 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsAnalysisComputerChess Politics ChessKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Chess Forum / General Topics / April 2006Temporary shortfall?
Third quarter 05-06 USCF financials. Year to Date: ($194,635.67). Yes, that is a NEGATIVE FIGURE. Here is a brief review of past postings on the topic. From: j...@channingcorporation.com Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc Subject: Re: I told you so Date: 7 Jan 2006 05:47:35 -0800 Not so! In the course of setting up our new cash flow projection system, Bill Hall and I found that the budget established by the previous board should keep us in the black this year. Everyone on the Board and the Finance and LMA committees is privy to our work and receives updates no less than quarterly. The shortfall is temporary, and due primarily to the ChessCafe problem. As for threats to employees, I think you should take a closer look at your source. Joel Channing --------------- From: "parrthe...@cs.com" <parrthe...@cs.com> Subject: Re: I told you so Date: 8 Jan 2006 00:51:18 -0800 SHORTFALL IS TEMPORARY <The shortfall is temporary, and due primarily to the ChessCafe problem. As for threats to employees, I think you should take a closer look at your source.> -- USCF board member Joel Channing So there was a cash crunch, and it occurred at about the time I said it would for the reason I said it would (our bookkeepers, among other things, counting advertising monies as sales monies). Randy Bauer's defense is that the Federation has not gone under. Nor did I say it would. I said that there would be a cash crunch and the politicians were hiding the fact. Whichthey evidently were -- or I knew more about the facts than they did, including the real price of the building in Crossville, which I reported in March 2005 to you some two to three months before the last Board fessed up to the precise same figure ($650,000) that I reported, once again, weeks before. That's our Randy Bauer for ya! The ploy now is that I somehow had sources that the Board members did not! Nonsense. Oh, yes, the official excuse for the small new wooden building in Crossville (about 40 percent the size of the one in New Windsor) is that I am a guy who says only size matters. That is a throwaway line. What has happened is clear enough: we are in the wilds of Tennessee in a small wooden building that will end up finally costing several hundred thousand dollars more than the large 10,000-plus square foot structure we had in New Windsor where repairs could have been made for about $100,000 without dislocating and hiring new employees. Joel Channing states that there have been no threats against those serving on Committees or working in the office re talking to outside sources -- or so I understand his point to be. I wish that I dare even to put a "him" or "her" to the sex of the sources, but I can assure all of you that the search would possibly bag the quail. People have been told to zip their lips -- OR ELSE. Moreover they have pretty much zipped their lips since I was last active in soliciting information. As for the shortfall being "temporary," perhaps it will be. I NEVER REPORTED OTHERWISE. I reported that their would be a shortfall within a month of the actual time period. Randy Bauer and the others kept claiming that this element in my reporting was wrong. It proved to be correct. As, unfortunately, did every other story I published. Someone like a Bauer, who knew the real cost of the building and kept it from you, hates to be exposed. He despises those who make facts public. When in power, he abused it horribly when establishing an egregious double standard for himself and Sam Sloan as to candidates' statements appearing in Chess Life: the letter of the law for Sloan; an understanding wink of the eye for him. At the time, I stated that Mr. Bauer was indeed a victim of circumstance, but I also noted that there was still an Old Testament exaction for Mr. Sloan; a form of Christian understanding for Mr. Bauer. Mr. Sloan gets the pillar of salt treatment; Mr. Bauer gets his statement into the magazine. Someone like our Mr. Bauer possesses an enormous sense of entitlement. -- Larry Parr Of course this doesn't stop the board from awarding $50,000 to cronies for a redesign project without any open bidding. Why shouldn't the new editor be assigned the task of redesigning Chess Life as part of his normal job instead of paying an outside consulting firm $25,000? CONFIDENTIALITY -- WHAT ELSE IS NEW? Mike Nolan on the USCF forum: Posted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 10:29 am "The full financials that were sent to the Board and the Finance Committee contain some confidential data." RED FLAGS Beatriz Marinello on the USCF Forum to Joel Channing Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 10:45 am Hello Joel: I agree with Ron Suarez about getting a progress report on this very important subject. My board authorized the allocation of $50,000 for this project in the USCF Budget, later