[rona]

This question might be a little naive, but does anyone here know if the respective bridge federations pay for all the expenses of the players when they play overseas for their country, or are there federations that expect their players to contribute.

I am not on any national team but I was asked to find out.Any information would be greatly appreciated.

Rona

[paulg]

I can tell how it works in Scotland. There are currently four international events which the Scottish Bridge Union (SBU) regularly enters:

• Home International Series - Open, Women's, Seniors
  For each weekend of the Open and Women's events the SBU makes a fixed contribution to the team. This normally covers the accommodation (which includes food) and perhaps half the travel costs. It is always based in the UK, and there is an additional small contribution if the event takes place in Ireland to offset the increased travel costs.
  
  The Seniors do not receive any funding.
• European Team Championships - Open, Women's, Seniors
  The Open and Women's team entry fee is paid and they receive a fixed contribution to costs. This generally covers the cost of accommodation. Players are responsible for all additional costs, including their travel and food. It is common for this to cost each player a few hundred pounds.
  
  For the Seniors, only the entry fee is paid. All other costs are the responsibility of the team.
• Commonwealth Nations Bridge
  The SBU paid 50% of the entry fee. All other costs are the responsibility of the team. This was not cheap considering it was in India last year, but it is scheduled to be in Scotland in 2014.
• World Mind Sport Games (aka Olympiad)
  In 2008 the SBU paid the entry fee and made a contribution to the costs of the team. I believe it still cost each player a few hundred pounds.

For any other international event, the SBU will occasionally pay the entry fee.

Junior events are very different and I don't believe that the players make any contribution.

In Wales I believe they have a similar philosophy except that the contributions are significantly smaller and it costs their players a lot more.

England is seen as a much richer country by Scotland and Wales, given it is normal for them to take NPCs AND coaches to these events. However it does appear that their profligate days are coming to an end and players will be making more substantial contributions to the costs incurred.

[Hanoi5]

Air-fares, hotel stays, tournament fees and a little extra is paid for official teams in my country. This is especially true for junior teams.

[NickRW]

paulg, on 2011-April-27, 05:57, said:

England is seen as a much richer country by Scotland and Wales, given it is normal for them to take NPCs AND coaches to these events. However it does appear that their profligate...

The EBU may well be richer than the SBU - but "profligate" is a bit OTT to say the least.

Quote

... days are coming to an end and players will be making more substantial contributions to the costs incurred.

One wonders why, given that most of us are now shelling out far more to the EBU than was the case. Where the hell is the money going?

[paulg]

paulg, on 2011-April-27, 05:57, said:

England is seen as a much richer country by Scotland and Wales, given it is normal for them to take NPCs AND coaches to these events. However it does appear that their profligate days are coming to an end and players will be making more substantial contributions to the costs incurred.

NickRW, on 2011-April-27, 06:58, said:

The EBU may well be richer than the SBU - but "profligate" is a bit OTT to say the least.

From a Scottish perspective, who make little allowance for the NPC, it was definitely viewed as 'profligate' to fully fund NPCs and coaches on international trips. Of course most of the time England has a team that will be considerably nearer the top of the table than Scotland and perhaps has been worth the investment made by the EBU.
And the Scottish bridge public do not like spending money on their international teams, at least according to their representatives on the Council. So none of the international funding comes from members' subscriptions.

[gnasher]

NickRW, on 2011-April-27, 06:58, said:

One wonders why, given that most of us are now shelling out far more to the EBU than was the case. Where the hell is the money going?

I assume that was rhetorical. If, however, you actually wanted to know, you could look at the EBU's accounts.

http://www.ebu.co.uk..._statements.pdf

It appears that the budget for international teams is only 2.5% of the EBU's income, so even a large decrease in this budget would have little effect on what the members pay to the EBU.

[whereagles]

In my country (Portugal) the federation usually pays all expenses related to the open team in the European Championships. Other events may be covered, depending on the yearly budget. In the latest years there has been no budget margin for those events, so players payed for their participation out of their own pockets.

