[Booze]

Hi

It has come to my sad knowledge that our superior Vugraph coordinator will not go to the Bermuda Bowl in Estoril, Portugal. I think he is needed with all his experience there.

I understand if he doesn't fancy the idea of paying all his expenses for a couple of weeks with around the clock work in Estoril.

So if anyone has any idea how we all could help him finance his weeks there please let me know!!


Bo

aka Booze at BBO

[shoeless]

Who are you talking about? I assume Roland but if I am in error please ignore the rest of this post.

Roland doesn't need to be in Estoril to do what he does so well. Frankly I think being on-site could distract him from the task.

I think what we need there is a top level vugraph 'operator' co-ordinator which is very much different than what Roland does - although I suspect he could handle it with aplumb. Herve, booze and mrdct are names that come to mind regarding the co-ordination of the technical aspects of on-site operation - there are probably others as well.

Having said this - if you wish to send Roland to Estoril as a reward for his amazing contibution to the BBO vugraph over the past few years - then I will gladly contribute $100 to that cause. We could probably ask him to do some work while he is there - wouldn't want him goofing off now - would we? I am quite serious about this - count me in if this is the route you go.

[Booze]

sry

I thought everyone knew it is Roland Wald

Bo

[fred]

Herve (Zmud99) has already been hired by the WBF to go to Estoril and oversee the technical aspects of the vugraph operation. The WBF will provide operators for 2 tables of vugraph at all times.

In addtion, it is not unlikely that there will be some volunteers among BBO members from Portugal (or elsewhere) who will act as operators at least some of the time (so that we can broadcast from more than 2 tables at a time).

Our company's current policy is that we will not spend any money on vugraph.

This is purely a matter of principle - we are actually now in a position where we could afford to spend money on vugraph if we chose to do so. However, it just doesn't seem right to us that a business (which in theory is supposed to be primarily concerned with profits) not only provides the software for free, but pays for the expense of using it. Various bridge federations (which in theory are supposed to be primarily concerned with promoting bridge and in theory are "not for profit" entities) are the ones who should be paying the bills (especially when you consider that it is THEIR tournaments that are being promoted). Good news is that nowadays, with a few notable exceptions, most of the world's major bridge federations, including the WBF, are willing to cover the expenses that are involved in producing vugraph broadcasts of their tournaments.

The above paragraph pertains mostly to "necessary expenses" like paying for operators and Internet connections. While Roland's presence in Estoril would be "desirable" for several reasons, it is certainly not "necessary". I don't think it is reasonable to expect the tournament organizers to pay for this.

Attracting corporate sponsorship for vugraph is the ultimate answer. If that happens we will then put some of the money we receive back into vugraph (for example, to actually pay Roland and the other commentators for the fine work that they do).

Our company is not going to get involved in trying to solicit money from our members (or even collect voluntary donations from our members) to send Roland to Estoril (or to set up a "general vugraph fund"). If people want to do that privately, that is their business. However, it might be a good idea to make sure that Roland would be comfortable about accepting these sorts of donations.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[vincenzo]

100% Agree with Fred.

I have often explained to FIGB (italian bridge federation) (that has a great interest to broadcast all italian championships on BBO) that there are only 2 solutions for this:

1) FIGB pays all costs that includes travel, hotel, compensation for vugraph operators, vugraph coordinator ecc..

2) FIGB finds a sponsor that supports these costs.

Neither BBO nor BBO ITALIA can pay for this !!



Vincenzo

[shoeless]

I am often in awe of the symbiotic relationships that have developed around the BBO vugraph facility. Seems to me no one stakeholder is all give or all take, including the spectators and in some respects I think we will only see it broaden and deepen over time. The ecological balance in symbiosis is always delicate even when the products from it are robust and hardy. Since it doesn't seem to be broken - we likely don't need to be fixing it.

My read on Booze's post is simple - he contributed a heartfelt sentiment of respect and admiration for one man's significant contribution to this world we share. I don't really think he was trying to fix anything.

[Booze]

Hi

I know that Roland for many reasons believes he is more able to his coordination from Estoril and if he thinks so I trust him and its not up to us to judge that, Roland has done a fantastic job at BBO !!

I have not suggested that BBO or BBO Italia should pay anything for him. I am looking for ideas!

Someone might see this from a flightcompany and offer a free flight?

Maybe someone has a big house in Estoril and can offer a free room?

Or someone may have a bridgeplaying aunt that recently won 100 millions on lotto and her biggest dream in life is to go to Estoril as his paying assistant ?

Or should we all email our federations and tell them what a wonder ful job he does for bridge as Vugraph coordinator and we would all like to give him optimal possibilities? At least tell them its not fair that he should pay for our entertainment.

All ideas are welcome !!!!

Bo

[geller]

People in every country seem happy to support their national teams in football (soccer), basketball, ice hockey,..... No reason bridge should be any different, even though the absolute number of fans may be several orders of magnitude smaller.