on the Delegates ratified the concept by approving the budget for this fiscal year. We all agree that Chess Life Magazine and the USCF website need significant upgrades and improvements. The process to manage this project, its ultimately the responsibility of the current board. I was disappointed by the fact that there was not an open bidding process to select the best suitable person/s to handle this important project. Although, I believe that Paul Hoffman was excellent qualifications, the lack of process report its a valid concern. Right from the start there were some red flags, the USCF paid $10,000 just to see a proposal from Mr. Hoffman. Unfortunately, I missed the presentation in New Jersey since I had a meeting in the school on Friday morning at the same time that Mr. Hoffman was schedule to show the proposal to the board. As today, I have not seeing any information about this project. As a board member, I am distressed by this situation. I have been active in USCF affairs for many years, and observed the most incredible blunders in the past. Transparency is the best prevention for obvious misunderstandings. The current board is accountable for this implementation of this project. I am quite sure ultimately it will be ok, but the uncertainly makes me wonder what is going on and how we are spending our members' money. All the best, Beatriz Marinello >CONFIDENTIALITY -- WHAT ELSE IS NEW? >Mike Nolan on the USCF forum: > Posted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 10:29 am >"The full financials that were sent to the Board and the Finance >Committee contain some confidential data." Bill Hall considered the other information, such as the aged receiveables and a cash flow analysis which went into considerable detail regarding payroll and other items, confidential. Too bad (and typically), Larry didn't post the rest of my message, which is given below in full: Posted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 10:29 am The full financials that were sent to the Board and the Finance Committee contain some confidential data. However, Bill Hall is in the process of sending the P&L and balance sheet files to the BINFO system for immediate release, so they should be there momentarily. -- Mike Nolan Dear Don Quixote, If you continue charging windmills, a dragon may eventually step in front of your lance. As for this fiscal year, there has been, and will be, no negative cash flow. Clamp > Dear Don Quixote, > > If you continue charging windmills, a dragon may eventually step in > front of your lance. That sounds like a threat.  Signature"Google maintains the USENET." -- The Honorable R. Barclay Surrick, Eastern District of PA Judge From Parker v. Google, E.D.Pa. #04-cv-3918 * Dear Don Quixote, If you continue charging windmills, a dragon may eventually step in front of your lance. * (Channing to Parr) * That sounds like a threat. * (Gordon) The truth is a threat to people who are milking the USCF. CHANNING WAS ONLY KIDDING < That sounds like a threat.> -- Ray Gordon Joel Channing was funnin' me. Randy Bauer once again tries to change the subject. Now, then, the issue is not whether the USCF will survive (Mr. Channing can prop it up with a couple of his interest checks.) or whether there will be losses over a period. The issue was one of reporting. Before essentially leaving this chess group for a period when working on a couple of memoirs, I did some sleuthing around among certain people. I reported, for example, in March 2005 that the small wooden building in Crossville (about 40 percent the size of the building in New Windsor) would cost about $650,000. There was a howl. Two months or so later, the Board publicly announced an estimate of ... $650,000. There were other such reports. Randy Bauer and some board members went ballistic. Who was leaking? Who was helping this writer inform the membership about what was really happening with the disastrous move to Cross-to-Bear? I also reported that there would be a quarterly loss and cash flow problem within a month of when it hit the Federation. The problem was that Randy Bauer had spent months attacking this writer for lying in my reporting, whereas I was merely repeating an analysis from my sources. Mr. Bauer's ploy was to change the subject and state that I was predicting the fall of the Federation or massive losses over a year. Joel Channing kinda falls in with this ploy because, well, the numbers are embarrassing. The game of these politicians is to attack this writer for what I did NOT claim in the hope of lessening the impact of future reporting if and when I reestablish my old contacts. Larry Parr wrote (23 Apr 2006 19:31:47 -0700): > Mr. Bauer's ploy was to change the subject and > state that I was predicting the fall of the Federation > or massive losses over a year. Joel Channing kinda > falls in with this ploy because, well, the numbers are > embarrassing. The game of these politicians is to > attack this writer for what I did NOT claim ... _ "... Here is [how] I believe ... events will proceed until this coming mid-year if the lawsuit to stop the move fails. ...... A cash crunch will appear as early as April, ... Some person or group will step forward to purchase the equipment and databanks of the USCF, along with other rights, to bail out the organization. ... The Federation as we have known it will be Manhattan -chess-clubized." - Larry Parr (16 Dec 2004 05:48:40 GMT) MY PREDICTIONS IN CONTEXT From: parrthe...