Misrepresentations in Goichberg's Campaign Statement

Misrepresentations in Goichberg's Campaign Statement
The April Chess Life has just arrived and the campaign statement of USCF President Bill Goichberg is on page 35.
After recounting his long record as a tournament player and organizer, only in the final sentence does Goichberg say what he has actually accomplished. He states: “While Office and Manager and executive Director, USCF improved from approximately $400,000 debt to $200,000 surplus, not counting building sale, with record profits in fiscal 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 after seven consecutive years of losses.”
There is a lot omitted from this. The so called “profit” comes from mostly two items: First, the “gift” of “free land” valued at $264,000 by the City of Crossville. However, that was an Indian Gift, as the USCF cannot sell the land and thus has no real right of ownership. Secondly: Most of the cash profit was the sale of the building in New Windsor for $513,000. Since the building that the USCF had owned for 37 years had been depreciated down to nearly zero, the proceeds from the sale was almost all "profit".
However, then the USCF proceeded to build a much smaller building for $650,000 in Crossville Tennessee, which we now cannot sell because we do not own the land under it, so we are now $137,000 in the hole plus we are locked onto Crossville.
Also, Bill Goichberg was just an employee then, so he cannot take full credit for this. Much of the credit must go to the board, which was in opposition to Goichberg much of the time.
More importantly, Goichberg makes no mention of his four years as USCF President from 2005 to 2009. The reason he does not mention this is obvious: The USCF has lost more than a half million dollars during the four years that Goichberg has been president. The USCF has just been bailed out by the $350,000 bequest which has already been almost completely spent. Otherwise, the USCF would be nearly bankrupt now.
If the voters knew this, would they be willing to give Goichberg another four years in office?
Sam Sloan
Reply to
[quote="Harry Payne"]Sam, You ask in another thread, or stated you could not understand my strong disagreement with you and your methods. This is a prime example.
Without the confusion and cost, of yours and Susan's lawsuits. The shenanigans of Paul Troung. And the misinformation campaign of anti-USCF proponents.
The USCF would be in very good shape financially, the Executive Board, Staff, and members would be considering, how to correct other problems and how to promote the Game of Chess and it's Players of all ages. Until the pettiness of a handful, who think themselves to be more important than they are, is stopped, and brought to an end. The USCF is destined to continue down the path of self destruction because of that handfuls actions.
That is what needs to be recognized as the truth of the matter. I as just one member, who is totally sick of a few egotists ruining it for so many that love the game, wish the USCF would just kick that crowd to the curb.
Take away their memberships, and not allow them association with any USCF event. Which by the way, is perfectly within the USCF's right to do so. I for one cannot understand why the USCF puts up with it. Just my take on it[/quote]
Harry, with all due respect, you just joined the USCF for the first time about three years ago. You seem to be suggesting that all the problems that the USCF faces are because of me. You even suggest that I should be kicked out of the USCF. You are stating that, if only I and a few other miscreants would go away or be kicked out, "The USCF would be in very good shape financially, the Executive Board, Staff, and members would be considering, how to correct other problems and how to promote the Game of Chess and it's Players of all ages", and everything would be just hunky dory.
If you would read a little more and write a little less you would find out that these problems go back a long time. These are not new developments. I first joined the USCF in 1956. Like most other members, I stayed out of chess politics and did not even bother to keep track of the elections for the first 40 years until 1996. It was then that I realized that there were serious problems and I started to get involved.
The problems I thought we had then are trivial compared to what we have now. Actually, the year 1996 when things seemed bad was actually the peak in terms of memberships, revenues and sales. We were profitable up until then. It was then that the downward slide began.
You will note that Bill Goichberg's candidates statement says, "with record profits in fiscal 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 after seven consecutive years of losses.” Do a little math. Seven years before 2003 was 1996. That was the last profitable year. That was also the year when Bill Goichberg was first elected Vice-President of the USCF. Goichberg was Vice-president from 1996 to 1999 and now has been President from 2005 until now. In every one of the seven years that Goichberg has been on the board, the USCF has suffered huge losses, whereas all the years leading up to 1996 were highly profitable. Also, as Tim Redman has pointed out in another thread, during the 1996-1999 period although it seemed like the losses were minor, only $20,000 in one year, in reality our losses in operations were huge, over $300,000 in one year, but were shielded by big stock market gains, as the LMA was mostly invested in stocks. Because of the profits in the stock market, an outsider reading the financial statements would think that we were doing OK. Then, when the stock market started going down, the operating losses added to the stock market losses created huge deficits.
So, altogether, for the total of seven years that Goichberg has been on the board, three as vice-president and four as president, the USCF has suffered close to a million dollars in total operating losses, but Harry Payne, a newcomer, thinks that Goichberg is doing a great job and will vote for him and thinks that everything would be sweetness and light if only that Sam Sloan were kicked out of the USCF so he could not bother these people any more.
Sam Sloan
Reply to
Please post the exact amount the USCF /would have/ lost (or gained), had BG not even existed during this same timeframe.
Imagine that you are God, and you can know everything-- how every molecule or atom would have spun, how much the USCF /would have/ taken in and spent, precisely why Damiano's Defense is a bust, and most important of all, where we would be, exactly, without the existence of BG-- all else being equal.
Reply to
help bot

BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.