Title: Interesting Lighthouse Q & A on....
klynch - May 5, 2009 01:47 PM (GMT)
Check it out, some of the ommissions are GLARING......I am in total support of the project but how can you leave out a plan for garbage or the actualy coliseum designs?
http://www.islandersindependent.com/
stevedepot - May 5, 2009 04:15 PM (GMT)
I've said all the bad things I could say about Wang.
There's always 3 sides to each story. both parties and the truth.
For me, I' still baffled why many fellow fans think we should accept mediocrity
and be "thankful" for Wang saving us.
He's either prolonged the inevitable or simply dragged this once great franchise through the mud.
Interesting, many of us have complained that Wang had a shot at buying out SMG. He didn't.
Botta wrote an angry blog trying to dispel that saying sooo much is involved. Who else would be brought in to do what SMG does, blablabla.
Good grief.
Nauseating reading that garbage and the garbage from many fans I once had respect for who lap that up like a saucer of warm milk.
We don't get the in depth media coverage other teams do so it's more important for us fans to seek out the truth. If you've been reading the Times, business week and following this team's current owner beyond what the TEAM try's to sell you you'd have a clearer picture.
Go ahead Chuckie...move the team, sell em...we'll survive. How you like them apples ya bastid?
4CUPZ - May 5, 2009 05:24 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (stevedepot @ May 5 2009, 12:15 PM) |
I've said all the bad things I could say about Wang. There's always 3 sides to each story. both parties and the truth.
For me, I' still baffled why many fellow fans think we should accept mediocrity and be "thankful" for Wang saving us.
He's either prolonged the inevitable or simply dragged this once great franchise through the mud.
Interesting, many of us have complained that Wang had a shot at buying out SMG. He didn't. Botta wrote an angry blog trying to dispel that saying sooo much is involved. Who else would be brought in to do what SMG does, blablabla.
Good grief. Nauseating reading that garbage and the garbage from many fans I once had respect for who lap that up like a saucer of warm milk.
We don't get the in depth media coverage other teams do so it's more important for us fans to seek out the truth. If you've been reading the Times, business week and following this team's current owner beyond what the TEAM try's to sell you you'd have a clearer picture.
Go ahead Chuckie...move the team, sell em...we'll survive. How you like them apples ya bastid? |
:applaud: :applaud: :applaud: :applaud: :applaud: :applaud: :applaud:
YEAH...WHAT HE SAID
OlTimeHockey - May 5, 2009 05:53 PM (GMT)
Just look at Wang and his pawn Botta and his minion of fans who eat whatever Wang throws them......another overstatement of losses? I'll counter with the Forbes articles, the Levitt report's assertion that Wang only includes half his cable revenues to the league and his known SEC trials/implications (that went unprosecuted).
Look at how he's run the talent level and payroll down JUST LIKE MILSTEIN DID when he didn't get his way.
Look at how a government agency said that his submitted reports were omitting serious considerationa and not accounting for very important environmental concerns.
Look at how every challenge he sets on Murray/ToH is in a public venue where people who eat up Botta's blog as gospel would attend and turn it into a MoveOn.Org seminar of total partiality instead of a closed meeting with serious discussion of issues ALL TAXPAYERS (not just hockey fans) are concerned with.
Look at his track record of nepotism and unqualifies subordinates has remained from his scandal ridden Computer Associates company (who are finally turning the corner after Wang ruined them.....starting with Kumar's reorganization of the Board of Directors).
But so many refuse to admit the day's events or recognize the questions arising.....we all want the Islanders to be great but we won't question the driver of that car on the bridge to success?
We might as well have Ted Kennedy driving. Doom ahead!
An owner of a business is accountable to the consumer, correct? Then why must he make a profit if he can't run a business profitably?
ronski631 - May 5, 2009 05:57 PM (GMT)
are we in Queens, yet? :dontknow:
alright, so Wang is a bully. He doesn't really give a sh!t about this team. BUT, who else is there? WHO else would consider buying this team AND keeping it on Long Island?
Don't throw stones but the LH project is truly a city within a city: it really is too big as is. Something is not right on all sides. As of right now, i'm off the Lighthouse bandwagon. I'm just going to keep following ISLANDERS HOCKEY and not focus on the politics behind it. If they move, so be it- i'll probably move with them.
we're doomed :disgraced:
The Moose - May 5, 2009 11:19 PM (GMT)
I agree with...none of you.