@cs.com (Parrthenon) Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.politics Date: 16 Dec 2004 05:48:40 GMT Subject: Re: USAF EB to hold closed sessions in Florida 1. There is a significant shortfall of six figures in Federation revenues. 2. The most likely source of the shortfall is ChessCafe. The most likely cause is that monies sent by the Cafe have been advertising and membership revenues without a sufficient mix of sales receipts. 9. A cash crunch will appear as early as April, and the Board will take funds from the LMA, which were to go toward constructing headquarters in Crossville. We will be told there is nothing to worry about because the Federation has splendid quarters in a Crossville church and need not construct a building for a year or two. -- Larry Parr Larry Parr wrote (24 Apr 2006 07:40:33 -0700): > MY PREDICTIONS IN CONTEXT >_ [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > and the Board will take funds from the LMA, > ... _ Larry Parr left out some parts of his 16 Dec 2004 05:48:40 GMT note. In particular: _ "11. Some person or group will step forward to purchase the equipment and databanks of the USCF, along with other rights, to bail out the organization. ... 13. The Federation as we have known it will be Manhattan-chess-clubized." - Larry Parr (16 Dec 2004 05:48:40 GMT) Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!newshub.sdsu.edu!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!audrey-m1.news.cs.com!not-for-mail Lines: 63 X-Admin: news@cs.com From: parrthenon@cs.com (Parrthenon) Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.politics Date: 16 Dec 2004 05:48:40 GMT References: <41c0dfe9.6590953@ca.news.verio.net> Organization: CompuServe (http://www.compuserve.com/) Subject: Re: USAF EB to hold closed sessions in Florida Message-ID: <20041216004840.21909.00002185@mb-m06.news.cs.com> KEEP THIS POSTING! Here is what I believe is happening now and how events will proceed until this coming mid-year if the lawsuit to stop the move fails. 1. There is a significant shortfall of six figures in Federation revenues. 2. The most likely source of the shortfall is ChessCafe. The most likely cause is that monies sent by the Cafe have been advertising and membership revenues without a sufficient mix of sales receipts. 3. There will be an effort to speed up the move while there is still cash in the kitty. 4. At the Board meeting this weekend, Beatriz's resignation will be accepted on a 6-0 vote, a kind of honorable discharge. 5. At the Board meeting this weekend, Beatriz's hire as, most likely, acting or assistant executive director, will be approved by a 5-1 vote. Don Schultz's silence speaks volumes, and the only "No" vote will come from Frank Brady. 6. Numbers four and five above will be accomplished within a few minutes. The issue is totally cut and dried contra Bauerian claims to the contrary. 7. There are provisions in the contracts between the USCF and Crossville that do not bear the light of day, and deliberations over the move will be secret unless the meeting is unattended by outsiders. If outsiders arrive, the Board will vote to go into secret session. 8. The Board has no decent estimate of the cost of the move, having voted for it without costing it out beforehand. The costs of the move as well as the new building will exceed all expectations. 9. A cash crunch will appear as early as April, and the Board will take funds from the LMA, which were to go toward constructing headquarters in Crossville. We will be told there is nothing to worry about because the Federation has splendid quarters in a Crossville church and need not construct a building for a year or two. 10. The actual moving will occasion problems as yet unimagined. Political factions will draw lines, and the crackah barrow lads in Crossville will add a couple of their surprises. The loss of experienced employees will prove devastating. 11. Some person or group will step forward to purchase the equipment and databanks of the USCF, along with other rights, to bail out the organization. 12. The last of the former New York employees will disappear. Beatriz Marinello or, depending on how the elections go, Bill Goichberg or his nominee will assume the post of Executive Director. 13. The Federation as we have known it will be Manhattan-chess-clubized. Look for something to come out of the Florida meeting or shortly thereafter indicating income shortfall. If we hear of such, you may take Nos. 2 to 13 for granted. ________________________________________________________________ "FIDE has made its decision. Players who refuse to be drug tested will not be able to play chess." -- Dr. Press, co-founder of the FIDE Medical Commission. > MY PREDICTIONS IN CONTEXT > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > -- Larry Parr From: parrthe...