NAYCC 2025 Bids May 4 deadline for submission of bids to CFC

[Vladimir Drkulec]

For all your appalling behaviour regarding the 2025 NAYCC Vlad, I suppose I should thank you because the regulations have changed effective January 2024. I will forward the new regs to the Secretary. Obviously our original bid is off the table.

From your point of view my behaviour is appalling because I declined to favour your bid above all others and allow you to submit a bid without any other bidders. If that is appalling then we have a different definition for the word. Interesting that you posted this while I was busy with the Candidates tournaments and you knew I would be too busy to see this.

Instead of $20USD per player to CCA, the number is now $40USD for official players and $60USD for additional players.

We await CCA informing us instead of some random Canadian of any changes in the regulations which were not posted on their website as late as two weeks ago.

Your insistence on a detailed budget is also out of place. There is nothing in the CCA regulations about the need for a budget.

That is a CFC requirement and not a CCA requirement. It is also a requirement from most reputable sporting organizations. If you are incapable of producing such a budget, I suggest that you ask your local sport tourism bureau as they are more than capable of producing one for you.

The hosting obligations are somewhere between 39 and 75 people, for 5-6 days. Such is the risk which organizers must accept to stage this tournament. This risk is heightened because the USCF charged their players a $200USD admin fee to attend the NAYCC in Mexico 2023 (not so for Calgary) and likewise for the World Schools in Peru. Likely this practice will persist in 2025. Not sure what that will did to future demand.
[Meanwhile, the CFC's 20% cut of the CCA head tax already stands to increase by almost 300% in light of their new fees.

What is your connection to the CCA and why are they telling you this, and not the relevant CFC officials?

The implication that organizers must be held to account for unfairly enriching themselves is, um, a little rich.

"The wicked flee where no man pursueth."

I want to trust you and your team but history keeps teaching me otherwise. Your handling of bids in general is beyond inadequate. Good luck.

We will be fine.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

We await CCA informing us instead of some random Canadian of any changes in the regulations which were not posted on their website as late as two weeks ago.

Did anyone from the CFC participated in the General Assembly of the CCA of 2023? https://fideamerica.net/site/en/llam...iciembre-2023/
With what happened there https://fideamerica.net/site/en/asam...-america-2023/

3. Actualización de Regulaciones Financieras y de Torneos: Se aprobó la actualización de las Regulaciones Financieras y de Torneos, fortaleciendo el marco que guía las actividades de FIDE América.
google translation:
"3. Update of Financial and Tournament Regulations: The update of the Financial and Tournament Regulations was approved, strengthening the framework that guides the activities of FIDE America."

Seems almost four months passed...


The website holds only a five-year-old regulations. https://fideamerica.net/site/en/regu...s-financieras/

[Hal Bond]

Thanks Egis - you did this the hard way! I am often frustrated by the CCA website so I just wrote to Secretary Celi and asked for the latest regs.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

Clearly everyone that I have talked to about NAYCC was informed that we thought that a substantial payment to the youth fund was warranted. You cannot claim that such elements of your bid are proprietary as those proprietary elements that I cared about appeared in bids from people that I did not talk to. This is not rocket science. I have given everyone a similar first email to the one I gave you. We can agree to disagree.

[Hal Bond]

I need to correct one of my statements. The hosting obligations for this tournament include 12 players plus an HoD per Federation, totalling 39 people. In addition, the previous year's champions are entitled to free room and board (or 60% thereof), and that is only another 12 people, not 36. My bad. So the total exposure is 39+12 = 51 people.

It may be worthwhile checking with the USCF about their $200 surcharge. If that remains in force it could reduce the US participation.

In any case, I hope the bidding and the event goes well. The new CCA fees are a bit of a shock.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

We are talking to the U.S. often and productively.

Even if everyone shows up you are only paying 60%. It used to be 100% so the balance on this question at least has shifted in favour of the organizer. You typically get all of the Canadian, all of the U.S. players and a few Mexican players who may be living in the U.S.

[Hal Bond]

From your point of view my behaviour is appalling because I declined to favour your bid above all others and allow you to submit a bid without any other bidders. If that is appalling then we have a different definition for the word. Interesting that you posted this while I was busy with the Candidates tournaments and you knew I would be too busy to see this.

Nice try Kreskin. Your behaviour is appalling because even after discussing (and seemingly approving) the proprietary elements of our bid, you then engaged another bidder, and then decided you should enter a bid yourself. And why would a random Canadian know or care about your personal schedule? And why on earth would I go on record with a lie? Grow up!

The info I provided about the USCF's $200USD surcharge did not come from CCA, rather from the USCF's assorted web pages. I thought I as doing all bidders a service by sharing what I learned. The info about hosting obligations came from you. I just put into context.

