It just so happens that my wife, Kayo Kimura, is an accounting major
at Lehman College, a division of CUNY, and she is taking a course in
advanced auditing this semester. Her professor is a partner in
Deloitte Haskins & Sells.

My wife just spent two weeks in the hospital. She was seriously ill.
She sent me to her class to take notes and report back to her on the
professor's lecture. The professor agreed to let me sit in on the
class.

It just so happened by fantastic coincidence that the professor
devoted his lecture to the subject above.

The first thing that Jack Lemoine would do it he were hired to audit
the above transactions is see not only whether the charges were
reasonable, but whether they were authorized. Did the board vote to
allow the hiring and the payment of these fees? Is there any
resolution of the board in the corporate minutes? Was there any
contract signed? Is there any memorandum or record of any agreement to
pay these fees? Are these fees reasonable in light of the general
custom and practices of the industry, which in this case is chess? Is
there any history of the USCF paying these kind of fees in light of
the services allegedly performed?

Unfortunately, the answer to all of the above questions is no. There
is no record of any agreement in advance to pay these fees and
charges, nor is there any history of the USCF ever paying comparable
fees to anybody other than on the occasion in question, nor did the
executive board pass any resolution authorizing the payment of these
fees.

In short, if Jack Lemoine were to audit this statement, the payment of
this $13,358.36 would raise questions, possibly requiring a footnote
in the financial statement.

Sam Sloan

On May 4, 11:47 am, samsloan wrote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrisfalter Hal, Some months ago a controversy was raging in this forum over expenses and fees paid to GM Polgar at the 2003 US Open. Mr. Sam Sloan very helpfully posted the itemization from Polgar's invoice, so Jack looked it over with his auditor's eye.

It just so happens that my wife, Kayo Kimura, is an accounting major
at Lehman College, a division of CUNY, and she is taking a course in
advanced auditing this semester. Her professor is a partner in
Deloitte Haskins & Sells.

Ho hum....... Sam sits in on a class and magic happens... they discuss
accounting in an accounting class. Ye Gods! A miracle!


My wife just spent two weeks in the hospital. She was seriously ill.
She sent me to her class to take notes and report back to her on the
professor's lecture. The professor agreed to let me sit in on the
class.

Yadda-yadda-yadda!


It just so happened by fantastic coincidence that the professor
devoted his lecture to the subject above.

The first thing that Jack Lemoine would do it he were hired to audit
the above transactions is see not only whether the charges were
reasonable, but whether they were authorized. Did the board vote to
allow the hiring and the payment of these fees? Is there any
resolution of the board in the corporate minutes? Was there any
contract signed? Is there any memorandum or record of any agreement to
pay these fees? Are these fees reasonable in light of the general
custom and practices of the industry, which in this case is chess? Is
there any history of the USCF paying these kind of fees in light of
the services allegedly performed?

Try out for the Olympics, Sam. With your ability to Jump to
conclusions with the distance you do should get you a medal in the
broad jump.

Unfortunately, the answer to all of the above questions is no. There
is no record of any agreement in advance to pay these fees and
charges, nor is there any history of the USCF ever paying comparable
fees to anybody other than on the occasion in question, nor did the
executive board pass any resolution authorizing the payment of these
fees.


Is the horse dead yet Sam?

In short, if Jack Lemoine were to audit this statement, the payment of
this $13,358.36 would raise questions, possibly requiring a footnote
in the financial statement.

Doubtful.

Sam Sloan

But that was precisely the problem. The Executive Director had
disappeared, vanished, gone, never to be seen again.

However, he had left behind a laptop computer, which presumably
contained any records of this transaction, if they existed.

However, when that laptop computer was taken by the virtuous Miss P,
all records of the transaction disappeared.

So, the question is: Upon what legal basis was the amount of
$13,358.36 paid by Mr. G to Miss P?

Sam Sloan

On May 4, 6:36 pm, samsloan wrote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by rfeditor Quote: Originally Posted by samsloan The first thing that Jack Lemoine would do it he were hired to audit the above transactions is see not only whether the charges were reasonable, but whether they were authorized. Did the board vote to allow the hiring and the payment of these fees? Is there any resolution of the board in the corporate minutes? Was there any contract signed? Is there any memorandum or record of any agreement to pay these fees? Why should there be? At the time in question (and during most of the history of the USCF), such matters were entirely at the discretion of the ED. If the Board didn't like what he did, they could fire him. Periods of Board micromanagement have occurred, but they have been rare and generally unsuccessful.

But that was precisely the problem. The Executive Director had
disappeared, vanished, gone, never to be seen again.

However, he had left behind a laptop computer, which presumably
contained any records of this transaction, if they existed.

However, when that laptop computer was taken by the virtuous Miss P,
all records of the transaction disappeared.

So, the question is: Upon what legal basis was the amount of
$13,358.36 paid by Mr. G to Miss P?

Sam Sloan

I was agreed to by an official representative with the authority to
negotiate contracts.

Who was that ED or who was that person acting under his authority? Can
you provide the name of that mysterious person. What did he agree to
and when? Why has no paper record been found of this transaction? Why
did Miss P wait until months after the incidents in question and until
after she had taken the laptop computer prior to demanding payment?

Finally and perhaps most importantly why did Mr. G conceal the fact
that he had made this payment of $13,358.36 to Miss P from the board
then in office and from the current board until Mr. S discovered the
payment in the books and records of the USCF late last year?