[NickRW]

gnasher, on 2011-April-27, 07:53, said:

I assume that was rhetorical. If, however, you actually wanted to know, you could look at the EBU's accounts.

http://www.ebu.co.uk..._statements.pdf

It appears that the budget for international teams is only 2.5% of the EBU's income, so even a large decrease in this budget would have little effect on what the members pay to the EBU.

Well, those figures are a year old.

Anyway, you appear to be thinking that I resent money being spent on Internationals. Quite the reverse - in fact it is one of the few things that I actually feel proud of that my contributions go towards.

But the solid fact remains, most of us have paid more - and it is the case the organisation that is in reciept of this money is doing less of one of the few things I think it should do!

Nick

[rona]

Thank you everyone.

[paulg]

NickRW, on 2011-April-27, 10:50, said:

Well, those figures are a year old.

The EBU figures do highlight the budgeting issues that need to be addressed by the accountants, namely that the costs vary dramatically year-on-year and are not necessarily predictable.

Scotland budgets for the Home Internationals over a five-year period and factors in the increased travel costs. This is relatively simple.

The European Team Championships are every two years and are a lot more expensive. The venue is rarely known more than 18 months in advance. Some countries are a lot more expensive than others.

I have seen no information on the World Mind Sport Games, which is held every four years, and it is not even known if Scotland will enter a team at this time (as there has been a suggestion that there should be a UK team).

Just issues that an NBO needs to appreciate.

[gnasher]

paulg, on 2011-April-28, 01:54, said:

I have seen no information on the World Mind Sport Games, which is held every four years, and it is not even known if Scotland will enter a team at this time (as there has been a suggestion that there should be a UK team).

Who has suggested that? If I were an aspirational Scottish player I'd be unhappy with the idea.

[Fluffy]

In Spain they pay the entry fee and nothing else. Tickets, food and hotels all are payed by the players with little exceptions.

[paulg]

paulg, on 2011-April-28, 01:54, said:

I have seen no information on the World Mind Sport Games, which is held every four years, and it is not even known if Scotland will enter a team at this time (as there has been a suggestion that there should be a UK team).

gnasher, on 2011-April-28, 02:40, said:

Who has suggested that? If I were an aspirational Scottish player I'd be unhappy with the idea.

Rumoured to have been raised at BGB meetings if the WMSG was to be run along Olympic lines (where UK&NI compete, not the individual countries) but also the falling revenues from BGB to the home countries means that they may not be able to afford to attend the WMSG individually (although as it will be in Manchester it is obviously cheaper).

There are many practical difficulties though. According to the latest WBU minutes, England are already in conflict with Scotland and Wales over the role and status of BGB so agreeing on trials would be a testing exercise. On the other hand the SBU Selection Committee has failed to mention the WMSG in its trials schedule for 2012.

[1eyedjack]

paulg, on 2011-April-28, 01:54, said:

The EBU figures do highlight the budgeting issues that need to be addressed by the accountants, namely that the costs vary dramatically year-on-year and are not necessarily predictable.

One of the points that you may have to bear in mind when reviewing these figures is that the entire basis of funding of the EBU underwent a massive overhaul effective from just after the balance sheet date of the accounts to which this thread refers, with their replacement of direct annual subscription with a "pay as you go" universal membership scheme. So it may not be representative of the current position (at least in terms of total picture).

[mtvesuvius]

For the U.S., you must pay your way to whatever trials for the event. Once you win the trials, the USBF sponsors you to play at whatever venue that may be. They usually pay airfare, hotel, and give a per diem each day.

[gordontd]

mtvesuvius, on 2011-April-28, 16:49, said:

a per diem each day.

[aguahombre]

gordontd, on 2011-April-28, 17:27, said:

Nothing gets past Gordon.

[Cascade]

aguahombre, on 2011-April-28, 18:57, said:

Nothing gets past Gordon.

Adam went to lengths to make it clear what he was saying.

[mtvesuvius]

lol oy

[ahollan1]

I know that in some years New Zealand teams pay their own way.
Don't quote me, but they seem to go through most of the permutations for Open, Women and Senior Teams.
Only the Juniors seem to be subsidized all of the time