Must fess up on Wallace to qualify for handout

[NMWBloods]

Well, I'll tell you where I first heard the rumour, earlier this year.

Wallace is managed by a sports management group, with principals including Craig Kelly and Rob Wodehouse. I went to school with Rob and he lives next door to our head of sales, Mike. Rob and Mike and some other guys regularly jog together and see each other for beers and things. Rob told Mike about the arrangement. Mike wasn't meant to tell anyone, but being a sales guy couldn't help himself. I asked whether it was a rumour and he said, no rumour, it's a fact. So, I take that as being a fairly good source!! Hard to get too much closer to the deal.

[Damien]

It is funny that if ever proven that Wallace was to be our coach, all it would have taken was for Wallace to wait an extra week and then tell the bulldogs he wanted out. It would have been a lot harder for Pro Roos groups to gain momentum for the so called 'people power' after the season had ended.

The Richmond game was the catalyst in so many ways, an amazing show of fan support for Roos, two retiring legends making it very clear who they wanted and the team at the end of a match where two of our greatest servents had retired surrounding Roos as if he had just won them the grand final with the last kick of the day.

A quiet resignation by Wallace in the first week of the finals sighting lack of motivation - only to be suddenly motivated by the chance to rebuild the swans a few weeks later, would have worked out so much better.

Anyway, I hope it is never proven because no evidence can support it, but if it ever is, it is probably Wallace who can blame himself.

[Xie Shan]

Ahh.. the Wallace rumours have returned.

My views on this haven't changed since I first heard them - while it conveniently explains Wallace's sudden decision to quit because he had a job promised to him (whether true or not), I think it would be highly unlikely, given that when the loss (abt $1mil) was reported, the figures provided for the breakdown of the loss (incl. Telstra Stadium games, etc) didn't suggest that a $600k payout could have been included in it.

The only thing that would put this whole thing to rest though, aside from firm denials by all parties involved (as far as I know, they have all denied it), would be for the club to release its financial statements in an annual report.

That said, assuming that the AFL/auditors have been through their financial reports regarding the recent difficulties, I would be amazed if there WAS a payment, that it wasn't discovered by now.

Even today's Sunday Tele article here did not 'prove' that any payout has been made. But, if the rumours ARE true, then those responsible should resign.

[NMWBloods]

Releasing financial statements will give no ideas as to whether a payment has been made to Wallace and the fact that the financial statements also means nothing. It is remarkably easy to hide payments in a set of accounts and publicly-released financial statements give very little information indeed.

[Xie Shan]

Point taken NMWBloods, as an accounting student I know how easy it can be to manipulate financial statements.

The Swans don't publish an annual report (as far as I know). If publicly listed companies such as HIH and One.Tel can get away with all kinds of manipulations (as I've recently learned), then who knows what you could get away with if you don't put out a report!

It's getting a bit off-topic, but they could easily hide a Wallace payout in their accounts, depending on how they choose to classify it. The point is that publishing financial statements would at least provide some information, which is more than what we get now. It would make any payouts (relatively) easier to spot, if you knew what you were looking for.

[Reggi]

Guys that is for publicly released financial statements, whilst it is easy to hide in those, it is a bit more difficult to hide if someone comes through and goes through transactions.

Both Colles and Jackson have publicly stated there has been no transaction. The 'whistle blower' reckons there is no paper trail - how convenient.

Next we will be accused of drug running and laundering through Terry Wallace.

Can I suggest that Sydney supporters generally stick to the facts as presented - gossip is the playground for bored minds we shouldn't assist by specualtion and guesswork as to what is going on.

To my knowledge these are the only facts.

Sydney has a cash-flow problem bought on by budgetting mistakes and poor estimates of revenue drops. Sydney have alerted the AFL - but not requested any assistance . Clearly Colles has gone public in order to prompt Swans and Corporates to financial support the club.

Some have claimed that Sydney is paying Wallace - this would seem unlikely as Wallace still had 2 years to run on existing contract at WB. It is very hard to believe that he would sign before being released from the contract.

Most of the rest is specualtion - a few good crowds - some sponsors and Sydney's cash - flow problem goes away (a home final would definately help).

The problem Sydney face is an everyday business problem as the saying goes - if it doesn't happen to you you're not trying hard enough.

In another scurrilous rumour it was reported on MMM yesterday that Wallace's management offered Pagan money not to take the Carlton job - cause Wallace wanted that.

[NMWBloods]

Guys that is for publicly released financial statements, whilst it is easy to hide in those, it is a bit more difficult to hide if someone comes through and goes through transactions.