4CUPZ - May 5, 2009 11:32 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (ronski631 @ May 5 2009, 01:57 PM) |
As of right now, i'm off the Lighthouse bandwagon.[/b] I'm just going to keep following ISLANDERS HOCKEY and not focus on the politics behind it. If they move, so be it- i'll probably move with them.
|
:applaud: :applaud: :applaud:
:shake: :shake: :shake:
3POTI - May 6, 2009 12:33 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (4CUPZ @ May 5 2009, 07:32 PM) |
| QUOTE (ronski631 @ May 5 2009, 01:57 PM) | As of right now, i'm off the Lighthouse bandwagon.[/b] I'm just going to keep following ISLANDERS HOCKEY and not focus on the politics behind it. If they move, so be it- i'll probably move with them.
|
:applaud: :applaud: :applaud:
:shake: :shake: :shake:
|
moving with the team..might be a good idea..could be cheaper too..living in kansas than on the Island..
yeah, lets all move off the damn Island. Long Island is just plain garbage. Sure there are wonderful places to visit and see. But who the heck CAN afford to.
So screw the damn lighthouse and chucky and Long Island!
Dr. Generosity - May 6, 2009 12:52 AM (GMT)
I am no bandwagoneer, and I understand being sick of politics. But to those shaking hands applauding rooting for this team in another metro area, may I respectfully reply: :puke:
First, let me get this straight, we're supposed to believe that Wang and Reckson failed to address garbage disposal in their proposal because, uh, an unidentified source at the Town of Hempstead told a blogger that it was so?
And that same blogger, who has written some fairly thoughtful things over the past year, reports on the same webpage that his source told him another "fact"---that Clark Co. procured just as much work from Dems as Republicans, an obvious partisan statement---and that his source's assertion did not check out. But, according to some readers here, we're still supposed to believe the source's criticism of the proposal is entirely valid?
Until I see some more credible reporting on this, I am reserving judgment. No offense to the blogger, I just don't trust his source.
And second, as for the fans claiming that they're ready to move on when the Isles leave, hey, I respect you guys a great deal, but I must really wonder about your judgment on this topic. I just got over losing a pro sports team five years ago, and it is real $%&#! unpleasant. It takes something that is enjoyable and rewarding in your life, and leaves behind an empty, tinny, hollow feeling that never quite goes away. This post is getting long as it is, so I won't elaborate. Let's just say, dude, it's not fun. Losing the Isles, the team I care for most, would be painful beyond words.
I am distrustful of the Town, which I think is using plausibly neutral arguments (environment, planning, etc.) to cover its political goals (reasserting control over Coliseum development; the place has been a Republican machine jackpot for decades, ever since Caso built the thing). I am wary of the Dems who seem unable to get this development done. I am a frequent critic and occasional admirer of Charles Wang who is displeased when the threats to move become more overt. I don't mind him pressing for a good deal, but using our loyalties as leverage is a tricky business. Careful there, Mr. Wang.
If anyone has to give a little, I say it's the Town. The Republicans really mismanaged the current Coliseum with their poor upkeep of the facility and sweetheart deals with SMG. But ask me again later this year if Wang openly manuevers to move the team. :D
I intend to stay engaged and hold every party to this dispute strictly responsible for arriving at the only acceptable conclusion: A suitable home for the Islanders, on Long Island, in an economic arrangement that is fair to Island residents and responsible Islanders ownership.
7th Woman - May 6, 2009 03:29 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (klynch @ May 5 2009, 09:47 AM) |
Check it out, some of the ommissions are GLARING......I am in total support of the project but how can you leave out a plan for garbage or the actualy coliseum designs?
http://www.islandersindependent.com/ |
Please be aware that some of what BD posted originally was incorrect.
Additional facts were given to him, but I have not read it to see if they were changed.
The Moose - May 6, 2009 05:39 AM (GMT)
This is now people taking up party politics. That's what's most disappointing.
Dr. Generosity - May 6, 2009 12:50 PM (GMT)
I have no doubt that politics lies at the center of this issue. Remember, the Coliseum got done the first time under one-party rule. With two parties having a stake in the game, there is significantly more conflict. Ostensibly that should produce a better deal for everyone (if you believe what was written in the Federalist Papers) but in this case, where many fans just want to see shovels hit the ground, I'm not as sure.
Isles72 - May 6, 2009 01:33 PM (GMT)
so a guy contributes a meazly 4,500 bucks to murrays party and in return his company gets to analyze the lighhouse plans and nitpick on behalf of murray ?