@cs.com (Parrthenon) Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.misc Date: 14 Dec 2004 13:26:57 GMT Subject: Open Letter to USCF Board Gentlemen and Gentleladies, You have voted to move the headquarters of the U. S. Chess Federation to Crossville, a small town in Tennessee. If you have the funds, you will be putting up a headquarters building next to a gas company. If not, you may have a prolonged stay in an old church or, mayhaps, in a warehouse. You will be hoping to procure adequately trained labor in the vicinity. If you fail to do so.... Sam Sloan questioned whether there is an anticipated possible shortfall in USCF revenues about the original time of the move. He argued that suggestions to speed up the move might be a way of committing funds to this relocation while they are still there to spend. If the Federation comes up short in April or May, then money from the LMA could be tapped, and the Federation will have to hock itself to build the anticipated new headquarters. This writer wondered at the absence of comment about Sam's report, since nearly everything else he pens gets plenty of comment, much of it adverse. But the silence surrounding the suggested income shortfall is deafening. I have repeatedly asked whether you have received any reports, most likely from Leroy Dubeck, about possible financial embarrassment near the end of this fiscal year. No answer. A POSSIBLE SCENARIO There is no way for us outside your circle to know in detail what is happening on the financial front. But the obvious surmise is that if you have been warned about an income shortfall whose source would be ChessCafe. Is it not possible that ChessCafe has been sending you membership monies and advertising income but has fallen behind in meeting its $350,000 sales obligation? Membership money and advertising income come under separate lines in the budget, and the $350,000 or whatever portion outstanding will remain to be paid as the budget has been written. If the money does not appear in the coffers by the end of the fiscal year, then there is a catastrophe at the very moment you are either moving or recovering from moving. What happens if during the move Murphy's Law proves alive and healthy, which we know to be a likely circumstance? What happens if the shortfall occurs at the same moment when the Federation cannot fulfill its fundamental task of, above all other things, keeping the office sufficiently organized to collect money from the membership? THE HEAT OF THE BATTLE In the heat of the battle on this and other forums, I would ask you not to circle the wagons and act irrationally. I would ask you to consider a modest proposal. Why not delay the decision to move just long enough to procure (or fail to procure) Delegate approval at the next U.S. Open? There are weighty reasons for doing so: 1. If you have, in fact, been warned of a possible massive shortfall in income, then your making a move now is dangerously impetuous. 2. If you wait to procure Delegate approval, you will not only have the benefit of further study of, say, the site in Liberty, New York, but you will also remove a significant prop underlying legal action to prevent the move. 3. If the Federation truly is in recovery mode at this time, then let the Federation build some cushion against the highly likely, unforeseen difficulties that will occur during this move. 4. If you delay, you can firm up the details for such a move, making the transition easier than it currently is like to be. 5. Before hiring a coordinator for the move, you could benefit from a longer period to examine the suitability of candidates. I have no idea whether Beatriz Marinello is truly unpopular with the staff, but you must above all find the right person to oversee the move. You cannot afford a situation where people walk out under intolerable pressures. So, then, delay this move until you receive Delegate approval. Don't stake the future of the Federation on such ideas as: 1. You will make a seamless "!!" move; 2. You will lose a couple of hundred years of experience without feeling the effects; and 3. You will run the office as usual during the move, collecting all anticipated revenues from the membership. In the game of chess, you are obliged to make a move. In chess business, you are under no such injunction. There is no time pressure. Don't treat this move as part of a five-minute blitz session. Do the sane thing. Go to the Delegates this coming August. Yours, Larry Parr * As for this fiscal year, there has been, and will be, no negative cash flow.* (Joel Channing) Yet Beatriz Marinello, another board member, claims the USCF will end this fiscal year in the red. Who is right? Question for "the clamp": Unless there are some extraordinary donations, will the USCF end this fiscal year in the red or in the black? > * As for this fiscal year, there has been, and will > be, no negative cash flow.