OK boys and girls, it's decision time. At next week's AGM we must decide whether Bracknell Forest Bridge Club (BFBC) will remain affiliated to the EBU (English Bridge Union) in the brave new world of P2P (Pay to Play). This brief article is intended to let you know the ins and outs and help you come to an informed opinion. This is all based on my understanding of the issues and finances, to the best of my knowledge and belief. I shall also try to keep it as unbiased as possible.
The EBU is the governing body for contract bridge in England. Other UK countries have their own national organisations. Currently, the EBU receives its income from three sources:
Not all club players are members of the EBU. At BFBC it's less than a quarter. The EBU felt that those players who did subscribe were effectively subsidising those who didn't. They also felt that their membership numbers severely underestimated the total number of bridge players in the country, reducing their political clout when it came to things like lottery grants etc. P2P is the EBU's attempt to redress these perceived imbalances through the concept of "universal membership" - all club players will, at least nominally, be EBU members.
Under P2P, fees for Master Points and individual members' subscriptions are abolished (although the club affiliation fee remains). These fees will be replaced by a levy imposed on every player, every time they play at an affiliated club. It's like abolishing the annual membership fee (which not everyone paid) and increasing the table money (which everyone pays).
The P2P levy for 2010 will be 35p for every player at every club night. This comprises 29p for the EBU and 6p which goes to county (Berks and Bucks is our county) to replace what county used to get from EBU members' subscriptions. Note that the county component varies from county to county. Surrey, for example, have set a zero levy so the P2P cost is only 29p in Surrey.
That is not to say that table money has to go up by 35p. The club will no longer have to purchase Master Points so part of the P2P cost can be absorbed by the club by dint of that saving. By my estimation, Master Points cost BFBC around £180 a year.
Those players who are currently EBU members will no longer have to pay an annual subscription, a personal saving of just over £20 per year. Players who did not previously belong to the EBU will, in the P2P era, be able to get all the advantages of full EBU membership (magazine, diary etc.) for a one-off registration fee of £5.
Financial reporting for affiliated clubs becomes a little more complicated (but my software will be able to handle it!) because we would have to report to the EBU every player's result at every club night. However, this additional information is allowing the EBU to introduce a new national ranking scheme from next year. It remains to be seen how useful this will be.
By my calculations, taking into consideration our average attendance, the EBU P2P levy and the savings in Master Points, the club would more than cover the cost of P2P by increasing table money by 20p per player per session (no change to annual subscriptions).
If you were not previously a member of the EBU, but come to BFBC just about every week, that equates to around an extra £10 a year - less if you only come occasionally. The benefit to you as an individual is you can register your EBU membership for a one-off fee of £5. Having made that once-ever payment you will receive your own copy of English Bridge magazine six times a year and an EBU pocket diary. Whether or not you register (as I understand it) you will also be elligible to compete in external EBU competitions that were previously closed to you. You will also be given a national ranking.
If you were previously a member of the EBU you will continue to receive your current membership benefits, plus getting a national ranking, but you will save around £10 each year because you no longer have to pay an annual subscription.
A couple comprising one member and one non member will break even.
If we choose not to affiliate then there will be a cost saving because we no longer have to pay for Master Points or the club affiliation fee. By my calculations, the cost saving would allow table money to be decreased by about 19p per player per session, although the members may decide to distribute the saving by other means, such as a reduction in annual subs. or a bigger and better Christmas party!
We would no longer be able to award Master Points at club nights but it has been confirmed that we could continue to field teams in the Bracknell League.
Players who are currently members of the EBU would lose their membership benefits unless they played a minimal number of times (I think it's around three times a year) at some other club which has chosen to remain affiliated.
BFBC members would not be included in the national ranking scheme.
The club would no longer be able to call upon EBU club services - such as insurance, arbitration, and publicity although, to be fair, we have made minimal use of those services to date. Having our name in the EBU's list of clubs is about the only service we currently use but there may be other services of interest in the future.
Also, it's a minor technical point, but to withdraw from the EBU would require a change to the club's constitution which currently states that the club will be affiliated to the EBU.
As well as the immediate personal financial implications there's the question of whether you approve of what the EBU does as a whole, and whether you think them worthy of your support for that reason. The EBU claim to be actively promoting the game of bridge in the media, in schools etc. How successful they are in this is something you must decide for yourself. They also operate a national bridge teacher training scheme and it is probably true to say that without bridge courses up and down the country the number of new players coming into the game would be drastically reduced. Finally, they manage and finance the national team. Again, you may consider this a plus or a minus depending on your point of view.
Those against the P2P proposals say that the EBU is only relevant to the higher echelons and completely out of touch with the rank and file players. A common view is that the P2P changes have been railroaded through and forced upon clubs without paying any heed to the level of dissent from ordinary club players. Certainly any democratic processes seemed rather perfunctory. Those players who weren't actually in the EBU didn't get much say and, arguably, those are the players most affected.
The EBU has clearly done a very bad job of "selling" its proposals to the nation's bridge players, many of whom are now advocating withdrawing support from the EBU to teach them a lesson.
A more extreme view is that the EBU has so severely underestimated the level of dissent, and therefore the number of clubs that will withdraw, that its financial projections are a fantasy and the EBU could even be bankrupt in 18 months or so. At that point another national organisation, perhaps Mr Bridge, will rise like a phoenix from the ashes.
Whatever your views, your decision at the AGM will have a small but tangible effect far beyond the simple consideration of how much more or less table money you will pay every week. It really is crunch time for the EBU and I believe they will stand or fall based on the number of clubs that do, or don't, affiliate.
No doubt there will be further views expressed on the night but I hope the above notes have enlightened you on what you are voting for, what the issues are for you as an individual, the club and the national governing body.
Keith - 2 July 2009