All public companies are audited and it's not particularly difficult to fool auditors. I can't see the AFL's auditors being any different.

Can I suggest that Sydney supporters generally stick to the facts as presented - gossip is the playground for bored minds we shouldn't assist by specualtion and guesswork as to what is going on.

Given where I heard it from, I don't view it as gossip.

[liz]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
All public companies are audited and it's not particularly difficult to fool auditors. I can't see the AFL's auditors being any different.

LOL - maybe you're right. But some things are easier to hide than others, and a $1.8m cash payment - or even a $600k one - would be hard to hide, particularly from someone specifically looking for it. And I speak as someone who spent many a long year - far too many in fact - in the auditing profession!

If the payment was made - and I'm not saying it either was or wasn't - it will either be found or it didn't go through the clubs books.

[Charlie]

What would the Swans turnover be?

Somewhere around $25m?

Sounds pretty small to be able to hide half a mill, even from my rudimentary year 12 accounting knowledge.

[Gunn]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
All public companies are audited and it's not particularly difficult to fool auditors. I can't see the AFL's auditors being any different.



Given where I heard it from, I don't view it as gossip.

You can't prove a negative. Denials have come from The Swans board, Barassi, Colless and Terry Wallace. No paper trail been uncovered. There is not in fact a scintilla of 'evidence' to support the 'theory'. Yet the pay off suggestion survives based on one unnamed "source" and peoples willingness to believe the worst. No further information has come to light from the Zachariah story. It appears to be a rehash of the original story which was also based on an unnamed source. It is probaby the same source. Did Zacharia say he had spoken to the source? He may have just requoted the old 'story'. He added nothing to the old story.

Regarding whether the books might disclose a payment those same newspaper scribes running the story already have that base covered. They have said that the payments may have been made by a supporter and not the club. This means that even a full blown audit would not be able to prove the negative and kill the 'story'.

As for you NMW your "evidence" is also paper thin and frankly unbelievable. We argued this late last year. Repeating it does not make it any stronger. Pub talk. Hearsay on hearsay. A throwaway line at best. Your impecable source is a person who has a duty to his client to maintain his confidence. No self respecting "manager" would disclose this sort of information. I give your story no credence.

I am not saying that the Swans didn't pay him out but to believe your story I have to believe that the people I mentioned above are all liars as they have all appeared on TV and denied it directly to the camera. I choose to believe they are truthful until it is PROVEN they are liars. I also refuse to try to prove a negative and challenge all those that argue that there was a payout to prove the positive viz that there was a payout....otherwise SHUT UP.

[barry]

Originally posted by NMWBloods

Given where I heard it from, I don't view it as gossip.

If you want some credibility NMWBloods, you'll need to name this source which is going against all other sources.

[Gunn]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Well, I'll tell you where I first heard the rumour, earlier this year.

Wallace is managed by a sports management group, with principals including Craig Kelly and Rob Wodehouse. I went to school with Rob and he lives next door to our head of sales, Mike. Rob and Mike and some other guys regularly jog together and see each other for beers and things. Rob told Mike about the arrangement. Mike wasn't meant to tell anyone, but being a sales guy couldn't help himself. I asked whether it was a rumour and he said, no rumour, it's a fact. So, I take that as being a fairly good source!! Hard to get too much closer to the deal.

I'll tell you how to get closer to 'the deal'. Phone up your mate Rob Woodhouse (yours misspelt his name, right?) and ask him directly. You now have a direct source. He is a mate of yours isn't he? Why else would you bother to mention you went to school with him?

You believe a "Saleman" who promised not to divulge a confidence from a guy part of whose job is not to divulge client confidence and who you say was breaching that confidence. A proven liar and a guy with no ethics. You want us to believe that "evidence". Yeh right!

[Charlie]

NMW - that story really does have more holes in it than the Bulldogs' defence.

[Louellyn]

Mr Zachariah, or ex Mr Maggie Tabberer is a glorified social reporter who happens to be a Swans fan. He may have been given this little tidbit over canapes at some festy toff party, and is running with it.

As some have said, it is hard to hide $1.8m and if it were true, it will come out after the auditers have had their crack.

Colless going on holiday probably proves it's all nuff nuff chatter.....hopefully. Otherwise, it may be wise for Mr Colless to stay on holiday........................................... .

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by lizz
LOL - maybe you're right. But some things are easier to hide than others, and a $1.8m cash payment - or even a $600k one - would be hard to hide, particularly from someone specifically looking for it. And I speak as someone who spent many a long year - far too many in fact - in the auditing profession!

Same!! But when it was said the AFL auditors have checked the books, did they say they were specifically looking for that payment or doing their normal audit?