Problems with Payment of Prizes at the US Championships

Phil Innes, who is notoriously anti-USCF and wants to put us out of
business, has scooped the board by posting on rgcp that the prizes
still have not been paid for the US Woman's Championship, even though
the event finished and the players went home a week ago. Also there
was a problem with the payment of the top prizes for the US Overall
Championship.

Here is what Innes posted this morning on rgcp

She didn't receive her money. Period.

Neither in fact did the US woman's team! The USCF checks were
promised to be there Friday, but didn't show up.

So Jim Berry dug out his wallet again and covered the amount, not
$300, but $25,000.

I further understand that this has caused a little tension down at
the office, especially since e-mails asking what the *@(_@! is going
on, are not being answered.

While future plans and the faults of others are the constant topic of
USCF politicos and 'spinsters', it remains to be seen if the
organisation can perform simply tasks at a national championship and
produce other people's money that they themselves received weeks
ago....

Phil Innes

This is really outrageous. The prize money checks are supposed to be
paid at the conclusion of the tournament, not mailed weeks or months
later. Many players come on a shoestring and need the money to get
home.

More importantly, checks to cover the prizes were mailed to the USCF
office months before these events were even scheduled. Bill Hall
bragged to us at the meeting in Stillwater that the USCF had $400,000
in the bank. He was there. Why could he not just write out a check to
Shabalov to pay him his first prize?

Saying that the players will get their money eventually is not good
enough. Players who win big money at chess tournaments expect to be
paid on the spot. By the way, Grandmaster Samuel Reshevsky is still
waiting to be paid his prize money for winning the US Open in Tulsa,
Oklahoma.

I demand an explanation for this, and it had better be good.

Sam Sloan

Problems with Payment of Prizes at the US Championships

Phil Innes, who is notoriously anti-USCF and wants to put us out of
business,

**ROFL - Sam Sloan, who firsts attends the worth, as he sees it, of anyone
else to comment...

has scooped the board by posting on rgcp that the prizes
still have not been paid for the US Woman's Championship, even though
the event finished and the players went home a week ago. Also there
was a problem with the payment of the top prizes for the US Overall
Championship.


**I know more of what is happening that baord members - strange no? - for
someone such as I, who 'hates' USCF - the question is, 'hates' USCF
politics, or 'hates' the staff? Let the Sloan person figure this out.

Here is what Innes posted this morning on rgcp

She didn't receive her money. Period.

Neither in fact did the US woman's team! The USCF checks were
promised to be there Friday, but didn't show up.

So Jim Berry dug out his wallet again and covered the amount, not
$300, but $25,000.

I further understand that this has caused a little tension down at
the office, especially since e-mails asking what the *@(_@! is going
on, are not being answered.

While future plans and the faults of others are the constant topic of
USCF politicos and 'spinsters', it remains to be seen if the
organisation can perform simply tasks at a national championship and
produce other people's money that they themselves received weeks ago....

Phil Innes

This is really outrageous. The prize money checks are supposed to be
paid at the conclusion of the tournament, not mailed weeks or months
later. Many players come on a shoestring and need the money to get home.


**The truth is that I know because I learned the truth from people who will
be victimised if THEY say it.

More importantly, checks to cover the prizes were mailed to the USCF
office months before these events were even scheduled. Bill Hall
bragged to us at the meeting in Stillwater that the USCF had $400,000
in the bank. He was there. Why could he not just write out a check to
Shabalov to pay him his first prize?


**Mr. Sloan might find out why, then ask, or rather tell - or should I, who
'hate' USCF tell him? I can say one thing, staff people don't hate me!

Saying that the players will get their money eventually is not good
enough. Players who win big money at chess tournaments expect to be
paid on the spot. By the way, Grandmaster Samuel Reshevsky is still
waiting to be paid his prize money for winning the US Open in Tulsa,
Oklahoma.

I demand an explanation for this, and it had better be good.


**This is your organisation, Mr. Sloan, so you must do 3 things:-
a) since I know and you don't, nor any member of the board, you might
consider that there is a certain lack of confidence in informing you
politicians
b) fix it now, I mean, today
c) if you blame anyone for this debacle, they will have even less confidence
in you, and since their process of operation is so preyed upon and
interfered with - you learn nothing from them, since board members are not
exactly free from denying their own influence, while despising the staff
[that's a staff opinion!]

