EGF:s årsmöte

Om go i Sverige

Moderators: boywing, pel, sestir, pem

henric
Posts: 1096
Joined: 11 May 2004, 08:10

Re: EGF:s årsmöte

Post by henric »

Kommentar från Peter Zandveld till de rumänska förslagen
(länkarna: http://www.go-centre.nl/egcc_for_dummies ,
http://www.go-centre.nl/egf_for_dummies ,
http://www.go-centre.nl/articles_of_association )
:

To Catalin Taranu, President of Romanian Go Federation
Dear Mr Taranu, Hello Catalin,
I read the Romanian letter with interest. In this letter I will only reply about the part about the EGCC on behalf of the EGCC. A second letter about the go congresses will follow.
Your motion is written in a shoot-first-ask-questions-later style. I will answer in the answer-questions-first-shoot-later style.
To avoid misunderstandings I wrote two pages on the EGCC webiste:
1. EGCC for Dummies
2. EGF for Dummies
The constitution of the go centre is here:
Articles of Association
1. Now about your letter. First the formal/procedural points.
1. The EGF supervises the EGCC through the Supervisory Board. As you can read in the constitution the Supervisory Board has considerable influence. The Supervisory Board consists not only of EGF members, but also representatives of the Japanese community. The EGF is not owner or boss of the EGCC, it should also respect other stake holders.
2. If the EGF Members are not happy about the EGCC they should address the Supervisory Board.
3. The cooperation between AGM and EGCC is voluntary from both sides. The relation between the EGCC and EGF is exactly the same as the relation between a professional and the EGF: You agree to do a certain job for a certain amount of money. Sometimes for a special price, sometimes for free. The only difference is that if the EGCC has a surplus it has to spend that money on go.
4. Detailed information about salaries or performance of staff is be available to the Supervisory Board, but is not to be discussed in public. I can assure you that salaries are low to Dutch standards.
2. Now about the general state of affairs.
1. In the first place: the staff and board are not happy with the current state of affairs.
2. When I became president of the foundation and William Wandel general manager (about 2 years ago) we were faced with a combination of problems: income was dropping, we were fasing out the employment of 2 staff members, tasks of 3 persons were shifted to one person, the financial reserves were too low and there was a backlog in the maintenance.
3. In my view the first priority of the general manager was increase income and balance the books. To this end a website for the rental business was developed. This site was not used, because we could land a new big tenant. This solves the liquidity problems, but was a time consuming procedure. This tenant is expected to stay for a couple of years, but not indefinetly.
4. The second priority was to improve the bookkeeping and accounting system. We employed Harry van der Krogt to take care of that. We switched to an other bookkeeping system and booking procedures. Also we hired an other external accountant to produce the official yearly accounts. I consider this also succesfull.
5. It is not so the EGCC was closed for go players last year. The local go club played there; activities of the Dutch go association took place; Harry van der Krogt also did work for the Dutch go-association (partly paid for by the Dutch go association.); also some tasks for the EGF were carried out.
6. Though little time and money is available for go activites we think we can now look with confidence in the future.
7. The go centre is ready anytime to host bigger or smaller go events.
3. Details
1. At last years supervisory board meeting and AGM several projects were discussed in a brainstorming fashion.
2. We have not been able to work out these in detail due to lack in time or funds.
3. One of these projects was to develop propaganda material for tournament organizers. This was impossible to produce because of lack of time. But more important, I also think this is a misguided idea.
4. The other project we brought foreward ourselves was: actively approach the member nations and ask what kind of help they need. Here we overplayed our hand. We might have been able to send a questionaire, but if you cannot give a followup it is pointless.
4. Next steps
1. Improve governance. We have to make a better match between the constitution and practice. For example the contacts between the Supervisory Board and the EGCC have to be more frequent and their functioning has to be according to the constitution or the constitution has to be changed. We have to add younger persons to the Management Board.
2. Improve financial reporting. In the financial report the exploitation of the building and the go department should be split. Also, the go activities should be admistered like projects. Then it wil become at least more clear that even in bad times the go centre is a big sponsor of the go community.
3. Improve communication with the outside world. We have setup a wiki website. This can serve as an independent forum for people involved in the promotion and organization of go.
4. For a start the beginners instruction books should be available on line.
5. Conclusion
I hope you are satisfied with our answer. We look foreward to cooperate with you.
Peter Zandveld, on behalf of staff and management board of the EGCC.
henric
Posts: 1096
Joined: 11 May 2004, 08:10

Re: EGF:s årsmöte

Post by henric »

Kommetar från Peter Zandve´ld till de tjeckiska förslagen:

Open letter to Martin Kovarik regarding Czech proposals

Dear Martin,

With this open letter I try to help AGM members to make up their mind with regards to your letter. This should help shorten discussions at the AGM, and/or make them more to the point.

