The importance of the USCF image
In the recent weeks, there have been a lot of discussions about the reason why the AF4C backed out of sponsoring the US Championship. Here are some of the remarks:
"I believe this is exactly what some of us have been saying would be the problem with Sam on the EB. There is no way a major corporation is going to consider the USCF when any web search will tie Sam Sloan and his web filth to the USCF." Mark Nibbelin
"Sevan did tell me he heard this from John Henderson, and Don Schultz heard something similar from Erik Anderson, and I later spoke to Henderson who told me the same thing, that AF4C's sponsor pulled out because they found internet postings by Sam Sloan and learned that he was on the Executive Board." FM Bill Goichberg
"Sam - one day, maybe, you will come to the realization that you are the root cause of sponsors not wanting to deal with the USCF. I've spent the last 3 weeks having conference calls and meetings with CMOs of large businesses in the Chicagoland area. 2 of them specifically during the meetings asked me to explain YOU and why they would want to associate their corporate images with the likes of a character as yourself given that you are a board member. They were very specific of what they found about you thru Internet searches and your website. One of their words were 'I understand there are strange, questionable, and downright improper characters in all activities out there, but having an improper character on the board of a national organization that is a NFP to boot is asking a bit much for me to look past." Sevan Muradian
"That means Sam Sloan is NOT responsible for the decision by AF4C not to foot the bill themselves and is NOT responsible for the delay in making an announcement. However, we would have a 2007 US Championship today if Sam Sloan was not on the Executive Board. He and his supporters are indeed responsible for that!" NM Michael Aigner
Labels: credibility, image, USCF
posted by Chess Daily News @ 1/29/2007 02:22:00 PM
9 Comments:
At Monday, January 29, 2007 2:43:00 PM,
Unknown said…
ROI - Return On Investment
ROI doesn't necessarily have to be monatary. However, AF4C does expect something for their efforts. It could be money. It could be the advancement of chess. It could even just be the pure joy of doing something good for what you love.
Obviously the AF4C felt their money could be used better elsewhere.
So how does the USCF show we can offer the returns sponsors expect?
Image is one thing. A poor image shoots down the idea that a sponsor is going to feel good about things from an ethics standpoint.
Membership is another thing. You can't say you are promoting chess while your chess membership is a downword trend.
Money. Is the USCF a big enough and well run enough organiztion that can give the visibility a sponsor needs?
So in the context of sponsorship the USCF needs to clean up its image, increase membership, and make itself lucrative.
At Monday, January 29, 2007 5:54:00 PM,
Anonymous said…
I'm a long time chess coach in Chicago. I definitely believe that Mr. Sloan is an embarrassment to chess and the USCF. He's harmful to this federation and to scholastic chess. I didn't vote for him the last time and I definitely won't vote for him this time.
I'm also very disturb to see Mr. Hal Bogner sticking up for Mr. Sloan many times in the past. What went over the top today is when Mr. Bogner said that Susan's blog is thousands of times more harmful than Mr. Sloan. Someone who makes a statement like this should not do business with scholastic chess.
I was planning to enroll all my schools to his program at www.ChessMagnetSchool.com. I can no longer support Mr. Bogner. In fact, I now sincerely question his sanity.
Chicago Chess Coach
At Monday, January 29, 2007 6:02:00 PM,
Anonymous said…
My wife signed up my son for www.ChessMagnetSchool.com a few weeks ago. He actually hated it. I don't know who Mr. Bogner is but the program is a waste of money.
At Monday, January 29, 2007 7:00:00 PM,
Chess Daily News said…
Please take it easy on Mr. Bogner. He is entitled to his opinion even though I completely disagree with him. Let's give him the proper courtesy.
Thank you!
Susan Polgar
www.PolgarChess.com
At Tuesday, January 30, 2007 3:46:00 AM,
Michael Aigner said…
Whether you agree with the opinions expressed by Hal Bogner has little or nothing to do with his ability to create a website for teaching chess. Likewise, just because I've publically disagreed with Bill Goichberg on the US Championship issue doesn't mean I will stop attending CCA tournaments.
At Tuesday, January 30, 2007 8:53:00 AM,
gregory said…
Hi Chicago Chess,
I also want to echo some of the comments made by others, while many of us may disagree with him, Hal has done alot to promote our game, and his credentials are quite strong. Furthermore, I personally know one of the other business partners in the chess magnet program, and he is a very decent man. I urge you to reconsider and look at the chess magnet program with an open mind.
Regards,
Gregory Alexander
At Tuesday, January 30, 2007 1:54:00 PM,
Jack Le Moine said…
Susan as written to the Board and has done everything that any one person can do to clean up the USCF Forums. These could be such a positive help to the USCF image. Instead they are another disgrace.
The next meeting of the Executive Board is this weekend. To remind them of this issue, I put some of Susan's pleas back to the top of the Forum's threads and added the following post which I'm re-posting here for the benefit of Susan's readers.
At Tuesday, January 30, 2007 1:54:00 PM,
Jack Le Moine said…
The reason I’ve resurrected these threads is because I fear that we may have become accustomed to the bad things here. Sadly, it’s psychological. We who have become regulars on this forum may have lost our sense of the outrage at all the lies and attacks and libels and slanders that have become so much a part of this forum. And we may have forgotten how much disgust that exists from the rest of the people out there.
We note that when the moderator and the Executive Director finally did issue a sanction, it was on the lone issue of Board Confidentiality. Among all the other issues out there, that was the only one upon which a stand was taken.
Others have commented on this thread that we are held hostage by fear of lawsuits. Others have said that low priority is the problem. The one thing that is clear is that the culture of this forum is not as it ought to be. Many good people besides Susan and Paul will not participate here because of that.
Moreover, I must note how hard it is to even navigate here from the main USCF homepage. At first I had though that it was due to really bad web design. Now I know that the hidden path is intentional. We are ashamed of these forums. The true shame is that these forums should be a source of pride.
This week the Board will meet. Presumably, they will appoint some new kind of policing entity. Last word from our President (posted above) was that this new entity can receive more support from the Board because it will not be perceived as a creature of the Board like the paid staff was. Mere perception like that will be a very thin reed to rely upon. How long will the “perception” last after Sloan and Co. begin their attacks?
Which brings me to the main point. Whatever barricades of procedures and committees that the Board puts between itself and the problem, eventually an appeal from some sanction will be made. At some point the Board will have to take a stand and it will have to take a real stand.
Otherwise, this problem will just go on and on.
At Saturday, February 17, 2007 7:07:00 PM,
Anonymous said…
There has been no chess activity in the Chicago area worthy of note for several years. When was the last time you saw a Chicago tournament advertised in CL? There is no media coverage because there is nothing to report.
Post a Comment
<< Home