EBU
Pay to Play
These are the original
proposals and comments
Click here to see the revised version
This Summary from the Hampshire and Isle of Wight Website
English Bridge Union Announcement June 2007 - there have been some detail
revisions after comments from individuals, clubs and counties
1 Objective: A strategy to achieve the objective stated
in paragraph 3E of the EBU’s Memorandum of Association. ..”to
elevate and maintain the status and procure the advancement of the game
of Bridge in England”.
2 Proposed Strategy:
(i) The following recommendations from the Board of the EBU outline a
scheme intended to revitalise our clubs and their membership, which will
result in a vibrant bridge playing community at all levels in England
and achieve our aim of universal membership.
(ii) The aims of this initial phase are to strengthen the membership base
and to restructure the financing of the EBU. This will form the basis
for a strategy which will enable the development of Bridge in England.
This phase of the complete strategy can only be fully developed when the
results of this consultation with our shareholders and members are known.
(iii) The proposals are based on research and analysis of EBU clubs and
members, and also include investigations of best practice as demonstrated
by the most successful national bridge organisations in Europe, namely,
France, Holland and Sweden. Continued examination of these organisations
is in hand. Each of these national bridge organisations has embraced universal
membership, as have many others across the world.
3 Key features of the proposal:
(i) The annual membership subscription and Master Point charges will be
abolished.
(ii) A Pay to Play (P2P) scheme will be introduced, in which a small table
charge is levied for every player at every duplicate session in an affiliated
club.
(iii) A one-time only Registration Fee of £5 for new or lapsed EBU
members.
(iv) An extensive range of free services will be provided to affiliated
Clubs, including a National Rating scheme.
(v) The annual Club Affiliation fee will be based on the number of duplicate
sessions played per week.
4a Club Services: The following services will be provided
to affiliated clubs:
(i) Free rating system software
(ii) Free scoring program
(iii) Free web site hosting on an annual basis
(iv) Free monthly electronic newsletter -also available to individual
members
(v) Free access to online club committee forum
(vi) Free exclusive online club night once a week
(vii) Free club directors’ handbook
(viii) Free club managers’ handbook
(ix) Free service of club liaison officer
(x) Free computer deals and hand records
(xi) Free club constitution
(xii) Club insurance discounts
(xiii) Bridge Shop discount which exceeds that given to individual members
(xiv) Discounts on club director training
4b Charges:
(i) Charges for Master Points will be abolished as will the issue of paper
MPs.
(ii) Clubs will be charged an annual Affiliation Fee based on the number
of duplicate sessions per week.
(iii) The minimum annual fee will be £50, with a further cost of
£25 per duplicate session for the second and any additional sessions
per week, up to a maximum of £150 per annum per club.
5 Rating System Software:
(i) The rating system software will allow all club players to be part
of a new rating scheme, which will provide a current evaluation of a bridge
player’s skills, running alongside the life time achievements offered
by the existing Master Point Scheme.
(ii) This rating scheme will also allow clubs to stratify and handicap
their own events through their own local rating data.
6 Membership: To benefit from these services, members
of affiliated clubs will be members of the EBU as follows:
(i) Individual: The current annual membership subscription will be abolished
(ii) A one-off registration payment for new members of £5 will be
collected via clubs.
(iii) Individuals who are members in the year of implementation will not
be charged a registration fee; any lapsed members will have to pay it.
(iv) There will be an annual mailing to all individual members to maintain
contact, update details, issue a free diary and membership card. As long
as an individual’s affiliated club membership is current that individual
will continue to be a member of the EBU with no extra subscription charged.
continued over
(v) Individual members will continue to receive English Bridge. Overseas
membership will still exist by subscription, as will direct membership
for those members in England who are not members of affiliated clubs.
7 Pay to Play:
(i) The P2P method provides flexibility relative to the number of people
playing in affiliated clubs. It is also fairer in that those who play
more will benefit more from the new services available to our clubs.
(ii) Each EBU/club member will be charged a discounted table fee payable
to the EBU for every session they play in a club.
(iii) This is likely to result in an increase in table money in the region
of 30p per session.
(iv) A visitor’s fee for non-EBU members will be set in consultation
with the clubs.
(v) Special arrangements will be made for juniors.
(vi) Electronic registration of MPs through the provision of free scoring
software will provide records of players per session.
(vii) Clubs will send in the table money on invoice in arrears.
(viii) The P2P process will apply to all games played under the auspices
of the EBU, other than national tournaments and licensed events.
(ix) All other county events will be liable to a P2P charge.
8 Counties and Universal Membership:
(i) A standard proportion of the table fees from a specific county’s
affiliated clubs will go to that county. The intention is that there should
be no adverse effect on a county’s financial position.
(ii) The advantages for counties will be that, unless requested otherwise,
each affiliated club member will become a member of the county in which
the club is situated.
(iii) This will provide a substantially larger pool of players for county
competitions and other activities.