1. Opening remarks:
If you think the EGF is not in good shape, this should motivate you to go to the AGM. Staying away is exactly the wrong action.

2. News:
This kind of motion does not work. What sanctions can you apply? What if the president sends a letter of one line every 3 months: "no news today" to avoid those sanctions? This newsletter thing will function only when the president feels the need to do so him/her self.

3. Ratings:
You are right there in my opinion. But now it is not possible. First the EGF AND THE MEMBERS have to be mature organizations first. This is a 10 year plan. That includes rewriting the constitution, implementing rules for good governence that can be imposed on member organizations, arbitration procedures..................

4. EGCC:
I wrote a letter on behalf of the EGCC in reply to the Romanian proposal. I assume you have received it. No need to repeat here that the AGM cannot make the decision you ask for.
(On my letter I got feedback from only one member. So I assume nobody cares except a few.)

5. Treasurers report:
I agree with you.

6. Auditors report:
I agree there is a problem. But probably only a formal problem.

7. Budget of congress:
I think the financial plan has to be part of any proposal for a congress before the voting. This can be a rough outline, but shows way of thinking.
After the event nothing can be changed, so this knowledge is only of theoretical interest.
Publishing the financial report after the congress is meaningless without an audit.
Publishing the full financial report outside a group of few insiders may cause fiscal problems and problems with sponsors, especially when there are more than 1.
If the AGM wants to have influence on how the congress is run financially, it also has to take a matching responsibility.

8. Judging the EGF Board.
Your letter letter gives a sense of unhappiness about the EGF. I think the problem is that expectations are to high. The EGF is not a god that solves all the member organizations problems in exchange for prayer.
The EGF = the member organizations. The EGF is not a source of idea's, money, power or whatever. It is a forum where the these are exchanged. The EGF board members are the brokers and regulators. Without membership activity there is no EGF activity.
Please read also http://www.go-centre.nl/egf_for_dummies
We need a measuring rod for judging the board. I propose:
1. It has to do what the constitution says.
2. It has to do what it traditionally does.
3. It has to do what it promissed last year to do this year.

re 1. This is what the constitution says:
"The purpose of the EGF is to encourage, regulate, co-ordinate, and disseminate the playing of Go in Europe. The EGF is a non-profit organization, has no political purpose, and is interested only in the promotion of Go.
In accordance with this purpose, the specific objects shall be as follows:
• 1. To establish guidelines for tournaments and championships.
• 2. To establish guidelines on gradings and rankings of players in Europe
• 3. To ensure that a European Championship is organised each year
• 4. To represent the interests of European Go both inside and outside of Europe
• 5. To take such other action as may be expedient to further the main purpose of the EGF. "
Point 1, 2 and 3 are OK
Point 4 could be interpreted as handling relations with IGF and Asian sponsors. This is also OK
Point 5, for example coordinating the tournament callender and various tournaments, also OK

Of course point 5 allows the EGF to do 1000 more things, but we have to conclude that the EGF carries out its constitutional tasks more or less correctly.

re 2. No points there, or am I missing something?

re 3. I read the minutes of the AGM of 2009. Nothing seems to be promissed. But I remember different. A proposal for a system of the EC has been promissed. These are there, 2 even.

So I think the board did OK, The only question I have is: The board seems to have the same limited interpretation of what it should do as I. Why 7 people?

9. Conclusion
I recommend to reconsider your motions, and withdraw most of them. Perhaps we can find some time to invite the other 3 or 4 people interested in go politics to taste the Finnish beer together.


Best regards


Peter Zandveld
henric
Posts: 1096
Joined: 11 May 2004, 08:10

Re: EGF:s årsmöte

Post by henric »

Den internationella diskussionen verkar äga rum mest på:
http://lifein19x19.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=47

mvh
h.
pel
Administratör
Posts: 927
Joined: 31 Aug 2004, 12:58
Location: Uppsala/Gävle
Contact:

Re: EGF:s årsmöte

Post by pel »

Det är väl inte ett "lagom" förslag - det är ett svullstigt förslag!
Det skulle innebära att vi har två EM-titlar: en sluten och en öppen.

Med det sagt så är det väl inget fel på det - möjligtvis så känns det lite krystat med två EM-titlar; å andra sidan så kan vi slopa den irriterande uppdelningen mellan européer och icke-européer under EGC. Vem vet - det kanske kan höjag EGCs status t.om.?

Det enda riktiga problem jag kan se med det här är att det kommer att komma åsikter om att EGC ska sponsra EM med pengar.
lagom
Posts: 55
Joined: 20 Apr 2006, 07:50

Re: EGF:s årsmöte

Post by lagom »

Det är väl inte ett "lagom" förslag
Kanske inte ''lagom'' för årets AGM, men ''lagom'' långsiktigt, och ''lagom'' tycker om det.

