay a modest fee to play, they should be charged less for their child to play, to give that family a financial break. Are there other rationales for this discrimination in favour of juniors?

And if there are legitimate reasons for the practice of junior discount, what reasoning do the flat-fee'ers give for taking away this financial break to families with kids?

I think that Juniors can do less within the CFC:

"13. Any Ordinary or Life Member, who is a Canadian Citizen or a landed immigrant in Canada, and who is 18 years of age or over, is eligible to be nominated and elected to the position of Governor .... "

[Christopher Mallon]

That's for legal reasons Egis; minors are not allowed to serve on the board of corporations in Canada, I recall it being an issue back around 2005 when someone (Eric Lawson?) won a Governor spot as a top-2 finisher in the Closed.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

All play in the tournament, and all should equally support the national organization.

I think this is totally wrong approach to a game of chess. It should be that the national organization must support in all its power and possibilities to prosper the tournament chess by eliminating all kind of obstructions for people to play and enjoy chess. While the CFC must survive financially, I think, there are other ways to do this without creating "complicated" discounts.

I am not supporting this motion and vote NO.