What kind of tournament *doubles* the entry fee for last-minute entries? They really are smoking some fine hooch here. This so deserves to come crashing down in a magnificent heap of thwarted ego and surrealistic greed. And a big BOO to Maurice Ashley for attaching himself to this...I don't care how much they paid him.
Ashley's Million-dollar chess tourney - but bring your own clocks
Sort:
tigerprowl wrote:
I think we need some clarification here. It isn't just 1,000. It is 1,000 until July 31. Then it's:
"Tournament Registration
$1,500 from August 1 through October 8, 2014
$2,000 from October 9 through 3:30 p.m. October 10, 2014
Registration officially closes at 3:30 p.m. on October 10, 2014
Those lines in the sand will probably drop just like the original "we won't proceed with this event unless we get 1500 registratations by X date" (they only got to 5% of that). Paying a 25% penalty or so for registration at the door of a $100 event will work. A 100% penalty on a $1,000 entry fee? Would you pay that?
> A 2200 playing in the open is paying a very large premium for competing in this tournament over others.<
I think it has been long-established that organized US Chess is generally populated by hucksters and the fools they feed upon. How many times have any of us spent hundreds to win a few games in some hotel ballroom? HUNDREDS, people. To push wood. Now a group has decided to go to the next level. It's the American way...keep up-selling until they squeal.
May 14, 2014
0
#45
Why all the vitriol? Ashley and Lee think that there are a large number of avid, affluent chess players, and many of them will be willing to play in high entry fee, high-prize-fund tournaments. If they are correct, they will make money. If they are wrong (which I think they are), Millionaire Chess, LLC will fade into oblivion.
maskedbishop wrote:
What kind of tournament *doubles* the entry fee for last-minute entries?
Quite a few, actually.
woton wrote:
If they are wrong (which I think they are), Millionaire Chess, LLC will fade into oblivion.
I think you mean Bolivian.
rdecredico wrote:
maskedbishop wrote:
I think it has been long-established that organized US Chess is generally populated by hucksters and the fools they feed upon. How many times have any of us spent hundreds to win a few games in some hotel ballroom? HUNDREDS, people. To push wood. Now a group of shysters has decided to go to the next level. It's the American way...keep up-selling until they squeal.
Spot on.
Although I believe there are some people that play in events and are not trying to win the money prize so much as play competetitve chess and for those that can afford it, it can be fun.
In general, the US Chess scene is all about the USCF putting its hands into the pockets of the parents of scholastic players and then finding ways to piss away all the harvested cash in a blaze of bureaucratic buffoonery.
That's not my experience. And I've played in dozens of USCF tournaments over the last 30 years. Every large organization, all around the world, has its inefficiencies and mistakes. But it's not fair to exagerate the way you do. Makes me wonder if you have any experience to support your accusations, or are you just a bit too eager to jump on the anti-American bandwagon?
rdecredico wrote:
I've plyed in more than dozens ...149 rated USCF events to be exact and I am not exaggerating one bit.
Do your own homework to alleviate any ignorance you might be suffering. This is not an academic paper, its a web forum, so sources and cititation are not needed and will not be provided.
You really need to investigate the history of the USCF and not just rely upon their propaganda.
And what has this to do with any 'anti-American' bandwagon?
Citations please to back up these slanderous accusations? You should have no problem citing a published report if you have "done your homework", as you imply.
I didn't think so.
So what we have here is hearsay, the most common and most useless aspect of the internet. If I'm wrong, please eductate me.
where is jonesmurphy lmao?
May 14, 2014
0
#51
knightvxx wrote:
I never believed this tournament will draw more than 1,000 players. Not sure where the organizers thought the money would come from.
From what I have been able to glean from Amy Lee's musings, the idea was for MC, LLC to go into the high-end chess tournament business. The MC Open in Las Vegas was the start. If it drew enought participants and attention, then there would be sponsors and they would be on their way.
Like most business startups, MC, LLC would initially lose money (Amy Lee is bankrolling the venture), but eventually, if successful, they would make money.
rdecredico wrote:
TurboFish wrote:
rdecredico wrote:
I've plyed in more than dozens ...149 rated USCF events to be exact and I am not exaggerating one bit.
Do your own homework to alleviate any ignorance you might be suffering. This is not an academic paper, its a web forum, so sources and cititation are not needed and will not be provided.
You really need to investigate the history of the USCF and not just rely upon their propaganda.
And what has this to do with any 'anti-American' bandwagon?
Citations please to back up these slanderous accusations? You should have no problem citing a published report if you "have done your homework", as you imply.
You clearly do not understand what the word 'slander' means.
Slander: the communication of a false statement that harms the reputation of an individual, business, product, group,government, religion, or nation.
Nothing I have stated is false.
You on the web. Search it, fool.
Citing a dictionary, and personal attacks. Is that all you have to back up your claims? You have 149 USCF tournaments behind you -- please tell us what happened to make you so bitter about the USCF.
