New handbook - big joke - more taxes?

From what I understood, not only the taxes habe been raised for the Majors and Grand Prix but also there is an extra tax to pay to FISTF? (50 EUR for a GP, 30 for an Open, 20 for Satellites, Challengers and Futures).

What is the reason for that? Sorry but this is unacceptable.

This has also been discussed many times, and the conclusion has been that it is damaging for the smaller tournaments and nations. And no one has come up with a good reason to why FISTF needs so much money and to what purpose is it used.

Sorry but if I run a Future and I have 6 players taking part, 20 + (6*0,5) = 23 Euros to pay to FISTF and it's a lot of money.

That's a point I don't understand too.
An association has to pay 100 EUR to have the right to host a Grand Prix and then the organizer has to pay another 50 EUR + taxes to organize the tournament?
I can understand the raise of the taxes, because 50 cent and 2 EUR was a bit too low of course. 1 EUR and 3 EUR (god knows why 3 EUR and not 4 EUR, which would be more logical) is ok to me, because on the same chapter they also raised the starting fees the organizers can ask for.
For the small events that could mean problems, most of those events don't even bring the money in you have to spend for venue and trophies. That rule means 20 EUR more loss.

It is not obligatory for them to tell us what they will do with the higher income. The associations will get a financial report where they can see what happened with the income of FISTF.

Heinz

Heinz Eder wrote:
It is not obligatory for them to tell us what they will do with the higher income. The associations will get a financial report where they can see what happened with the income of FISTF.

But they have to, at least morally, give some reason for raising these fees. I don't think that for example we in Finland get anything more from FISTF, but we just pay more. And I haven't read anyone commenting on this (months ago) who says there is need for more money for FISTF.

What you are saying is that they could raise the fees for membership and fees for everything, and after they spend it to something that is not accepted by the members, it means nothing because the money is already spent.

Does FISTF have any rules about what the money should be used for and how? I'm not sure about this, and this is why I'm concerned.

It's quite clear that smaller countries and tournaments will move towards WASPA with this decision. I don't see it helping FISTF as a federation for all.

I agree with Vesa. Capponi was the one who says we "have to be professional and get money from sponsors". What does the money serve for? The money should be for the players, not coming from the players to be used by a few directors.

This decision will be a great help for WASPA in the future, I think!

Admin wrote:From what I understood, not only the taxes habe been raised for the Majors and Grand Prix but also there is an extra tax to pay to FISTF? (50 EUR for a GP, 30 for an Open, 20 for Satellites, Challengers and Futures).

What is the reason for that? Sorry but this is unacceptable.

What disturbs me more is that it is mandatory for a member nation to host a GP. What if no club is going to organise it ? Will the member nation being downgraded to a partner nation ?

My post was a kind of sarcastic, because as it seems the associations are not interested earlier what the money will be used for, so at least they will see in the next financial report.
As it seems some didn't understand it yet, that FISTF has only to answer requests from its members, and individual players are not the members of FISTF, the members are the national associations. This discussion is running around for nearly 2 years now, and nothing changed except the board. Neither the actions nor the networking between the national associations changed.
Everybody is complaining on his own, nobody is interested to work together to get information which are of same interest.

Heinz

von K. wrote:

Heinz Eder wrote:
It is not obligatory for them to tell us what they will do with the higher income. The associations will get a financial report where they can see what happened with the income of FISTF.

But they have to, at least morally, give some reason for raising these fees. I don't think that for example we in Finland get anything more from FISTF, but we just pay more. And I haven't read anyone commenting on this (months ago) who says there is need for more money for FISTF.

What you are saying is that they could raise the fees for membership and fees for everything, and after they spend it to something that is not accepted by the members, it means nothing because the money is already spent.

Does FISTF have any rules about what the money should be used for and how? I'm not sure about this, and this is why I'm concerned.

It's quite clear that smaller countries and tournaments will move towards WASPA with this decision. I don't see it helping FISTF as a federation for all.

Sorry, what other reasons do you have to be member nation in the 3 years without a congress!?????

Janus_Gersie wrote:

Admin wrote:From what I understood, not only the taxes habe been raised for the Majors and Grand Prix but also there is an extra tax to pay to FISTF? (50 EUR for a GP, 30 for an Open, 20 for Satellites, Challengers and Futures).