* (Joel Channing) [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Who is right? They could both be right. I think that Joel is right to focus on cash, because the USCF doesn't have a lot of other assets that could be readily converted to cash should the need arise. Because the USCF has had surpluses in recent years, it is entirely possible to have plenty of cash (i.e., 'no negative cashflow') and still 'end this fiscal year in the red.' Obviously, the USCF cannot operate every fiscal year in the red ad infinitum, but, if the deficit is not large, is not structural in nature, and if there are plans in place to change the trend in the future, operating this year in the red isn't, by itself, a cause for extreme concern. There are questions to ask, such as: 1. What strategies is the USCF undertaking to improve revenues, particularly growth areas like magazine and web revenue? 2. Are there membership service improvements that will enhance members' enjoyment of their USCF membership (and thus be more likely to maintain their membership) 3. Are there partnering opportunities that can enhance the USCF's stature and finances? 4. Are there strategies to control major cost centers? I am encouraged by the development of better and more consistant financial data (such as monthly cashflows) and believe that continued study of revenue and expenditure estimates to actuals will provide better ability to forecast trends in future USCF budgets based on changes in the economy, demographics, and membership. Randy Bauer >They could both be right. I think that Joel is right to focus on cash, >because the USCF doesn't have a lot of other assets that could be >readily converted to cash should the need arise. Because the USCF has >had surpluses in recent years, it is entirely possible to have plenty >of cash (i.e., 'no negative cashflow') and still 'end this fiscal year >in the red.' To some extent talking about cash and finishing in the red is mixing apples and oranges. There are items on the P&L that have have a much different impact (or no current impact) on cash, such as depreciation, the adjustments to revenue that arise from current and prior year multi-year membership payments, and several entries involving sustaining and life memberships. For example, so far this fiscal year the USCF has received $40,000 in one-payment life memberships and another $2000 in one-payment senior life memberships. (That ignores the minor impact of online discounts and affiliate commissions.) While that money was put in the bank, helping the USCF's cash position, very little of it will show up as revenue on the current year's P&L. -- Mike Nolan I asked the question of Joel Channing, not Randy Bauer or Mike Nolan. Maybe Joel will give us a straight answer without any doubletalk. > I asked the question of Joel Channing, not Randy Bauer or Mike Nolan. > > Maybe Joel will give us a straight answer without any doubletalk. You get a response from Mike, who is as involved in the day-to-day operations of the USCF, and me, the Finance Chair, and you complain? My gawd, Parr usually screams about the lack of transparency. Making a note -- from now on, no answers to members' questions about finances unless they specifically address them to me. Randy Bauer Let me repeat my question in case Joel Channing missed it the first time around: * As for this fiscal year, there has been, and will be, no negative cash flow.* (Joel Channing) Yet Beatriz Marinello, another board member, claims the USCF will end this fiscal year in the red. Who is right? Question for "the clamp": Unless there are some extraordinary donations, will the USCF end this fiscal year in the red or in the black? "They could both be right." -- Randy Bauer I respectfully submit that this "reply" from the chairman of the finance committee begs the question. Let me repeat the question: "Unless there are some extraordinary donations, will the USCF end this fiscal year in the red or in the black?" Yes or no will suffice, thank you. >Let me repeat the question: >"Unless there are some extraordinary donations, will the >USCF end this fiscal year in the red or in the black?" >Yes or no will suffice, thank you. That's a little too easy - of course the answer is "Yes, the USCF will end the fiscal year in the red or in the black". Don't you mean, "Red or Black will suffice"? - Tom Martinak PS: I wanted to get this simple reply in fast so that you can quickly repair your question, because I'm sure Larry Parr, as he does for Louis Blair, will point out how badly formed your question is. >>"Unless there are some extraordinary donations, will the >>USCF end this fiscal year in the red or in the black?" [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > That's a little too easy - of course the answer is "Yes, the USCF will > end the fiscal year in the red or in the black". What is this, three-card monte? "Watch the red...red..red..black, no red...." Signature"Google maintains the USENET." -- The Honorable