Sam Sloan

This issue came up and was discussed at the November, 2006 meeting of
the USCF Executive Board in Stamford, Connecticut. This may explain
why the tapes or transcripts of that meeting have never been posted.

Since the discussion of this issue by the board remains top secret,
why don't you tell us what evidence you have that either Frank Niro or
Diane Reese agreed to pay Miss P the sum of $13,358.36?

Have you ever spoken to either of them about this, or is your source
just Jerry Hanken, who admits that he has never spoken to either of
them about this subject?

Sam Sloan

Not true. Several board members addressed this topic at the meeting in
Stamford. I can recall Bill Goichberg and Beatriz Marinello speaking
on this subject. It was also at about this time that the "under the
table" incident occurred.

This is an example of why it is important to maintain transcripts of
these meetings.

Regarding the "work" that Susan Polgar allegedly performed in Los
Angeles, committee members and delegates are never paid, nor are their
expenses ever covered for attending these annual meetings. Miss P and
Mr. T apparently consider themselves to be privileged characters just
for showing up. Please note that they demanded a per diem allowance of
$50 per day each for 14 days for a total of $1400. Miss P is, of
course, a self-made celebrity and can hope to have her expenses paid,
but who is Mr. T and what made Mr. T entitled to be paid just for
being there. What did he do that entitled him to receive money from
the USCF? With most of the US grandmasters present in Los Angeles at
their own expense, what is so special about Miss P that she expects to
be paid for flying there?

Sam Sloan

On May 5, 3:48 am, samsloan wrote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by rfeditor Quote: Originally Posted by samsloan Quote: Originally Posted by rfeditor Am I the only one who's getting awfully tired of this droning redundancy? The ED (or someone working under his authority) entered into binding agreements to pay for services rendered. Those agreements did not require approval by the Board, which is there to set policy, not to micromanage operations. If you want to criticize the Board that hired Frank Niro, fine. That's legitimate, albeit pretty pointless now. To suggest that the USCF could or should repudiate contracts entered into by its CEO suggests a certain, ah, lack of contact with the real world of the non-judgment-proof. Who was that ED or who was that person acting under his authority? Can you provide the name of that mysterious person. What did he agree to and when? Why has no paper record been found of this transaction? Why did Miss P wait until months after the incidents in question and until after she had taken the laptop computer prior to demanding payment? Finally and perhaps most importantly why did Mr. G conceal the fact that he had made this payment of $13,358.36 to Miss P from the board then in office and from the current board until Mr. S discovered the payment in the books and records of the USCF late last year? Sam Sloan Frank Niro was the ED. The 2003 U.S. Open deal, which you've done a good deal of whining about, was mostly handled by Diane Reese. A better question is why the USCF waited so long to pay its bills, but the answer, of course, is that in 2003 it didn't have the money. You know all this as well as I do, Sam, but you seem to be under the impression that the readers (and voters) are dullards. Do you really expect us to believe that Polgar gave lectures and simuls with no agreement on payment, in the hope that she would be able to con the USCF later after the ED had vanished? If so, would you like to buy a bridge? (Note also that I'm fairly sure all those agreements were, in fact, documented the last time you raised this farrago. But since, unlike some I could name, I do not make factual claims unless I am certain, I will leave that aside for now.) As for your second paragraph, have you the slightest evidence that the payment was "concealed" from the Board? Are you actually boasting of making the shocking discovery that the USCF paid its bills? And why exactly would the current board be informed about payment of a closed account that took place before they were took office? Wouldn't you be happier back at rgcp, where no one bothers you with those pesky facts?

This issue came up and was discussed at the November, 2006 meeting of
the USCF Executive Board in Stamford, Connecticut. This may explain
why the tapes or transcripts of that meeting have never been posted.

Since the discussion of this issue by the board remains top secret,
why don't you tell us what evidence you have that either Frank Niro or
Diane Reese agreed to pay Miss P the sum of $13,358.36?

Have you ever spoken to either of them about this, or is your source
just Jerry Hanken, who admits that he has never spoken to either of
them about this subject?

Sam Sloan

Yet further proof that Mr. Sloan wishes he were a proctologist.. The
game now will be to have a contest to see who can make the best use of
Sam in this analogy.

Example: Top ten reasons Sam Sloan should be a
proctologist:

#10. His favorite song is " Burning Ring of Fire"
#9. He always tries his best to be a pain in the butt!


You provide the other eight reasons. We can vote on the best.

I ask again: What evidence do you have that either Niro or Reese
agreed to pay these fees? Niro disappeared and Reese has since
resigned so you cannot ask them.

We have a new situation here in that Jamie Anson, the person whose
check for $24,000 bounced, wrote that she had been promised her
expenses for attending the 2003 US Open in Los Angeles, and she was
never paid. She was a regular member of the USCF staff.

Even the prize winners at the 2003 US Open in Los Angeles had to wait
for months to get their prize checks.

Why is it that Miss P who had a very dubious claim for money and Mr. T
who had no case whatever got paid by Mr. G, but the actual USCF
employees who worked at the US Open in Los Angeles still have not been
paid?

Sam Sloan

Sam Sloan

I would like Mr. Sloan to provide a total accounting of the costs to
the USCF in defending his frivilous lawsuits? How much money has Mr.
Sloan cost the USCF when they honored his requests for various items?
I dare say Mr. Sloan has depleted USCF funds at a much greater rate
than any other single person and has contributed even less.