I'd hate to see what she'd do for 4,501
stevedepot - May 6, 2009 02:19 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Isles72 @ May 6 2009, 09:33 AM) |
so a guy contributes a meazly 4,500 bucks to murrays party and in return his company gets to analyze the lighhouse plans and nitpick on behalf of murray ?
I'd hate to see what she'd do for 4,501 |
That company has been used by more politicians than Murray in the tri State area for projects.
They are a reputable company.
This is all SPIN crap against them.
here is their client list.
http://www.fpclark.com/clients_and_projects.htm
7th Woman - May 6, 2009 02:41 PM (GMT)
Well... why does a company from westchester need to contribute to a campaign fund for a Nassau county politician
and ... Town of oyster bay fired them.
stevedepot - May 6, 2009 02:54 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (7th Woman @ May 6 2009, 10:41 AM) |
Well... why does a company from westchester need to contribute to a campaign fund for a Nassau county politician
and ... Town of oyster bay fired them. |
because they've used them before.
same way law firms contribute to politicians. it's good business.
doesn't mean they'll share their vested interest in DENYING or APPROVING a project
and putting their reputation on the line.
are you kidding me?
I saw what you wrote on your blog too. I cannot disagree more.
a townhouse community project is different from housing ALONG with an arena and shopping area.
Dee, really, are you finally being paid by the organization?
congrats. if not. you are a great soldier.
;)
4CUPZ - May 6, 2009 02:57 PM (GMT)
MAYBE THEY SENT 4500 TO ALL THE CAMPAIGNS THAT SENT BUSINESS THEIR WAY :dontknow:
MAYBE THEY DIDNT LIKE THAT ANSWERS THEY WERE GIVEN :dontknow:
7th Woman - May 6, 2009 03:02 PM (GMT)
nope. not being paid a dime.
And in all sincerity, if that's the way "business" is done then it seems to be in stark contrast to what Murray says.
She can't attend any meetings with developers because it's a "conflict of interest" but she can accept money from a vendor as campaign funds?
And since it's not the TOWN paying his bill for his service, you really don't think they have any reason to drag things on?
Steve... yeah... I'm a good soldier. and everyone sees things differently.
I don't know... when I was growing up oh so long ago we called that "graft"
I guess now they call it politics.
stevedepot - May 6, 2009 03:15 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (7th Woman @ May 6 2009, 11:02 AM) |
nope. not being paid a dime.
And in all sincerity, if that's the way "business" is done then it seems to be in stark contrast to what Murray says.
She can't attend any meetings with developers because it's a "conflict of interest" but she can accept money from a vendor as campaign funds?
And since it's not the TOWN paying his bill for his service, you really don't think they have any reason to drag things on?
Steve... yeah... I'm a good soldier. and everyone sees things differently.
I don't know... when I was growing up oh so long ago we called that "graft"
I guess now they call it politics. |
Dee,
All politicians work that way. Don't act surprised.
Why should Kate Murray attend rally's????
That's right Rally's.
Why didn't Tom Suozzi review the 6,000 page report he's so heavily behind?
Honestly? Why?
Murray's no angel. I get it, but no one can sit there and say Wang is RIGHT.
BOTTA has EVERYTHING to lose if he doesn't support all things Isles.
So get the blind faith from him. He has an excuse. Ask yourself...
if you were Kate Murray, would you take time out of your schedule for a fan rally?
Can't Wang agree to meet without the BIG news splash and rally for support?
Why does it have to be a HUGE event? When was the last time a BANK negotiated a loan with a homeowner and the WHOLE damn neighborhood came out to support the homeowner to get the rate he wants???
Yeah, dumb analogy. Right?
:dontknow:
7th Woman - May 6, 2009 03:24 PM (GMT)
I'm not talking about the "rally's" Steve.
She refuses to attend meetings, even with Tom Suozzi.
Not press conferences, meetings. There is a difference.
She is a republican. Why wasn't she at the republican round table on sports and entertainment on Long Island? That was actually about the UFC first.
I believe in the project for Long Island.
I saw the union representatives talking about their members needing jobs.
I saw the representatives for other workers looking for jobs and housing and apprenticeships for the residents of the town.
I'm not Botta. I get nothing (repeat NOTHING) out of being supportive of the project or the team. Actually the only thing I get out of being supportive is being ripped a new a**hole every few days.
