Does the good / bad image of the USCF help / hurt sponsorship opportunities for the federation? Could the bad reputation of Executive Board members hurt sponsorship opportunities?
If you are a CEO / President / VP of Marketing of a Fortune 500 Corporation, even if you get adequate / good / excellent bang for your bucks, would you rather sponsor an organization / event with a good / excellent reputation or do you not care one way or another?
The same question but if you do not get enough bang for your bucks, would you continue to sponsor?
Please do not answer with your emotions or with various political motives. Please think about the answers rationally and professionally.
My take: This is why the Susan Polgar Foundation, AF4C and some others have had success in finding sponsors for various events. In most of the events that the SPF organizes, we get about 10-40 sponsors. Why? Because we treat our sponsors professionally, with proper respect, and we give them more coverage and publicity than they even expect.
I also have various posts for discussion regarding US Chess on www.USChess.blogspot.com. Welcome!
Regardless of the common mythology about the private sector, the quality of business relationships is what really matters, even above profit. Any legitmate sponsor is going to want to be associated with reputable organizations that not only deliver on promises, but provide respectful customer service while doing so.
the question assumes that the uscf actually has an image. I think this is a problem with Susan, she assumes that all these places know about the uscf and everything it does. Not really, i’m sure they would assume someone runs chess but i doubt they know who or how well they do that job.
I think if you goto alot of these places and say the USCF needs your help and sposnsorship, the usual reply would be “who?”
The worst chess player in the world:) says:
Dear Ms. Polgar,
These kinds of questions are ones I must worry about everyday. A large part of my job is about securing funding for a non-for profit like the USCF. In my agency we work with the disabled so we have an advantage in most respects over the USCF, and I can say from experience the reputation does matter, but not as much as you might think. Corporate sponsors are usually interested in one thing: how is giving you money going to help my company? If you can’t answer that question then it is time to stand up shake hands and be politely shown the door. Once you have sponsorship for an event treating you sponsors right is a huge part of keeping them – it is just good customer service! You can’t look at them as just your sponsors for in reality they are your customers and good, or great, customer service will always keep them coming back! Reputation is part of that customer service. If your agency has a bad reputation then nobody is going to want to touch you with a ten foot pole unless you can really do something for them in which case the will fund you any way.
I think the USCF has a problem to solve when dealing with corporate sponsors. Answering the question of how does chess help my company? Chess doesn’t get into the mainstream news very often, and I don’t know about New York, but around here in Hicksville Illinois it only gets into the local press when children are involved. Why would IBM, Ford, GM, and the like want to give you, USCF board member, money? What do they have to gain by it? If you can’t answer that question than get ready for your handshake!
I would also say the if you had a board member who was a real crackpot from crazy land who was going to show up at all you major events and start shooting his mouth off it would have a very bad effect on how your sponsors viewed the relationship and they most likely would not come back, or even get on board in the first place. This situation I think would be heightened for chess in my opinion.
I would also suggest the USCF look into securing research grants for chess in education and rehabilitation. I know I am looking into starting a chess rehabilitation program here, and know for a fact I have good chances of finding funding for such a program. Now I am just brainstorming here, but it would be the kind of thing a USCF good partner with us and get funding itself for. I would think education in school would have similar opportunities. Such a thing then could serve as a gateway to increasing public awareness of chess in the national community, which in turn would open many doors for sponsorship. Again this last bit is brainstorming, but seems logical if a lot of hard work for some poor soul – oh hello poor soul:)
Understand that what I deal with in my work is the same yet different issues, so my experiences may, or may not be the same, and I am trying to use my limited understanding of the chess world to answer your questions, but that knowledge is only as a fan, and casual player.
In the end, a corporation, profit or non-profit, is judged by it’s peers based on the way it conducts it’s business. If the USCF conducts it’s business in a shady, off-color manner, then this is the image it will project to potential sponsors. The Executive Board of the USCF is the deFacto governing body and controls the way the USCF conducts it’s business. Any perceived ‘image’ problems stem from that board alone.
Don’t think that potential sponsors do little research into a corporation they are looking to associate with. You can be sure they would google the USCF and get some idea of the current political environment surrounding the USCF.
If I was a potential sponsor to a chess event and googled the USCF, what would I find? What would I consider relevant? What would I assess as simple ‘sour grapes’? What names would dominate my search results? Is the tone positive or negative?
Today, a google search result yields the usual USCF web site links, but as one walks the results list, names like ‘Sam Sloan’ and ‘recall election’ and ‘ishipress’ links begin to pervade the results, and nearly all of them are negative.
That is the reality of the USCF image today.
I don’t know the details or real reasons behind this latest setback for chess in the U.S. but I do think that we need new blood in the USCF to make any changes. Reading through this blog and other chess blogs, I see all the exciting initiatives coming from outside the USCF — Susan’s national tournaments for boys and girls and chess team for girls, Greg Shahade’s U.S. Chess League and U.S. Chess School, the Kasparov Foundation’s support for the All Girls National and invitational quads for high rated young players. My sense is that certain members of the existing board are just not visionary in any sense of the word and other members (or at least member) bring nothing positive to the table.