9 Partner Teachers, Learn and Play Clubs and Partner Clubs:
(i) The free and discounted services available to Partner Teachers will
be provided up to the point of the formation of the Partner Club, when
the full affiliation fee will be gathered for the amount of sessions played
and table money charged per player per session.
(ii) Free membership will still be given to those students who are part
of this scheme.
(iii) This will cover the period of their first academic year’s
teaching and their Learn and Play Club period -a total of 18 months.
(iv) When the Learn and Play Club becomes a Partner Club they will pay
their one-off fee to register as a member of the EBU.
10 Benefits:
(i) By providing an extensive range of free services to clubs, the affiliation
fee has much more value.
(ii) Those who play more pay more, and thus their contribution to the
provision of services from the EBU is fairer as they benefit more.
(iii) The low level of the one off £5 registration fee, together
with the discounted P2P charge for EBU members, will encourage more members
to join the EBU.
(iv) Members will be able to subscribe to the electronic club bulletin
for free; this will provide another communications opportunity for us
to specifically reach the club playing membership.
(v) The circulation of English Bridge will increase and thus advertisers
may find the magazine a more attractive proposition thus increasing advertising
revenue. We will be able to truly fulfil our role as a National Bridge
Organisation researching and implementing the development of our game
at all levels from schools to tournament venues, and sitting rooms to
the international arena. To undertake this task properly requires time,
consideration and proper investment, which should be provided by a stabilized
and increasing membership.
11 Next Steps:
(i) These proposals were published on the EBU website on June 6th 2007.
(ii) We ask all our shareholders to take these proposals back to their
counties and discuss them fully with their county committees, their clubs
and their members.
(iii) We will provide a forum for county officials alongside our shareholders’
forum to discuss and exchange views.
(iv) We know that you will have many questions, and we will answer them
via these forums or through email communication via the EBU website to
Peter Stocken, the EBU Chairman.
(v) We can also provide, on request, more detailed information on the
research and background to the plans including our data analysis and risk
assessment.
(vi) A programme of meetings with counties has been set up to review consultation
arrangements and to discuss feedback. We will then be able to have a full
and considered discussion about this scheme at the AGM in October 2007.
(vii) These changes can only be successfully realised with the wholehearted
support of shareholders, counties and clubs. If this is forthcoming, the
intention would be to implement the proposals by April 2010.
Summary and Comments
The EBU propose to charge everyone a fee to play in their local
affiliated bridge club
The principal of everyone contributing to the EBU has support from those
currently administering bridge at County level
The amount proposed is 30p per attendance (yes if you play more
you pay more).
This is intended to raise the same amount of revenue as subscriptions
and Master Points.
There have been lots of discussions about the amount but it can only be
an estimate as no one knows how many clubs will cease to be affiliated
and how many players will migrate to non-affiliated clubs. There have
been some constructive discussions about the detail (eg visitors fees)
and when the proposals are finalised the mechanics should work.
The EBU claim that they intend the proposal to be 'revenue neutral'
One might ask what is the point if no extra money is raised
However one might be skeptical about this as the amount is to cover
"additional amount to cover the additional costs of servicing
the anticipated increase in membership.
A financially prudent amount to rebuild the EBU’s financial reserves spent
in setting up the scheme.
An amount to provide funds for any additional projects approved by the
Board after consideration of the views of the Shareholders "
The Board will set the charge in accordance with the funding needs
for any particular financial year.
As you know the Board consists of those at the top of bridge - with no
realistic chance of non tournament players being voted on to the Board.
From the Surrey Meeting
FAQ4 of the Strategy documents states unequivocally that the charge will
be set by the EBU Board of Directors. However, following an exchange
of e-mails with Sally
Bugden, the SCBA Committee have received the assurance that approval of
any proposed change will have to be given by the Shareholders.