R. Barclay Surrick, Eastern District of PA Judge From Parker v. Google, E.D.Pa. #04-cv-3918 > Let me repeat my question in case Joel Channing > missed it the first time around: [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > I respectfully submit that this "reply" from the chairman of > the finance committee begs the question. I respectfully submit that you don't know what "begs the question" means. Question begging is to assume a conclusion (or an arguable point) without providing support for the assumption. I also respectfully submit that you are being disingenuous by placing my reply after the question about extraordinary donations. That wasn't the question I was responding to. Or hadn't you noticed? I also respectfully submit that it doesn't sound like you have much experience with accounting and finance. The point that cashflow statements are different from financial statements is pretty basic stuff. Randy Bauer > Let me repeat the question: > > "Unless there are some extraordinary donations, will the > USCF end this fiscal year in the red or in the black?" > > Yes or no will suffice, thank you. >>CONFIDENTIALITY -- WHAT ELSE IS NEW? > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Too bad (and typically), Larry didn't post the rest of my message, which > is given below in full: Larry Parr didn't tell the whole story? Shocking! Chicken Parr Little continues to hope and pray that the sky will someday, somehow fall. Randy Bauer > Posted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 10:29 am > The full financials that were sent to the Board and the Finance Committee [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > -- > Mike Nolan OK, what's the complete story? Why shouldn't any member, such as myself, consider the Crossville move a complete and unnecessary waste of money? John >>>CONFIDENTIALITY -- WHAT ELSE IS NEW? >> [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] >> -- >> Mike Nolan John J. wrote (Mon, 24 Apr 2006 19:52:16 GMT): > OK, what's the complete story? Why shouldn't any > member, such as myself, consider the Crossville > move a complete and unnecessary waste of money? _ Here is some of what Timothy Hanke wrote about the subject: _ "We have sold our New Windsor building which was too large and (paradoxically) had insufficient parking. In a matter of months, we will be shut of the $50,000-a-year lease next door to our former building. Soon, I hope, we will also be rid of our current storage charges of $2,100 a month. Cutting out those two major expenses will practically pay for our mortgage in Crossville! _ We are moving to an attractive and prosperous area with low costs. The local chess establishment is very active, and we have received a gift of valuable land appraised at $264,000. _ The local bank will give us a no-money-down construction loan, allowing us to conserve our cash. Local costs are so low--low property taxes, no tax on earned income--that USCF employees will be able to afford to buy their own homes. I thought that was important. _ Local real estate should appreciate in value, thanks to Crossville's strong and diversified local economy and Crossville's high ranking in national surveys of the best places to retire. (The Cumberland Plateau has a nice climate and there are lots of golf courses and attractive housing developments.) _ So we will be able to conserve our cash, while placing our national operations in an attractive and low-cost area, and growing a nice real-estate asset that can be borrowed against (if necessary) in the future." - Timothy Hanke (24 Oct 2004 12:17:34 -0700) _ _ "The present move to Crossville may or may not be the perfect move, but having been to Crossville myself and having met the leaders of the community--and the leaders of the Tennessee chess community--I feel confident it is a good move. I believe it is a good location for the USCF office, and I believe we have a good chance to prosper there. As a chessplayer, when I see a move that gives me a clear win, I do not need to continue searching. _ In the case of Crossville, not one but *two* consecutive boards have visited the place and approved it. We have been given free prime land. Favorable financing is lined up for our new building, which will be a valuable asset to USCF when paid off. While waiting to build, we have free rent and utilities. The local chess community is strong and supportive. The local government is strong and supportive--we have met with the governor of Tennessee and many other leaders on down. _ It is true that fewer USCF staff than I expected have agreed to move to Crossville. But we have an excellent chief financial officer in place--Grant Perks, who previously served as acting executive director (or some similar title) in 2003. Mike Nolan is advising us on technical matters, and we have great confidence in his abilities and in his knowledge of our needs. A respected local architect has already presented us with an initial design for the new USCF headquarters, which he is modifying according to our input--especially