Två olika EM-titlar är helt ok, ett 'European Congress Chamapion' och ett 'European Champions' Champion'.

Toppspelarna hade tidigare 'Ing Cup' och 'Toyota-Denso' etc, men tyvärr finns de pengarna inte längre. Jag tycker det är bra att ha en speciell turnering för toppspelarna och det är utmärkt att köra en VM-liknande turnering av EGF. Där får de kämpa om EM-titeln och platsen till de stora turneringarna i Asien. Och låt EGC få att vara EGC.

/Martin
henric
Posts: 1096
Joined: 11 May 2004, 08:10

Re: EGF:s årsmöte

Post by henric »

Brev nr 2 från Zandveld:
Open letter to The Romanian Go Federation.

Dear Mr. Taranu, Dear Catalin,

Your letter to the EGF containing some proposals and comments needs carefull consideration. In the AGM there is no time to discuss such long letters in detail. Judging from the agenda this point may be discussed around midnight, so we better start a constructive dialogue before the meeting.

I sent already a letter on behalf of the EGCC.
In my letter in reply to the Czech letter I indirectly gave my reply to your comments on the EGF leadership.
This letter is a reply on your comments and proposals concerning the European Go Congress. (point 2 of your letter)

Introduction.
I have attended the EGC since 1977. In 1985 I was one of the main organizers of the congress. I did the accounting, the contact with the sponsor and was tournament director. For a large number of years I was Auditor of the EGF. So over the years I collected a lot of background information on the congresses. First I present some general information newcomers may need, and than my opinions.

Relation between the EGF and Congress.
What the EGF is can be read on http://www.go-centre.nl/tikiwiki/egf_for_dummies
In the past when the EGF was still small, say up to 1990, the congress rotated among countries. There was no voting needed to decide where the congress was to be organized. Later, when more countries wanted the congress, voting in the AGM was introduced. After the congress was given to an organizing team, the team could more or less do as they please. The only thing the EGF controls is the tournament system of the European Championship. There is no contract between the EGF and the organizers. Sometimes the EGF board has tried to control the money of the EGF sponsors.

Traditions.
There is a number of traditions that have been preserved over time. Most important:
1. Date: last week of July - first week of August
2. Tournaments: Main (10 rounds), weekend tournament, many side tournaments.
3. Official delegates from Asia (professionals): the congress pays their hotel and expenses. No salary and air ticket.
(this has been violated by congresses with a strong money making intention, and in Villach where a total different management of pros has been chosen)
4. Low tournament fee
5. The congress is organized by volunteers.
In the early days of the congress the European Champion played a game with a professional on the last day. In the eighties and nineties players from the (former) communist countries were given special conditions.
Prize money: opinion on this varied very much. Some organizers did not want this on principle, others had not enough money available, some tournaments had good sponsors.

Profit/loss
The organizing country is responsible for profits or losses of the congress. Therefore the EGF cannot interfere much on how the organizers spend the money.
Most congress organizers aim at break even. In order to do that you have to plan for a profit, and hope all goes according to plan. Of course not all goes according to plan, so often a loss is incurred. This was the case in Groningen for example.

Why want people to organize a congress?
Some see it as a business opportunity. Maybe it is in a poor country. In Western Europe there is no way you can get paid for your time spent organizing a congress.
For most organizers/association vanity is the driving force. The organizing team wants to show to the world their association can do the job, can do its DUTY. And of course you want to organize the best congress, with the best possible conditions at the best possible location. You want many people coming. Also you want it to be the strongest congress ever, so you try to offer attractive conditions to strong players.

My opinions:
1. There should be some form of contract between the EGF and the tournament organizers. This contract should be short, but at least containing point 1,2,3 of the traditions.
2. Before accepting a proposal for organizing a congress to be voted on, the EGF board should check the organizing team understands the contract, and is capable of organizing.
3. Proposals for organizing a congress should be sent in time to be included in the documents of the AGM.
4. A basic version of the financial plan should be included. This should show what the organizers plan for prize money, and who pays for it. This can include conditions like 'if we find no sponsor the first prize is a diploma." or "If we do not find a sponsor I will pay the prize money from my own pocket".
5. The organizers should take good care of EGF sponsors, so the next year will not suffer from any problems caused in the previous congress.
6. For 2014 there are 2 candidates. The previous congresses in these 2 candidate countries had many problems. I know the new organizers cannot help it, and surely will do better this time. However I think it would be good if they tell us themselves what went wrong last time, what they learned from that, and how they are going to improve this time.
7. There is no such thing as a right to prize money. In any sport the source of big money prizes is the vanity of the organizers and/or the marketing policy of the sponsors. If you want to make kyu players pay for the prizes of dan-players you will end up with few kyu players.
8. High prize money in the congress sends out the wrong signal to ambitious young players. Only very few players in the world can live off prize money. A professional has to expect to earn his money by teaching. So, if there is a lot of money available for strong players, I think it is better to give many top players some money for travel and expenses then to give a lot to a few.
9. Hiring European teachers is something a congress organizer should do. But I do not think the EGF can force them to do so. Also the organizers can pick the teachers they want. So being a teacher is no guarantee to get hired. It also creates a problem for the organisers because the "dirty" work of organizing is not paid.
10. The tournament fee of the congress should be higher to make organizing the congress more easy. In the USA it costs
USD 325 for 1 week (excluding food & hotel)