But I personally would like to see it happen because I think it would be an outstanding place to visit or even work.
I could never afford to live there as I can't afford any living in Nassau county.
I cannot vote in Nassau county. If there are those people that can that also would like to see it get accomplished, I hope they do vote. I can only hope for it.
EmptyNet - May 6, 2009 05:53 PM (GMT)
Doesn't it suck when politics and hockey collide? It just makes me feel dirty all over.
Wang keeps saying he wanted to save the Islanders, and he did but not just because he wanted to save them, he wanted to make money. I really can't blame him for that, he had an idea and tried to tackle two birds with one stone. Be a community hero and make a ton of cash off of development. I can't fault a guy who is in a position to buy a franchise to turn in to a development to make money.
Really? If you had the uber money to throw around, would you just blindly buy the Islanders after the 90s with no plan on making money?
That being said I'm glad the team is here at least for right now, and we've had almost a decade of hockey thanks to Wang, even a few years of playoff hockey.
While I personally want the lighthouse here, I hate this whole using my favorite sports team as a political ploy, though I understand it.
Does anyone know if SMG wasn't in control of parking and concessions, would the Islanders make money? I'm just getting to the point of like, could there be some last minute backup plan to save the Islanders by Nassau County should the lighthouse fall through?
The more CB writes about all those "poor Wang" articles the less I feel bad for him. Really - was the SMG contract hidden from Wang when he bought the team? Did he just write a check and not know he was going to lose money? I don't pity Wang, this isn't his first pony ride whatsoever, he knew exactly what he was getting in to, he knew what he wanted and he knew the risks. Now he's crying foul? It's not like a news flash.
LEDZEP - May 6, 2009 05:54 PM (GMT)
hockey is politics :torrey:
stevedepot - May 6, 2009 06:20 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (7th Woman @ May 6 2009, 11:24 AM) |
I'm not talking about the "rally's" Steve. She refuses to attend meetings, even with Tom Suozzi.
Not press conferences, meetings. There is a difference. She is a republican. Why wasn't she at the republican round table on sports and entertainment on Long Island? That was actually about the UFC first.
I believe in the project for Long Island. I saw the union representatives talking about their members needing jobs. I saw the representatives for other workers looking for jobs and housing and apprenticeships for the residents of the town.
I'm not Botta. I get nothing (repeat NOTHING) out of being supportive of the project or the team. Actually the only thing I get out of being supportive is being ripped a new a**hole every few days.
But I personally would like to see it happen because I think it would be an outstanding place to visit or even work.
I could never afford to live there as I can't afford any living in Nassau county.
I cannot vote in Nassau county. If there are those people that can that also would like to see it get accomplished, I hope they do vote. I can only hope for it. |
| QUOTE |
CA Founder Wang `Personally Directed' Fraud, Ex-Chief Says Share | Email | Print | A A A
By Patricia Hurtado
Sept. 4 (Bloomberg) -- CA Inc. founder Charles Wang ``personally directed and implemented'' a $2.2 billion accounting fraud, said former Chief Executive Officer Sanjay Kumar, who is serving a 12-year prison term for the scheme.
Kumar, 46, made the claim in an affidavit filed in federal court in Central Islip, New York, by lawyers for billionaire investor Sam Wyly, who runs Dallas-based Ranger Governance. Wyly and Ranger Governance are plaintiffs in a 2002 shareholder lawsuit filed against the Islandia, New York-based software maker, formerly known as Computer Associates Inc.
Kumar, who pleaded guilty in 2006 to eight counts including securities fraud, conspiracy and obstruction of justice, said a practice of inflating revenue, known as the ``35-day month'' in which the company backdated quarterly sales contracts, was ``firmly entrenched'' under Wang.
This practice ``was considered to be the way CA did business,'' Kumar said in the 27-page affidavit filed Sept. 2. ``Charles Wang who co-founded and ran CA from before that time personally directed the implementation of this practice.''
Kumar, who is serving his term in a federal prison in Fairton, New Jersey, also claimed that Lewis Ranieri, CA's former chairman, and board member Alfonse D'Amato, a former U.S. senator, ``had knowledge'' that contracts were booked late and ``took steps to protect Wang and conceal the facts.''
Wang, Ranieri and D'Amato haven't been charged with wrongdoing by federal prosecutors who investigated the case. Robert Nardoza, a spokesman for Brooklyn U.S. Attorney Benton Campbell, declined comment on Kumar's claims.