with the skilled input of board member Elizabeth Shaughnessy, who is an architect herself. Glenn Petersen, former Chess Life editor and former acting executive director, is helping oversee the the transition from New York to Crossville. Beatriz Marinello has agreed to serve as a volunteer chief operating officer for six months--and as a board member, she will not be eligible for a bonus when she is done. We have some new staff already in place in Crossville, and some current staff who have already begun moving down to Crossville. While regretting the loss of valuable staff in New York, we are confident we will find good new staff in the Crossville area. So there is much good in the present situation, and in my opinion much good to look forward to." - Timothy Hanke (Sun, 02 Jan 2005 20:23:11 GMT) I think I just discovered jr's favorite song (see below). Sung to the tune of "I'm just wild about Harry" I'm just wild about Larry And Larry's wild about me! His double standards And endless slanders Fills me with ecstasy! He hates the guts of our Louie He wants to hang him from a tree Oh, I'm just wild about Larry, 'cause that's OK you see! I'm just wild about Larry And Larry's wild about me! His tasteless cannards And anal chatter Fills me with energy! He can't stand the likes of Randy Bauer Hates him every minute, every hour At the table, at the office And even in the shower. I'm just wild about Larry And Larry's wild about me! His prosy language And excess baggage Gvies me hilarity! Larry thinks it's lots of fun To ridicule one Mr. Kingston Oh, I'm just wild about Larry Because he's my number one! L I A, double R Y He's just wild about Cannot do without He's just wild about me! LOL! Bruceski! >I think I just discovered jr's favorite song (see below). > Sung to the tune of "I'm just wild about Harry" [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > Cannot do without > He's just wild about me! > Third quarter 05-06 USCF financials. Year to Date: ($194,635.67). > > Yes, that is a NEGATIVE FIGURE. So what? Is every company or organization's financial statement supposed to be positive every day? Every month? Every quarter? Every year? Has Parr ever heard of commerical paper? Revenue anticipation notes? The fact is that cashflows are uneven throughout a year. What matters is the bottom line OVER A PERIOD OF TIME. I can see Parr now, grabbing one month's negative financials and missing the larger trends. The larger trends are that the USCF cash position looks pretty good (and in an organization that was on the brink of financial collapse, the positive cashflow and lack of significant accounts payable is a good thing). I'm sure we'll hear shortly from CPA Parr, but I doubt Parr has been responsible for a multi-billion dollar budget. I know we're all hayseeds here in the Midwest, but my experience suggests things aren't looking too bad for the USCF. Randy Bauer > Here is a brief review of past postings on the topic. > [quoted text clipped - 93 lines] > > -- Larry Parr * Right from the start there were some red flags, the USCF paid $10,000 just to see a proposal from Mr. Hoffman. * (board member Ms. Marinello) So this Hoffman character gets ten large up front while several beloved grandmasters get the axe. Figures. Cronies always get the big bucks. Where in the so-called redesign report does it call for this "Saturday night massacre"? Any editor who says Chess Life doesn't need a Q&A column is clearly incompetent. I don't have to see the June issue to know that a costly disaster is looming. The best way for the USCF to end this fiscal year in the black is if Joel Channing makes a big fat donation out of his own pocket. TRANSPARENCY STINKS This writer stated in my Open Letter to the USCF Board on December 14, 2004: "There is no way for us outside your circle to know in detail what is happening on the financial front. But the obvious surmise is that if you have been warned about an income shortfall whose source would be ChessCafe." The actual term used was income shortfall. That means expenses will exceed revenues or there will be a negative net income due to a shortfall of projected revenue or an overage on planned expenditures. "Cash crunch" was also used as a more understandable term as there would be less income (cash) than planned. No one but those defending our poor contract/budget management have implied the USCF would go bankrupt, have no assets, not be able to pay their bills, have a negative cash flow, or be a permanent condition. USCF transparency stinks. Bottom line the USCF did have an income shortfall and is running a negative net income this year. The "cash crunch" did occur. No amount of redefining terms, obfuscation, or bombast changes that fact. We will watch in amusement as our leaders pull out all the stops and reach into their bag of tricks in order to be able to say they ended this fiscal year in the black. Larry Parr wrote (23 Apr 2006 16:53:44 -0700): > ... No one but those defending our poor contract/budget > management have implied the USCF would go