All snark aside Vlad - if the CFC wants to do this event in house, then don't accept bids. If you want a contribution to the Youth Fund, specify it to all bidders.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

Nice try Kreskin. Your behaviour is appalling because even after discussing (and seemingly approving) the proprietary elements of our bid, you then engaged another bidder, and then decided you should enter a bid yourself. And why would a random Canadian know or care about your personal schedule? And why on earth would I go on record with a lie? Grow up!

The info I provided about the USCF's $200USD surcharge did not come from CCA, rather from the USCF's assorted web pages. I thought I as doing all bidders a service by sharing what I learned. The info about hosting obligations came from you. I just put into context.

All snark aside Vlad - if the CFC wants to do this event in house, then don't accept bids. If you want a contribution to the Youth Fund, specify it to all bidders.

If someone submits a bid that is so good that we don't need to consider organizing it ourselves then we would not consider organizing it ourselves. In fact, I believe that has happened.

From now on, please do not send me any bid associated with you. Do not ask me about your bids. Do not ask me for my advice. You seem to misconstrue advice as an endorsement. Everyone else can continue to ask for my advice. I spoke to at least ten individuals about NAYCC 2025 before I spoke to you and I spoke to several individuals after you. Send your bids to Lyle Craver. If you continue to mischaracterize our emails then I will publish all of them. I already published the one original one which clearly outlined my position, which has not changed.

I did not even talk once to the group that submitted the best bid so far from my perspective unless you count the multiple contacts with their tourism bureau.

There are three bids to date including yours which has since been withdrawn. From my perspective yours was the third best. Congrats on your bronze medal.


On Sep 20, 2023, at 6:50 PM, Vladimir Drkulec wrote:


Hi Hal,

Christina and I had a long talk about youth matters this late morning to early afternoon. Of course, this predated your email. We have been discussing doing NAYCC internally for quite some time as a way to generate funds for the CFC youth fund in order to fund projects like youth training and sending players to the array of new tournaments from FIDE is becoming impossible to keep track of. [sic]

In 2022, the only place that we could organize NAYCC was in Alberta because of existing covid regulations.

I am not sure what the latest CCA regulations for this tournament are. Probably something like $20 US per player to CCA (FIDE America). Entry fees seem to be in the $225 range. At 400 players that is $90,000 gross revenue and more if you take into account late fees and sponsorship. Costs for official players have to be taken into account but even at $100 entry fee, this was a profitable tournament for the organizers. I think it is not unreasonable to ask for some substantial donation to the youth fund as this tournament could garner 500 or more entries in the current environment.

I am not even aware of the North American Schools Chess Championship existing as an event. Are you asking for the Canadian Schools Chess Championship? Again for this it looks like something which requires a similar setup as CYCC. I believe that our youth budget this year was in the $50,000 range so far, so we don't have the ability to absorb too much in the way of extra expenses though to be fair we are not always going to send three teams to the U16 Olympiad.

I do have some interest from other communities in NAYCC but we need a very good bid to discourage us from organizing it ourselves. I think it needs to be in Ontario.

I am going to a sport hosting event in Ottawa in a few weeks and the NAYCC is one carrot that we are dangling.

We are not going to award this event in the next month. You are asking for an option to present a bid and we are happy to give you that option. It does need to be a very good bid from the point of view of the CFC.

Vlad

[Mahmud Hassain]

Dear Vlad,


Please be reminded that, as the president, you do not speak on your behalf. This is not a social media platform. You are assumed to be speaking for, and writing and publishing on behalf of the CFC. That means, all the executive are assumed to have authorized and are endorsing your statements.
Olga Mushtaler, Lyle Craver, Fred McKim, Victor Plotkin, Christina Tao, Veronica Hitchlock, Mark Dutton and Patricia Gamliel: you are responsible for the President's statements.

Thank you
Mahmud

[Vladimir Drkulec]

Dear Vlad,


Please be reminded that, as the president, you do not speak on your behalf. This is not a social media platform. You are assumed to be speaking for, and writing and publishing on behalf of the CFC. That means, all the executive are assumed to have authorized and are endorsing your statements.
Olga Mushtaler, Lyle Craver, Fred McKim, Victor Plotkin, Christina Tao, Veronica Hitchlock, Mark Dutton and Patricia Gamliel: you are responsible for the President's statements.

Thank you
Mahmud

Not necessarily. Sometimes I speak on behalf of myself. Sometimes I speak on behalf of the CFC. You have withdrawn your bid so it is not relevant any more. People do not get to mischaracterize communications with me. They will be corrected.

The idea that the executive would be consulted on my every statement is not a workable idea. Paralysis by committee is not the way the CFC or any functional enterprise can exist and be effective. The board will let me know when they think that I have gone too far. They are not shy about that and I welcome their input. I respect all of them. They do not control what I say and do. I do not control what they say and do. Somehow it all works as things do when women and men of ability and good intent work together for a common cause.