Notes arising from a Consultation Meeting with Sally Bugden and Philip Masonon 3rd September, 2007
Attended by representatives of Cumbria: Isle of Man: Lancashire: Manchester: Merseyside & Cheshire: Philip Mason welcomed everyone to the meeting and commented that since the original strategy document had been produced a number of radical changes had been made as a result of responses from previous meetings and from individual members. There was a general acceptance from those present that the principle of universal membership of the EBU was an important move in the right direction. Within the P2P scheme it was recognized that many players had a number of caveats of varying degrees. It was clear in the early stages of the meeting that many clubs throughout the region may seriously consider disaffiliating from the EBU. Lancashire felt themselves vulnerable in this regard whilst Cumbria and the Isle of Man have historically experienced difficulty in recruiting members because of their geographical locations where taking part in EBU tournaments involves a significant amount of travelling. There was a consensus of feeling that the current strategy proposals would be difficult to sell to many of the clubs and their members. This had become clear from the survey which the participating counties had undertaken with their clubs. Table money at most clubs was typically in the range from £1 to £2 so the proposed P2P fee was quite noticeable, especially as many club treasurers would probably round this up to a convenient figure for ease of collection. Non-members of affiliated clubs might be reluctant to pay an additional charge because they may be sceptical about the desirability and benefits of belonging to a national organization. Many small clubs have only a handful of EBU members and the proposed P2P fee may well cause them to disaffiliate. The national membership survey carried out in December 2006 showed that the average member plays just over twice a week. Therefore, those who play more than this would, under the new proposals, be worse off on a yearly basis even after the elimination of the annual EBU/County subscription. Suggestions were put forward that a reduced weekly charge may help such players or that an annual rebate could be a possibility. It was important to get across to members that the current proposals were NOT aimed at bringing in extra money for the EBU - it is intended that the proposed strategy should be revenue neutral - this is the message we have to put across very strongly. The view was put forward that the proposed club affiliation fee needs amending. The numerous services that the EBU could offer would not be attractive to a lot of clubs - for instance, many clubs already have their own scoring software, they can produce their own stationery and can develop their own websites. Therefore, the annual fee should not be substantially different from that which currently pertains. The introduction of a national rating system was generally accepted as a good idea. It can be used in a variety of ways and at all levels of the game and may be an incentive for clubs to continue to affiliate. An awards system could operate within a club for a member whose rating increased the most during the year. The general perception of bridge at the moment is that it is a cheap evening out where everything that the club does (movements, laws, etc.) is taken for granted. There was wide ranging discussion of English Bridge. It was pointed out that the difficulty of such a production is that it has to be all things for all members. It was generally accepted that English Bridge in its current form did appeal to the majority of our members and that under any future strategy all members should receive a copy - giving members an option would not work well. Publications which would be seen as beneficial to counties, clubs and members were county and club newsletters along with a club directory listing all EBU affiliated clubs. County leagues would not attract a P2P fee. Instead there would be a fixed EBU fee for each team playing in the league. The suggestion that each county should determine its own P2P fee within the national fee received widespread acclaim. Apart from the obvious benefit for the county, members would appreciate that part of the P2P fee was being used locally. Players who are currently non-members of the EBU and would, therefore, become members under the new strategy could retain complete anonymity if they so wished by being allocated a unique number. It was accepted that a major problem for the EBU has always been that a significant number of its members regard the EBU as remote and elitist - an "us" and "them" situation. The perception, which we must do our utmost to dispel, is that the EBU only caters for the major tournament players and that a disproportionate amount of money is spent on internationals. The image of the EBU, therefore, might be enhanced if international players could be seen to make a contribution to the game - i.e. coaching, lectures, etc. Certain games of bridge would not attract a P2P fee. Examples of these would be partner/teacher schemes, charity games, etc. The desirability of high profile publicity - T.V. and national press - was discussed along with the importance of the infiltration of bridge into schools. It was explained that a strengthened membership would allow the EBU to investigate the development of these initiatives. The overall view was that the county consultation meeting had been well worth while and had given everyone an opportunity for open and frank discussions.
Questions and EBU Answers
From the Bedfordshire Meeting (from the 28 questions on their
website):
Q: If you do not have annual membership, merely a registration, how can
you influence the EBU by the final sanction of resigning, when you consider
the EBU are doing an appallingly bad job? Stop playing at EBU affiliated
clubs?
A: This makes the assumption that the EBU does not listen to its
membership. We hope that we have proved during the last 18 months and
with the current consultation process that we are listening. The ultimate
sanction, of course, is to no longer play in an EBU affiliated club.
Q: At present, our EBU members play amicably with our non-EBU players,
and all are equally important to us. All contribute to the EBU, via Master
Points. Why jeopardise this? Memberships of clubs will become fragmented,
and Bridge, as a whole, will be damaged.
A: We do not believe that we are jeopardising this, we believe
that we are bringing the bridge community together. We have to think about
the future and the new players that we hope to attract and educate.
Members feedback form the Surrey Website
1/ The proposals to abolish the Annual Membership Subscription and Master
Point
charges have been generally supported.
2/ The Costs to smaller clubs, in terms of the increase in table money
and club
affiliation fee based on the number of sessions per week will be too large
.
3/ Increased costs are likely to drive smaller clubs to disaffiliate from
the EBU,
leading to a weakening rather than strengthening of the EBU membership
base
and a 'two-tier' or 'elitist' environment, where Affiliated Clubs carry
higher table
money than Non-Affiliated.
4/ The range of Club Services has limited value to established clubs,
and there is no
obvious application for rating system software within most Clubs; the
Free
weekly online club night might also drive down attendance at clubs.
5/ The Quality of software which might be provided is a concern; the
last scoring
program offered by the EBU was poor quality and caused issues; most clubs
have
already purchased scoring software and would prefer to retain it.
6/ The role of the County is being eroded to the point where their influence
in the
EBU is significantly diminished (membership centralisation has also contributed
to this).