Comments on your letter by paragraph

"There was a grave problem at the last congress in Groningen. Despite raising a very large amount of money from tournament taxes, the organizers decided to invest in Asian pros rather than give decent prizes to players, thus we arrived to the ridiculous and shameful situation when the European Champion prize was a mere 450 euro. The prizes at the side tournaments were also ridiculous."

This years entry fee and what the participants got in return was similar to previous years

"While is normal that the tournament organizers should have some profit from the EGC, the example of last year shows how bad the situation can become if the organizers abuse their rights to the detriment of the players."

Having a profit is not normal.

"This is possible because EGF is reluctant to take partial control of the tournament and its resources. While EGF has no rights to decide over the money the organizers raised through their own effort, the tax paid by the participant players should be controlled by EGF, as the authority that auctions this tournament every year."

This is very difficult to do. The organizers them selves know earliest on the last day what the profit/loss is.
If an organizer want to cheat, he can.
What to do if the organizer makes a mistake?
In some countries it is not possible to run the congress financially transparent.

"Our proposal is that EGF makes a new rule for the EGC organizers , that a percentage
of the tax taken from players should go back to them in form of prizes. We propose the
percentage to be 60percent, but we are aware that we don’t have a budget allocation of
the previous congresses to make the calculations . Be it 50 percent or 40 percent, a
decent part of the money should be given to the players, in the limit of ensuring the
organizers have enough money for the organization costs."

I presume you have already made the financial plan for 2014. I hope you can present it at the congress. If you want to give 50% in prizes, you can always do so by adjusting the entry fee. If you want to guarantee a certain amount of money for prizes you have to make "unforeseen expenses" on the budget very high.

"An observer from EGF to ensure that its policy is respected by tournament organizers is a must, countries that
ignore EGF policy should suffer severe penalties."

This person has to be a forensic accountant fluent in the local language with powers that exceed those of local tax controllers.
If you want "penalties" you need a set of rules, judges, appeals committee, etc. All this has to be good enough to stand the test in a real court of law. That is a 10 year plan. In 1999 we had a discussion about Italy. Some members wanted to expel the FIGG from the EGF. I pointed out this is not possible without a system of rules, commissions etc. Nobody showed any interest in starting this project.
henric
Posts: 1096
Joined: 11 May 2004, 08:10

Re: EGF:s årsmöte

Post by henric »

Mötet varade från 19.00 till 02.15.
En del av det kan ses på EurogoTV:
http://www.eurogotv.com/index.php?menu= ... id=8613288

Några punkter:

Europas får skicka en dam till ett dam-VM i Kina, ffg nu i september. Rita Pocsai kommer att åka.

Från 2011 görs lag-EM om till en turnering på Internet, med final IRL under EGC. Pandanet sponsrar.

Sponsringspengarna till par-EM förs över till parturneringen under EGC.

EM-systemet ändrades såhär: de första 7 ronderna spelas som vanligt, därefter spelas en utslagstävling bland de 8 högst placerade efter rond 7, genom forced pairing. Detta förslag stod inte på dagordningen i år men är faktiskt vad Sverige föreslog för några år sedan. Vi röstade för det. Att ställa alla de andra förslagen åt sidan krävde lite skickligt fotarbete, inte minst av Geoff Kaniuk från UK.

EM 2014 blir i Rumänien, troligen i Sibiu. Rumänien vann över St Petersburg med röstsiffrorna 13-12, trots att ryssarna denna gång förberett sig rätt väl, med iden att spela på ett stort hotell i centrala St Petersburg.

Martin Finke blir ny IGF director, med huvuduppdraget att jobba med de Mind Sports Games som troligen kommer att äga rum i Manchester 2012.

Övrigt:
Den nya ledningen i det italienska förbundet välkomnades med en varm applåd.
Catalin är mycket missnöjd med att lag-EM i Leksand används för uttagning till ett evenemang 2011 - eftersom lag-EM annonserades så sent anser han att rumänerna (regerande europamästare) inte fick nån chans att åka dit. Å andra sidan har EGF svårt att backa ur beslutet, eftersom ryssar och holländare satsat på att skicka starka lag.

mvh
H.
Post Reply