BCCF changes it's membership fee to a per player per event format

[roger patterson]

The BCCF has decided to change it's membership fees from an annual charge to a per player, per event charge starting Jan. 1, 2009.

In brief, BCCF membership will be $4 per player for a multiple day event, or $2 for a one day event. Existing annual memberships will be honored until they expire in 2009.

For more details about implementation and why this change has been made please refer to the BCCF website on the "Membership" page or the most recent BCCF email bulliten.

http://www.chess.bc.ca/membership.shtml

Roger Patterson
BCCF president.

[Valer Eugen Demian]

I might understand this wrong, but in my case it means losing money for BCCF. Here is in short my situation:
a) do not play in CFC/ BCCF tournaments (would pay $0 after the change)
b) act as TD for junior tournaments ($0 fees required to pay after the change)
Wouldn't BCCF lose my provincial portion of membership I am paying anyway in the current format?

The new initiative counts on more adult players coming out to play. I have not seen this desire in the past few years. Will more come out and play for $2 a tournament? Will they play (if they come) the equivalent number of tournaments to equal the current provincial annual adult membership? I am not so sure...

[roger patterson]

The volume of play over the last three years was considered when setting the per player per tournament result. The fee was chosen so as to be approximately revenue neutral assuming those playing volumes to continue.

Probably the class of members who pay an annual membership yet never play is a pretty small group.

[Kerry Liles]

The BCCF has decided to change it's membership fees from an annual charge to a per player, per event charge starting Jan. 1, 2009.

In brief, BCCF membership will be $4 per player for a multiple day event, or $2 for a one day event. Existing annual memberships will be honored until they expire in 2009.

For more details about implementation and why this change has been made please refer to the BCCF website on the "Membership" page or the most recent BCCF email bulliten.

http://www.chess.bc.ca/membership.shtml

Roger Patterson
BCCF president.

Roger, I think this is an interesting approach and offhand I really like it. I see from a follow-up post that you did some calculations to try to set the fees so that the outcome would be more or less revenue neutral changes... I hope this all works out.

I certainly prefer this to the current CFC model: I just renewed my CFC+Ontario membership (for $43) and cannot for the life of me think of what I get for it.

[Valer Eugen Demian]

The volume of play over the last three years was considered when setting the per player per tournament result. The fee was chosen so as to be approximately revenue neutral assuming those playing volumes to continue.

Probably the class of members who pay an annual membership yet never play is a pretty small group.

I spoke with a few adult players meantime (since my original post) and I doubt your regular BCCF member would play 6 tournaments (6 x $2 = $12) a year to equal the amount of membership he should pay under this already old setup. Well, will live to see the results, aren't we?...

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

I would offer to implement the roof for the maximum amount taken from players (it may difficult to control, but possible)

Current 12$ fee is accumulated in just three multi-day tournaments.

[Valer Eugen Demian]

I would offer to implement the roof for the maximum amount taken from players (it may difficult to control, but possible)

Current 12$ fee is accumulated in just three multi-day tournaments.

How many working players can afford to play 3 multi-day tournaments per year?! It seems an unnecessary gamble to count on such things, especially given the almost non-existence of adult tournaments in BC lately...

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

It seems an unnecessary gamble to count on such things, especially given the almost non-existence of adult tournaments in BC lately...

What is your point?
a) That there would be not enough tournaments and players would not play enough tournaments? (so in principal you blame BC execs for making wrong math)
b) that the active players must be "robbed"?

[Valer Eugen Demian]

... the most important building block of a financially sound federation (provincial or national) - the membership that is - needs to be reviewed properly as I already suggested for the CFC one. Hasty/ superficial decisions are simply leading to disastruous results. We are playing with dollar numbers way too easy as far as I can see (financial results so far)!

a) Yes, first of all there won't be enough tournaments based on the trend we've seen in BC in the past few years. Also yes for the number of participating players.

Using the "robbery" word is blowing things out of proportion. I can respond by saying lots of chess lovers in this country want everything in exchange for nothing and God forbid someone suggest fight for sports status when it comes to chess! You have to agree there is something masochistic the way we deal with chess in this country...

[Peter McKillop]

The beauty of this system is that it severs the BCCF's reliance on the CFC as revenue gatherer. Thinking about what might ensue from this is very interesting. Good luck to the BCCF.