Brilliant! Look forward to it.

(btw: they could have made the microphones a bit bigger, don't you think?!)

It's nice to see someone organizing a super-tnmt when other well known annual tnmts have either been discontinued or downsized to the pt of no return. Go Norway, HTH and Jadarhus!

You could think of a campaign similar to Apple's "Think different", but using "Think better". I could think of drug companies, supplement companies, reclusive millionaires with money they do not want leave to their relatives, Las Vegas casinos, computer (both soft and hardware) companies as potential sponsors. What would Tata gain from a tournament anyway, yet, it is one of the best out there.

youre right BigHickory...

Jesterville,

I certainly agree with you that US $800K would be a big amount vis-a-vis the chess market.  By saying it was a pittance, I simply meant relative to the marketing budgets of the kind of corporate giants we would all love to see sponsoring chess tournaments.  I haven't checked lately but a single full-page ad for one day in The Wall Street Journal cost in the neighborhood of US $175,000 more than 10 years ago.  And of course, you see ads like that from the same auto companies, IT and software giants, every day.  (To use a different - but impressive -metric of overall finanical power these companies wield, a company like Toyotoa spends in the neighborhood of US $1 million PER HOUR all year long.  That's about $8.8 billion per year.)  So I simply meant that at scales like this, $800 K is a pittance.  But you are absolutely right that it's huge for chess.  We just need to find a way to convince companies that supporting chess is worthwhile.  It's likely to be an incremental effort.  (IBM certainly used chess to its benefit back during Deep Blue vs. Kasparov.  I wish - and someone please let me know if they did - that IBM had created some kind of significant fund to support the future of human chess; given how much great publicity they reaped from the match, it would have been a very nice, and I believe, justifiable gesture.)

TokyoCowboy, I agree with everything you have said...in fact, I have been invoved in developing Budgets for quite some time now...though not on the Marketing side. My essence was questioning the word "pittance". $860,000 in no way can be considered "pittance", when viewing the chess market...ie. a market that is crying for funding. In fact, as indicated half of this going to prizes is rather generous when talking about chess.

BigHickory, Everything you have said there is not unique to the US Market, it also holds true all over the Planet. Yet, sponsers for chess are found for "super tournaments" each year through-out Europe and Asia. Why has the US been absent?

I to wish the U,S. would step up and sponsor a super tourney. I dont know what its going to take to get my country to love chess again.I guess it just takes one child at a time.

wooooo...

Jesterville wrote: "And for those who refer to this amount as "pittance"...I think you do not understand that this is only the sponsor's budget allocated to this event, certainly chess would not be the main target for any sponsors. Chess would be way down the line on their list."

Actually, Jesterville, I DO understand this and my point still stands.  I work in marketing and communications, and I can assure you that It's a question of perceived value of the expenditure.  If a (potential) sponsor is approached and, after weighing this opportunity against probably dozens of others, decides that tournament sponsorship provides the best bang for the buck, then they will become a sponsor.  OF COURSE this event may be "way down the list" - but it may still be ahead of dozens of other potential uses of the money.  Very few companies throw their entire marketing budget into a single event (except some of the dot coms back before the 2000 meltdown of that sector, where companies put their entire budgets on the line for one Superbowl ad!!! - most of these companies don't exist anymore).  And OF COURSE this entire decision-process assumes that the company is financially viable to begin with and that the marketing budget is free and clear to be used for its intended purposes, and not raided to cover shortfalls elsewhere.

I hope this helps.

@ BigHickory: Good assessment. But I would not give up the power of media or advertisement. On one hand, there is not much to sell with a high profit margin for chess players. The target audience, just like you said is not any particular demographic or income segment. Chess is not exactly giving an immediate gratification (like taking out a baddie in a video game) and it actually takes effort to do it well.  On the other hand, it would only take a few magazine articles or TV shows about the effect of playing chess say, preventing or slowing down dementia or Alzheimer's, controlling ADHD, improving business decisions.

The chess community in the U.S. has difficulty attracting sponsors for a number of reasons.  Chess matches don't get much television, radio, or newspaper coverage.  When they are covered it is mostly chessplayers who pay attention, and chessplayers make up a very small part of the population.    I'd be surprised if 1 in 1,000 people here could name the current best American chessplayer, or name just 1 of the current top 20 international players.

 Chess doesn't have much of a reputation here.   At best, many non players think of chess as an intellectual diversion for eggheads with no practical value.  And many people think that chess is just another way to waste time, like playing video games and watching T.V.

When approaching potential sponsors, the first thing they will ask will be something like "Why should my company help sponsor a chess match?   How does it benefit us, or how does it benefit the community?"    It's a tough question to answer.  Chess players are not a particularly desireable demographic group for advertisers because the chess community is extremely diverse.  About the only thing we all have in common is that we play chess.  While a few serious players are willing to spend a lot of money on chess equipment, coaches, travel, and tournaments, the vast majority of casual players spend very little on this hobby  (look at the number of people with a free membership on this site!) 

In recent years chess has gotten some good publicity here in the U.S., with studies showing that chess players tend to do better in school, and some saying that the academic performance of many poor students improves after they begin to play chess.  Kids who play chess also have less time to get into trouble.    These could be good selling points, as it may be possible to convince corporations or charitable foundations to sponsor tournaments as a way to help at risk kids. 

BIG NEWS!!!

860,000 is still ALOT for budget!

I believe first place will recieve like 75,000 if half the budget is prize fun.

It appears from reports that half of the 860,000 is for prize money.

And yes, the $860,000 is the Budget of the sponsor...which of course includes the prize money, but it does not give us the breakdown, nor does it indicate if this Budget is for one year or multiple years.

And for those who refer to this amount as "pittance"...I think you do not understand that this is only the sponsor's budget allocated to this event, certainly chess would not be the main target for any sponsors. Chess would be way down the line on their list. And actually, this amount is very generous considering the first prize at any "super tournaments" are normally only 10, 20 or 30,000 Euros. The highest I remember is 50,000 for The London Classic.

This is great news for us chess enthusiasts. But I am surprised that the USA (the country that houses the riches people on the Planet)...that not one of them has stepped up to the plate to sponsor an ongoing "chess super tournnament"...can hardly understand this.

Compared to other sports, say tennis or golf, the prize fund is pittance. It is for this reason that the 'Iron Curtain' produced champs for years, since the livelihood of the players was taken care of by the State.

@corwin69 Simonsen is the other one -- it's a law firm

Anyone know who the sponsors are that MC wears?  Artic Securities for sure. Looks like a Polo Blazer but the emblem is unrecognizable to me...

Thanks,

D

Thank you mr. Carlsen ! Nice City!