bankrupt, > have no assets, not be able to pay their bills, have a > negative cash flow, or be a permanent condition. _ "... Here is [how] I believe ... events will proceed until this coming mid-year if the lawsuit to stop the move fails. ...... A cash crunch will appear as early as April, ... Some person or group will step forward to purchase the equipment and databanks of the USCF, along with other rights, to bail out the organization. ... The Federation as we have known it will be Manhattan -chess-clubized." - Larry Parr (16 Dec 2004 05:48:40 GMT) * Right from the start there were some red flags, the USCF paid $10,000 just to see a proposal from Mr. Hoffman. * (board member Beatriz Marinello) While members get the shaft, cronies like Paul Hoffman will get $50,000 for a redesign of Chess Life and the USCF website without any open bidding. In another message, Ms. Marinello said the the USCF will finish this fiscal year in the red. * USCF transparency stinks. Bottom line the USCF did have an income shortfall and is running a negative net income this year. The "cash crunch" did occur. No amount of redefining terms, obfuscation, or bombast changes that fact. We will watch in amusement as our leaders pull out all the stops and reach into their bag of tricks in order to be able to say they ended this fiscal year in the black. * (Parr) *I also respectfully submit that it doesn't sound like you have much experience with accounting and finance.* (Bauer) You're absolutely right, Randy. But I do know the difference between a company ending in the red or the black for its fiscal year. ' Since Joel Channing seems to keep ignoring my question, let me ask it again: Without some extraordinary donations, will the USCF end this fiscal year in the red or the black? Thanks again for your reply. It's good to see that at least one official has the integrity to answer legitimate questions here.instead of playing with words. > *I also respectfully submit that it doesn't sound like you have much > experience with accounting and finance.* (Bauer) [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > least one official has the integrity to answer legitimate > questions here.instead of playing with words. Thank you, but I will repeat my earlier assertion that even if the USCF ends the year in the red, it will not necessarily be a big deal -- as long as it is a manageable number. Right now, I believe that its cash position is more important than GAAP-based financial statements for the USCF. From what I've seen, the cash position is improving. Randy Bauer * Thank you, but I will repeat my earlier assertion that even if the USCF ends the year in the red, it will not necessarily be a big deal -- as long as it is a manageable number. * (Bauer) Dear Randy, After consulting my decoder ring, this means that the USCF will end in the red for this fiscal year absent any extraordinary donations. By the way, I'm looking forward to your match against Evans and hope it takes place. Any word from the sponsors? > * Thank you, but I will repeat my earlier assertion that even if the > USCF [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > USCF will end in the red for this fiscal year absent any > extraordinary donations. I spent nearly 20 years doing revenue estimating and budgeting -- the fiscal year isn't over until the fat lady sings. What I wrote most definitely does NOT mean that "the USCF will end in the red absent any extraordinary donations." My comment was meant to indicate that IF the USCF ends in the red BUT has cashflow similar to what exists now, I would deem the USCF's financial health to be pretty good. > By the way, I'm looking forward to your match against > Evans and hope it takes place. Any word from the sponsors? Thank you. You're probably the only one. Haven't heard a word from the sponsors but would definitely prepare for battle should it come to pass. Randy Bauer jr (a.k.a. Larry Parr lite) scribbled > Thanks again for your reply. It's good to see that at > least one official has the integrity to answer legitimate > questions here.instead of playing with words. What? A member of the Parr camp complaining about someone else "playing with words" to avoid answering a legiimate question? LOL! Larry Parr wrote (23 Apr 2006 07:02:14 -0700): > Here is a brief review of past postings on the topic. > ... [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Randy Bauer's defense is that the Federation has > not gone under. Nor did I say it would. ... _ "... Here is [how] I believe ... events will proceed until this coming mid-year if the lawsuit to stop the move fails. ...... A cash crunch will appear as early as April, ... Some person or group will step forward to purchase the equipment and databanks of the USCF, along with other rights, to bail out the organization. ... The Federation as we have known it will be Manhattan -chess-clubized." - Larry Parr (16 Dec 2004 05:48:40 GMT) |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2010 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.