What is the reason for that? Sorry but this is unacceptable.

What disturbs me more is that it is mandatory for a member nation to host a GP. What if no club is going to organise it ? Will the member nation being downgraded to a partner nation ?

Heinz Eder wrote:My post was a kind of sarcastic


As it seems some didn't understand it yet, that FISTF has only to answer requests from its members,

Sorry, Heinz, didn't understand the sarcasm.

But FISTF doesn't answer requests from its members! Remember the german association calling for the changes to the minutes of Madrid? And I think that is not the only case. I can also see a President of an association banned from FISTF official forum without a reason, because he was asking about things.

And is it really so, that members have to ask for something that has been promised by FISTF. How many times do they have to ask? For example the international work on the infamous "book of mistakse, oh sorry, cases" and the international work for the new statutes etc.

Your criticism is correct, of course. Lack of interest and co operation is a problem. But it is a reality of an amateur hobby (not a professional sport), and that itself creates possibilities for dictatorial ruling and makes FISTF an absurd creature. The foundation for the whole thing is not there.

And you know who were the persons who made it impossible to have an international forum for all members (CoN forum). It was the guys on the BoD at the moment. You forget that the idea was meant to make it easier to work together. Why not criticise those who destroyed it?

It is up to you, who you critizize or not.
If an association tries it once to ask for something and don't get an answer there are 2 possibilities.

The association stops it and says they ignore us. Wouldn't change much, because the association still don't have the requested information. If they are happy with it only to say, we are poor they ignore us, then the priority couldn't be to get the requested information.

The association writes another letter with the same request and tries to find more associations, whos presidents are interested too to get a statement from the FISTF Board (or maybe get even an answer from another association).

If the board then still doesn't answer, send an official protest to the disciplinary council which is also responsible to sanction misbehaviour of the FISTF Board. All the tools are available, but if nobody is ready to use them, they are useless. I tried to explain it all over the last 2 years, people smiled at me and attacked me, if FISTF or tablesoccer is really that important for us, it is not enough to capitulate the first time after you didn't get an answer to a request.
That's the question every association has to answer for itself. Of course now it is easier, because with WASPA an alternative is existing, now it is easier to accept things like that.
The main problem is not that the board maybe don't answer, the main problem is that most boards of the associations even aren't interested to read about their possibilities in such cases.

I don't know how much time Stefano spent for FISTF actually, I can tell you out of my experience, that I also promised some things and then I forgot, because of many other things. I don't want to protect him, but I think there didn't happen anything since that discussion. If there would be worked without inlcuding people from many countries as promised you would be right to critizize it.

About the forum I have to say, people who post there post their personal opinions hopefully. If they want information for the association that should only happen by an official letter sent directly by the president to the secretary of FISTF and not on a forum. For me personally on a forum only individuals discuss, nobody is representing anybody, except of the FISTF Board members, if they answer questions by players for topics about FISTF. So if it is the president of an association and he is banned then he only can be banned for personal posts normally. If the president of the austrian federation would be banned, i wouldn't be happy, but i also wouldn't personally feel offended by it.

Generally I guess it is a kind of game played by the board, which is normal in my opinion. You wait for the reactions that you know about the priorities. As long as "only" 1 association complains about the book of cases or the meeting minutes of the EGM it can't be a high priority. (this is only a guess)

Heinz

von K. wrote:

Sorry, Heinz, didn't understand the sarcasm.

But FISTF doesn't answer requests from its members! Remember the german association calling for the changes to the minutes of Madrid? And I think that is not the only case. I can also see a President of an association banned from FISTF official forum without a reason, because he was asking about things.

And is it really so, that members have to ask for something that has been promised by FISTF. How many times do they have to ask? For example the international work on the infamous "book of mistakse, oh sorry, cases" and the international work for the new statutes etc.

Your criticism is correct, of course. Lack of interest and co operation is a problem. But it is a reality of an amateur hobby (not a professional sport), and that itself creates possibilities for dictatorial ruling and makes FISTF an absurd creature. The foundation for the whole thing is not there.

And you know who were the persons who made it impossible to have an international forum for all members (CoN forum). It was the guys on the BoD at the moment. You forget that the idea was meant to make it easier to work together. Why not criticise those who destroyed it?