I would think that BBO vugraph broadcasts of WBF championship events would be one of the cheapest and most cost-effective ways for the WBF to promote the game of bridge world-wide, and I wish they would be a bit more pro-active. At the moment there may or may not be prospects for sponsorship, but if the audience could be grown by broadcasting world-wide this certainly wouldn't hurt future prospects for sponsorship, and would contribute generally to promoting bridge. Ceratinly the costs are non-zero, but are not so big in relation to the costs of staging the World Championships.

The question of whether or not a vu-graph coordinator should be invited to Estoril at WBF expense is a subset of the question of how much effort the WBF should be devoting to promoting VuGraph, and the big question should be resolved first. In a positive way, I hope.

[FrancesHinden]

geller, on Sep 28 2005, 06:42 AM, said:

The question of whether or not a vu-graph coordinator should be invited to Estoril at WBF expense is a subset of the question of how much effort the WBF should be devoting to promoting VuGraph, and the big question should be resolved first. In a positive way, I hope.

At present, the Vugraph has a very delicate balance, where it is provided for free and run by volunteers. Sponsorship only covers the expenses.

I have no say in this (so why am I bothering to write this?) but I don't think you can tamper with any of this without affecting everything.

I give up some of my time to commentate on vugraph because I think the BBO vugraph is generally a good thing and should be encouraged. If I thought other people were being paid to do vugraph jobs, or that people were paying to watch, I might not be so keen. I imagine other commentators & operators feel similarly.

[Walddk]

Different points of view, all is fine, but no one seems to be able to answer the only important question:

Who is going to pay for this? Fred says "not us", the WBF says "not us", and strangely enough the vugraph coordinator says "not me". So no one is paying, and therefore nothing is happening. Why do people think that all this can be done for nothing?

It's not the end of the world that I (apparently) am not going to Estoril, but I don't agree with Fred when he says that a coordinator is not needed. "Desirable" but not "necessary", he writes. No one is indispensable, but allow me to point out that the success of those broadcasts is not only determined by the quality of the operators.

If no one is present to coordinate it all, the quality will not be as it could and should have been. We have seen that on previous occasions. You get what you pay for (and remember that no one working for BBO gets paid one cent), but if everyone keeps claiming no responsibility, you compromise with quality.

It's a compromise I will be very reluctant to settle for.

We invite all organizers to use the BBO software for free. That's the decision of the BBO management. Fair enough, but why would we also keep offering free coordination and expert commentary? Everything in life has a price; vugraph is no exception.

Roland

[uday]

We don't think that a co-ordinator is not needed, only that one is not needed at the playing site.

I think it would improve the quality of co-ordination if the co-ordinator was at the site, but I am not completely sure of this. It might be only a minor improvement and a major cost.

Why should we offer free co-ordination and commentary? Perhaps we shouldnt. But I don't want to cut off our nose to spite our face.

Our common goal is to make sure the vugraphs happen as often as possible and with as much exposure as possible. While volunteers are willing to do their part to promote the game, we're in good shape.

It is possible that someday no one will volunteer to offer commentary for an event. We're not there yet. And we'll all be sorry if we get there

[fred]

I get the impression that the intention of my previous post in this thread has been misunderstood. I will clarify:

I agree with the sentiments expressed in Bo's post, however, I thought it was important to explain both the current vugraph plans for Estoril and BBO's policies regarding vugraph expenses.

Furthermore, I thought it was smart to suggest that Roland be consulted about things like the following before anyone starts a "send Roland to Estoril" initiative:

- does Roland want to go to Estoril? This question has now been answered.
- is Roland willing to accept money from BBO members for this?
- how much money will be required to cover Roland's expenses? I very much do not like the idea of Roland staying in a cheap hotel and eating all of his meals at McDonalds in the interest of saving money. If he is going to go, he deserves good accomodations and that rates to be expensive.
- Roland has his own business and it costs him money to be away from it. It would be perfectly reasonable for him to want more than just his expenses paid if he were to go on this 2+ week trip. From what I know of Roland, I suspect he would be willing to eat this loss in the interest of providing the best possible coverage of the World Championships, but to me it doesn't seem right to put him in that position.

I certainly did not mean to denegrate or diminish in any way the great contributions that Roland (and Bo) have made (and continue to make) to BBO.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[Booze]

Hi

I know Roland would prefer to go to Estoril and I want him to take his decision if we come up to some kind of good idea how to make it possible.

Quote

I think it would improve the quality of co-ordination if the co-ordinator was at the site, but I am not completely sure of this. It might be only a minor improvement and a major cost.

Roland has the best expirence of us all in doing this and it is his judgement that it would be a lot better I respect. I know from the broadcasts from Malmö that he will have a busy time and my guess is that Estoril will double up in specs, thats 100 000 for both weeks.

I did nominate Roland for the Ranik Halle* prize in Norway this year, because I knew he fancied going to Estoril. Sadly I think the rules for the prize only allowed Norweigans.

* prize for best journalistic contribution in bridge

I am still hoping someone comes up with realy good idea and I know its impossible for BBO to pay it, but we still have a lot of rich federations ??