Wow, what a great post by that “worst chess player in the world”!
I think that you gave the definitive answer to that question.
But there is one point that needs to be emphasized here. When we think of sponsors, we normally think of the big time. You know, Susan Polgar and big BIG national championships.
The above poster informs us that local sponsors sponsor local events. One of my non-profit clients just got a grant from a local bank of $8,000 for playground equipment for their after school program. After reading that post above, I wonder that it may be those small under $10,000 grants that may become the backbone of US chess in the future.
I don’t mean neglecting the big sponsorships; I mean not neglecting the small, local sponsorships.
During the years when I was running the Seattle Chess Club, I often wondered why the USCF top people didn’t support local chess more – or at all. The only relations I had ever had with the USCF was to collect memberships for them, pay them for TLA announcements, and then pay them their rating fees. During those years they instituted a Certified Tournament Director program, but that was only another way to take the organizer’s money as far as I could see. Oh, I almost forgot the affiliate fees. Money, money, money; take, take, take.
When I suggested that the USCF could help by having somebody from the main office call the local press to help with publicity, people told me that I was dreaming.
So local publicity for the club and for the tournaments was left to Jack Le Moine, a nobody, calling the press. Naturally, I got brushed off.
Whether it be a low cost effort like calling the press, or something more substantial, like a major donor campaign, if the top guys at the USCF would partner with the local guys, then I’m sure great change for the better could be made.
Jack, as I stated above, the SPF has between 10-40 sponsors for each event we organize. Some sponsors give as little as $500 as some offer in-kind sponsorship. We do not have big sponsors as the AF4C because we have different missions. That may change in the future.
People are proud to sponsor our events just as my supporters are proud to display their names in my petition to run for the next election instead of fighting to hide the names of the supporters as being done by another board member.
Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
http://www.PolgarChess.com
Dear Susan,
Great posting and great debate. This introspection is what is needed in USCF.
The kind of corruption, ineptness and mind boggling incompetency that you accuse USCF of, exists in those donor organizations (Fortune 500 e.g.) as well. What is USCF but a microcosm of the people that we are. The same kind of backbiting, badmouthing, inefficiency goes on everyday in the board rooms, political cirles and everywhere else. Just look at all the scandals that are plaguing the church, the corporate sector, the polity and so on and on.
I have seen corporate culture from reasonably close quarters and know that at the end of the day, what matters most to individuals is how much money or fame they are going to get from a given endevor. The sheer amount of nepotism and incestual relations that exist between the board members of different corporations is nauseating. I don’t see a bright near future for chess or society as a whole.
I know I am sounding too negative and pessimistic here, but that’s not my intent. Chess is a wonderful game and I fully subscribe to it. There is a certain dichotomy that exists between the need to excel individually in a game like chess, and the need of a philonthropic organization like USCF to rise above the benefits to individuals in the larger good. I don’t know how we can resolve it, but the bottomline is that not many of us are not spiritual enough to rise above the materialistic view of the world.
Susan, I am not saying that your foundation is not doing well, nor that there are no good organization in the US. In fact there are, but they are mostly individual heroics, not a trend in the society. Until spirituality becomes fashionable and wisdom rules the society, we are left to grope for answers in the mists of ignorance. But I have no doubt in my mind that that day of the wisdom is going to be here in not too distant a future.
Regards,
Ravi Kulkarni
Ravi,
I agree and that is why I am working EXTRA hard to make a difference. My goal is to excite and unite the entire chess community to join my efforts. We can only succeed as a team. I am taking the first steps and I hope tons of people will join me on the local levels at their areas.
I do not like the word “I can’t” or “It can’t be done”! I will prove that “It can” and “It will” be done 🙂
Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
http://www.PolgarChess.com
The Worst Chess Player in the World:) says:
Wow, Jack you made some really good points! Looking at the local level was an error in my thinking, and you are right. Building up the local tournaments and clubs is also a great way to build the USCF that would have a major impact on the national level. Members and member clubs are also customers and working to improve the local tournament and club should also be a focus. Getting local sponsorship is far easier, but still difficult, and as Susan pointed out in kind donations always go a long way to making an event work. I know that for our events we always make it clear that every sponsor is important, and we have some relationships that have been going on for 20 years or more!
LOL- sorry while I was writing this some salesman called and tried to bribe me – of course it wasn’t a bribe just a free gift for being such a good customer – heck I’ve never heard of the company let alone bought anything from them:)…sorry back to my point:)
I was just thinking of corporate sponsorship, because it is going to be needed for the big national events, and I have been going down that road myself for my agency. Local and small sponsors should be welcomed with open arms and made to feel like they are just as important as everybody else. Heck if I was raising money for this stuff you’d find yourself sitting at a table at the next US Open with a big sign on it saying “This table sponsored by…” and everything else I could think of:)
You are correct though things need to be build from both directions at the same time, both at the local level and the national level. A dramatic improvement in cooperation and support from between both would have a major impact on improving the USCF and US chess altogether. Everything does tie together. What does Bubba the mechanic who loves playing chess know about promoting his local club or tournament, but a national coordinator could provide him with at least the advice on what to do and be there to assist him with his questions and problems, but anything more than that I fear would require a huge staff and be too expensive. How ever bulk advertising could help solve both problems…it would have to be look into.