Phil Innes

There is a big issue here.

Last year, the office collected the entry fees for the National Open
before May 31 but did not pay the prizes until after May 31. Since the
fiscal year ends on May 31, that made the USCF bottom line look better
for the 2005-2006 fiscal year. (The USCF still lost $130,000 even
after this enhancement.)

We have been expecting a siimlar phoney deal to happen this year and
it seems that it has. The Office has already put the money Frank Berry
donated into revenue. Now, by delaying payment of the top prizes to
the US Championship until after May 31 and by not paying the prizes
for the US woman's Championship at all, that may give them enough
extra money to make the USCF look "profitable" this year.

Sam Sloan

Sam,

Haven't you ever heard of creative accounting?

samsloan wrote:
There is a big issue here.

Last year, the office collected the entry fees for the National Open
before May 31 but did not pay the prizes until after May 31. Since the
fiscal year ends on May 31, that made the USCF bottom line look better
for the 2005-2006 fiscal year. (The USCF still lost $130,000 even
after this enhancement.)

We have been expecting a siimlar phoney deal to happen this year and
it seems that it has. The Office has already put the money Frank Berry
donated into revenue. Now, by delaying payment of the top prizes to
the US Championship until after May 31 and by not paying the prizes
for the US woman's Championship at all, that may give them enough
extra money to make the USCF look "profitable" this year.

Sam Sloan

THE CHECK IS IN THE MAIL

It would appear that Sam Sloan is right AGAIN.
"Checks in the Mail" often take a notoriously long
time to arrive after they are sent. Sometimes, in the
history of Checks in the Mail, many months or even ...
never is the time span.

Sam and Phil Innes are to be congratulated for
informing us about the facts.

wrote:
Sam,

Haven't you ever heard of creative accounting?

samsloan wrote:
There is a big issue here.

Last year, the office collected the entry fees for the National Open
before May 31 but did not pay the prizes until after May 31. Since the
fiscal year ends on May 31, that made the USCF bottom line look better
for the 2005-2006 fiscal year. (The USCF still lost $130,000 even
after this enhancement.)

We have been expecting a siimlar phoney deal to happen this year and
it seems that it has. The Office has already put the money Frank Berry
donated into revenue. Now, by delaying payment of the top prizes to
the US Championship until after May 31 and by not paying the prizes
for the US woman's Championship at all, that may give them enough
extra money to make the USCF look "profitable" this year.

Sam Sloan

On Jul 24, 10:37?pm, " wrote:
THE CHECK IS IN THE MAIL

It would appear that Sam Sloan is right AGAIN.
"Checks in the Mail" often take a notoriously long
time to arrive after they are sent. Sometimes, in the
history of Checks in the Mail, many months or even ...
never is the time span.

Sam and Phil Innes are to be congratulated for
informing us about the facts.
=====
Don't worry about a thang. If the mony don't show up soon, old Bill
Hall can just skedaddle down to the Crossville Cafe and Taxidermy and
pick up some dried varmit pelts for the ladies.

Old Haasie

"Old Haasie" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Jul 24, 10:37?pm, " wrote:
THE CHECK IS IN THE MAIL

It would appear that Sam Sloan is right AGAIN.
"Checks in the Mail" often take a notoriously long
time to arrive after they are sent. Sometimes, in the
history of Checks in the Mail, many months or even ...
never is the time span.

Sam and Phil Innes are to be congratulated for
informing us about the facts.
=====
Don't worry about a thang. If the mony don't show up soon, old Bill
Hall can just skedaddle down to the Crossville Cafe and Taxidermy and
pick up some dried varmit pelts for the ladies.

its just storm in a t-cup, really. except of course that people don't joke
about money due them. otherwise what can usefully be learned from this
instance is why it happened, so that it can be averted next time

but already the long knives are out!

it won't please anyone if i continue to address systems at uscf events,
rather than personality stuff, so i'll sign off here

phil innes

Old Haasie