Bo

[card_judge]

As a former business owner I most definitely understand the balance sheet is what drives a company. Those who have never owned a company will NEVER fully appreciate what cash fluctuations can have on a company its stock holders and employees.

As long as Fred and Uday are in agreement that BBO is not going to pay for the Vugraph coordinator this year to go to Estril then we as casual observers and bystanders may grouse all we want. They know the bottom line better than we.

With that said, it is my opinion for what it is worth, BBO should take the appropriate steps to send the Vugraph coordinator to the next Bermuda Bowl. It is obvious now that this is a "volunteer" position which requires a great deal of the individuals time. Why not "treat" the Vugraph coordinator to a special trip where they would essentially be "working" anyway. Planning ahead generally saves money rather than not planning. This would allow Roland, or who ever is Vugraph coordinator, an adequate amount of time to also plan for this next year. That way BBO can budget and allocate funds accordingly.

Additionally, if i read correctly, there are some fees associated with Vugraph. Therefore, simply add a convienence fee, administrative fee or something like that for all future Vugraphs. As long as you keep the connotation of "service fee" away I believe this to be an acceptable solution to the problem. There in all organizations are contributing to the Vugraph coordinator's trip to the next Bermuda Bowl. Everyone contributes a little rather than one organization footing the bill for the entire amount.

♣ ♦ ♥ ♠

[Walddk]

card_judge, on Sep 28 2005, 06:28 PM, said:

Additionally, if i read correctly, there are some fees associated with Vugraph.

You got that wrong, card_judge. There is no fee involved. Any organizer is welcome to use the BBO software for vugraph purposes free of charge. We also provide expert commentary for free.

Should there be a fee, you may ask. That's a different question.

Roland

[Al_U_Card]

We should all send e-mails to the CBF (Canadian Bridge Federation) (or your own national bridge organization) along the lines of " I pay to play in the International Fund Game etc. to support our national teams. I would also like some of that money to go towards vugraph of the contest so that I can see the result of how my money is being spent. Please set aside a portion of the proceeds to pay for commentators, operators and software." This will put the onus on the fee collectors to get sponsors etc.

[Walddk]

Your intention is very good, but the problem is that all federations (NCBOs) are already members of the WBF, and as such they pay an annual membership fee. Then you don't have to be an Einstein to figure out what the NCBOs will reply. Something like:

"We already pay lots of money to the WBF, so it must be their job to pay all expenses in this context".

Then in turn the WBF will counter with:

"We have many other more important things to spend the money on. If BBO wants to broadcast from our events, it is their problem as far as financial matters are concerned".

And then, regrettably, we are back to where we are now. No one wants to pay for vugraph.

Roland

[shoeless]

Help me out folks. I have a sincere question to ask. "How does Roland being on-site in Estoril make him more effective for this broadcast, in his capacity as BBO vugraph co-ordinator?" I genuinely can't get it.

[Clinch]

shoeless, on Sep 28 2005, 08:43 PM, said:

Help me out folks. I have a sincere question to ask. "How does Roland being on-site in Estoril make him more effective for this broadcast, in his capacity as BBO vugraph co-ordinator?" I genuinely can't get it.

I think the answer may first require another question: "what is the function of the BBO vugraph co-ordinator"?

I don't mean that fatuously. Clearly if the only role is to gather up enough commentators and operators, make sure they are signed in and be a genial virtual host, then this function can be achieved from anywhere in cyberspace.

On the other hand there is value in someone being on site, being able to describe conditions, gather additional player details to the audience. At present, that will only be achieved by chance, not design, if the appropriate commentator is available.

I wouldn't begrudge Roland's being rewarded for his efforts by an expenses-paid trip to Estoril, and I am sure he would be diligent in trying to add extra value. That being said, I wonder if the role he envisages is a little different from the bare minimum required of a coordinator. And maybe somewhere near the heart of this is the difference in general perception of the role Roland is required to perform, and the value that he - and maybe others - perceives he can add. My personal worry is that if this isn't resolved, Roland may somehow end up feeling underappreciated, and we may ultimately all suffer from that.

Peter.
New York, NY.

[shoeless]

1. Clinch - I guess I saw your question imbedded in mine. Sorry I didn't make it clearer.

2. Roland will never be underappreciated by me. If we had to start paying for the value this guy contributes, we might go broke. Whereas operators and commentators are on and off the job and have some options to take a break - he is pretty much in the barrel on an on-going basis, except for when he is off somewhere and he relies on the good graces of some others to pinch hit (I remember Ritong jumping into the breech once). He has chosen to do this work voluntarily and he has done a remarkable job. In no way do I mean to imply by my question anything about appreciation - purely going for more information.

3. I co-ordinated the vugraph on-site operations for a Zone championship (similar to what Herve is lined up to do at Estoril) and I certainly see a big difference from my job description for that and Rolands. However I do not fully know his job and his role (and how that might look on-site as opposed to off-site), so that is why I asked the question.