Oh I call myself the worst chess player in the world as a kind of joke against myself, and it is meant all in good fun…I appear on the ratings list as Richard L Hamilton (IL)…I really find myself must more interesting in organizing and promoting chess than becoming a very strong player hence the joke ‘worlds worst chess player’. Compared to you guys I am bad, but really I am not that bad:)
According to my experience, the sponsor wants good publicity and if it is possible something of economic benefit (in Spain the helps to sport and cultural associations make them to pay less taxes).
To get support at local level is not complicated, but naturally a big company wants much more. And the big ones only speak with the big ones, for that reason I understand that when the USCF didn’t help Jack Le Moine, he didn’t have real possibilities to get anything.
I believe that to get support of local sponsors and publicity of the newspapers or television of your city is not difficult. But a great sponsor, somebody that can support a great event… never spoke with a local representative of chess, but with somebody of the maximum level… and he/she will want to have a very good and abundant publicity: will you be been able to give it?
They give money and you improve their image.Thats the good and probably the only way of working with sponsors.
Image is not the entire equation when it comes to getting sponsorship. It is a part of it though, and therefore can hurt or help the USCF’s cause.
However as a business I certianlly would invest in something like the USCF if I could be promised that I would get a good return. But certianly there are some things that can’t be looked past.
First, the comapny would have to be courteous and professional in dealing with me. With so many good options to invest my money in, as a business owner, I certianly don’t have to stand for unprofessionalism.
Second, the company I am sponsoring would have to have good morals. For example if an immoral individual’s personal views were a reflection of the USCF as a whole, I would never give them money.
Now with those things said, using the USCF as an example, I would not care about internal conflict on the board. I wouldn’t care about any poor financial management. I probably wouldn’t even care about a person with poor moral judgement on the board, as long as it was isolated to himself, and not a mission statement.
So here’s my opinion on some general things that need to be done.
Act professionally with potential sponsors. Remember that when getting sponsorship, that individuals on the board are not the ones to benefit, but chess in general.
Don’t alienate your current sponsors or burn bridges with past ones. Potential sponsors will see how you worked with past ones and shy away if you treated them poorly.
Don’t expect things to happen by magic. You need to work hard for what you get. Don’t shoot for the moon. If the USCF has to back down and start with some smaller sponsorships, then so be it. Maybe it’s time to start over in that sense.
I’d recommend more tournaments with smaller sponsorship for each. Have a sponsored tournament every 2 weeks. Each year cancel the bottom 25% of the tournements in the context of financial performance. Replace those with tournemnts in other areas, or different formats.
Take the top 25% performing tournaments and leverage those for additional sponsorship.
The concepts are very easy, as long as all involved are disciplined enough to carry them through.
A previous poster pointed out the key point: Sponsors are indeed customers! Therefore they should be pursued as you would pursue a customer, and they should be serviced just as you would a customer. Learn how to offer them what they want and need; Always deliver what you promise, or even exceed their expectations; keep in mind that greater success for them, means greater success for you; organizations are run by people, and people do business with those that they trust.
Potential sponsors are everywhere. Every big chess tournament is teeming with potential sponsors … adult’s playing in the event themselves, or parents of scholastic players, etc. Many of them have the resources to sponsor chess events, or they have authority within their companies to have chess propsals considered .. or they know someone who has these capabilities.
I don’t think you can compare the USCF to the situation with Communist Hungary or with society in general. We only have one life, and our society is the one we live in, it is the only one there is, we cannot throw it away or get another. The same thing with our country, it’s not feasible for more than a few people to get up and move, we don’t want to abandon our culture, and anyplace else will have its own problems anyway. So if our country has a problem we must do what we can to solve it. If governments are letting polluting industries destroy the environment and poison the air, we cannot move to Mars to get away from it, so we have to fix it here on earth.
The USCF on the other hand is just a bunch of washed up old has-beens who squabble with each other. The USA has around 25 million chessplayers and the USCF has enrolled only about 100,000 or 0.4%. And what the USCF does, especially for scholastics, is near useless in this day and age. It’s comparatively easy for someone to set up a new publication to tell people of chess stuff–for example, your blog is much better than Chess Life. Rating system? Anyone with a PC can set one up. Governance and FIDE? Hah, FIDE is another cesspool of corruption.
If you’re interested in promoting scholastic chess, there’s a long debate possible about whether it’s better to just look for corporate sponsors for a new organization, and tell the USCF to jump in a lake. Regardless of what conclusion such a debate would reach, that the option for making a new organization even exists in a serious way, means the question is much different from the bigger problems of society in general.