Even web links would help. But you made the accusations, so you should provide the evidence.
rdecredico wrote:
As far as making up accusations:
Go find their financial statements and take a look at how much $$$ comes in, where it comes from, and what it is spent upon.
Get to work! You have ignorance to alleviate.
You made the claims, but without even a web link to support it. Then you suggest that I do the sleuth work for you. The ball's in your court.
May 14, 2014
0
#54
The information's out of date (2001), but it's the best that I could quickly find. You will note that the lion's share of their income is from membership fees and sales.
Income Statement for the Seven Months ending December 31, 2001
Figures for fiscal year to date
REVENUES
TOTAL REVENUE-MEMBERSHIPS $1,081,414.83
NET SALES REVENUE 968,780.12
TOTAL WEB SERVICE REVENUE 0.00
TOTAL MAGAZINE REVENUE 166,489.43
TOTAL OTHER SERVICES REVENUE 60,479.55
TOTAL TOURNAMENT REVENUE 2,218.69
TOTAL OTHER REVENUE 25,907.84
TOTAL REVENUE 2,305,356.90
COST OF SALES
PURCHASES 347,992.20
INDIRECT SALES OTHER 12,439.22
DELIVERY 72,812.51
TOTAL COST OF SALES 433,243.93
GROSS PROFIT 1,872,112.97
EXPENSES
TOTAL MAGAZINE EXPENSES 399,031.16
TOTAL BOOKS AND EQUIPMENT EXPENSES 140,254.53
TOTAL WEB SERVICE EXPENSES 59,629.22
TOTAL PROMOTIONS EXPENSES 59,038.19
TOTAL TOURNAMENT EXPENSES 33,763.05
TOTAL PERSONNEL EXPENSES 805,143.11
TOTAL GENERAL AND ADMIN. EXPENSES 245,605.83
TOTAL OVERHEAD EXPENSES 296,923.87
TOTAL GOVERNANCE EXPENSES 21,468.09
TOTAL EXPENSES 2,060,857.05
NET INCOME -188,744.08
woton wrote:
The information's out of date (2001), but it's the best that I could quickly find. You will note that the lion's share of their income is from membership fees.
Income Statement for the Seven Months ending December 31, 2001
Figures for fiscal year to date
REVENUES
TOTAL REVENUE-MEMBERSHIPS $1,081,414.83
NET SALES REVENUE 968,780.12
TOTAL WEB SERVICE REVENUE 0.00
TOTAL MAGAZINE REVENUE 166,489.43
TOTAL OTHER SERVICES REVENUE 60,479.55
TOTAL TOURNAMENT REVENUE 2,218.69
TOTAL OTHER REVENUE 25,907.84
TOTAL REVENUE 2,305,356.90
COST OF SALES
PURCHASES 347,992.20
INDIRECT SALES OTHER 12,439.22
DELIVERY 72,812.51
TOTAL COST OF SALES 433,243.93
GROSS PROFIT 1,872,112.97
EXPENSES
TOTAL MAGAZINE EXPENSES 399,031.16
TOTAL BOOKS AND EQUIPMENT EXPENSES 140,254.53
TOTAL WEB SERVICE EXPENSES 59,629.22
TOTAL PROMOTIONS EXPENSES 59,038.19
TOTAL TOURNAMENT EXPENSES 33,763.05
TOTAL PERSONNEL EXPENSES 805,143.11
TOTAL GENERAL AND ADMIN. EXPENSES 245,605.83
TOTAL OVERHEAD EXPENSES 296,923.87
TOTAL GOVERNANCE EXPENSES 21,468.09
TOTAL EXPENSES 2,060,857.05
NET INCOME -188,744.08
Yes, they made some mistakes THAT year. 13 years ago. Is there more?
May 14, 2014
0
#56
@TurboFish
Data like these are difficult to find, but these do show that, like most non-profits, the USCF operates on a shoestring budget.
There is a misconception that the USCF rakes in lots of money from tournaments. USCF affiliates put on the tournaments and pay the USCF a rating fee. The USCF gets little or nothing from the tournaments.
If it's true that you have to bring your own clocks, that's the most pathetic thing I've ever heard about chess organisation, and you can bet that as time goes on (pardon the pun), more stupidity/greed will cause it to meltdown into utter chaos.
May 14, 2014
0
#58
From the advertisement for the World Open
"Bring set, board, clock - not supplied"
This is typical in the US. What's strange about the MC Open is that they supply sets and boards.
Yes but having to pay a grand to enter ? Imagine booking into a 5 star hotel and they say you have to bring your own bed !
As for bringing your own equipment, that smacks of poor planning and corner-cutting.
It's much more standard in the US than on the continent, but surely a $1k entry fee could cover that.
As for the rest, I don't see the need for hate. Sponsors will lose their money, genuine players will lose to people taking their once-in-a-sandbagging-lifetime opportunity, and the rest of the chess world will barely be moved. So what ? Each one gets what he deserves.