The REAL problem with USCF!

[Ray Gordon]

USCF's problem is simple: they are NONPROFIT.

If they were a for-profit corporation, there would be incentives to make
sound financial decisions. Right now, there is really no such incentive, as
any "profit" has to somehow be disbursed anyway, and the only real way to
"profit" from USCF is to be an employee or a vendor.

USCF already has a for-profit "rival" in ICC. ICC all but owns online
chess, even has cash tournaments and other prizes available (playchess.com
even lets you play for money online), and ICC will very soon be capable of
sponsoring OTB events that are played over the ICC interface at computer
desks. ICC answers not to its board, but to its bottom line, and as a
result, it is far more innovative.

The best thing USCF could do now is convert itself to a for-profit
corporation. The chess market is more than big enough on the internet to
justify this now. Banging heads over nonprofit politics is useless, as the
laws are set up to protect much bigger cash cows than USCF (i.e.,
universities, hospitals, relief organizations, etc.).

--
"Google maintains the USENET." -- The Honorable R. Barclay Surrick, Eastern
District of PA Judge
From Parker v. Google, E.D.Pa. #04-cv-3918

[Chess Freak]

Thanks for sharing your ignorance of nonprofit corporations.

[Ray Gordon]

> Thanks for sharing your ignorance of nonprofit corporations.

Note that the other side only has flames.

[Chess Freak]

Your statement:

"...

If they were a for-profit corporation, there would be incentives to make
sound financial decisions. Right now, there is really no such incentive, as
any "profit" has to somehow be disbursed anyway, and the only real way to
"profit" from USCF is to be an employee or a vendor.

..."

is incorrect. It is perfectly legal and ethical for a "not-for-profit"
organization to make a profit. The incentive for maintaining a profit
is survival and in USCF's case to improve chess in the USA. There are
restrictions on what they can use with the profits. Are you suggesting
that there should be no limits on what these profits might be used for?
It seems to me that limiting what the USCF can spend it's profit on is
a good thing and your suggestion of converting USCF into a for-profit
corporation is stupid (I mean that in a nice way).

- CF

"
"Ray Gordon" <R...@cybersheet.com> wrote in message news:q-ydnec9S9raPdPZ...@pghconnect.com...

[mar...@stkittsnevischess.org]

I agree, and you should make Bill Goichberg and Kirsan Ilyumnhinov the
shareholders. You should let the delegates at large make the money, and
the little people have to drop their pants and piss at a chess
tournnment for the big people.

Marcus Roberts