Allegations `False'
``These allegations are false,'' Lewis Liman, a lawyer for D'Amato and Ranieri, said yesterday in a phone interview. ``Mr. Kumar has pleaded guilty to lying to the company's board, its lawyers and its investors. It is regrettable that from jail, Mr. Kumar continues to be a stranger to the truth.''
Andrew Frank, a spokesman for Wang, 63, declined comment. Wang said last year in a statement that he fully cooperated with the government in its investigation and was ``devastated'' by the fraud. He said at that time that he felt ``personally wronged by Sanjay Kumar and the management team he installed.''
Wyly and his lawyers have asked U.S. District Judge Thomas Platt, who is presiding over the case, for a hearing on the matter. Last year, they asked Platt to vacate a 2003 shareholder settlement reached in the case based on ``newly discovered evidence.'' Platt denied the request and affirmed the 2003 settlement in August 2007. That decision is being appealed to the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, records show.
`New Evidence'
``We write to you today to inform you of new evidence,'' William Brewer, a lawyer for Wyly and Ranger Governance, said in a Sept. 2 letter to the court. ``It is troubling that the facts contained in the declaration have never been publicly disclosed or put before the court.''
Brewer didn't return a voice-mail message left at his office seeking comment.
CA's Special Litigation Committee said last year that it planned to sue Wang to recover some of the $1 billion it paid the founder, Kumar and other executives. In the report, the committee recommended suing Wang to recoup at least $500 million in damages related to the fraud.
The committee wrote that CA was known as a ``one-headed dragon'' while Wang led the company and that ``no significant decisions were made without his participation and approval.''
Wang's Role
The committee found that Wang encouraged and participated in the fraudulent practices, according to the report. The company filed a request to re-open the matter. In November, Platt denied the CA committee's request to re-open the settlement, saying the legal deadline for such a request had expired. Robert Giuffra, a lawyer for the committee, didn't return a voice-mail message after business hours.
The statement by Kumar contains some discrepancies. He said Ranieri knew of the booking practice when he was on CA's board in October 2000. Company records show Ranieri didn't join the board until June 2001.
Kumar also blamed wrongdoing in transactions involving one company on other CA executives. U.S. prosecutors, in their sentencing memo to the court, said Kumar directed those transactions.
Kumar also said he informed the committee of his claims and said it sought to minimize ``any damage done to D'Amato, Ranieri and Wang.''
CA spokesman Dan Kaferle said the committee conducted at least 90 interviews that included Kumar and other executives. The committee also reviewed millions of pages of documents, Kaferle said.
``Every Effort'
``The Special Litigation Committee made every effort to investigate and corroborate the information used for its report, and directed the company to take action based on that report,'' Kaferle said yesterday. ``In a matter of this complexity, one cannot draw conclusions from the uncorroborated recollections of a single individual.''
Kumar's attorney, Lawrence McMichael, couldn't immediately be reached for comment.
D'Amato, now a radio commentator for Bloomberg News, didn't return a voice-mail message left at his office after business hours yesterday and an assistant said he was traveling. Ranieri also didn't return a voice-mail message left at his office after business hours yesterday.
The case is In re Computer Associates 2002 Class Action Securities Litigation, 02-CV-01226, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York (Central Islip). |
stevedepot - May 6, 2009 06:27 PM (GMT)
here's some more WANGalamadindong crap.
LINK| QUOTE |
Former CEO Sanjay Kumar Fingers CA Founder Charles Wang
From his cell in a federal prison in New Jersey, former CA CEO Sanjay Kumar has pointed an accusing finger at CA founder Charles Wang and said that Wang was the real author of the $2.2 billion accounting fraud that sent Kumar to jail for 12 years and nearly destroyed the company.
Kumar has said such things before but this time he also claims CA co-founder Russell Artzt, now its vice-chairman, was an active participant in CA's notorious "35-day months" and that one current and two former CA board members, including former US Senator Alfonse D'Amato, former Salomon Brothers vice-chairman Lewis Ranieri and former Audit Committee member Willem de Vogel, knew all about CA's practice of keeping its books open for five days or more past the end of the quarter so it could recognize some of the next quarter's software license revenues early and meet Wall Street's expectations.
He says they conspired to stonewall the government's investigation into the fraud and protect Wang.
Everybody denies the allegations. Newsday, CA's local paper, which broke the story, says Kumar's appeal of his prison sentence is supposed to be heard this month.
Kumar's accusations come a year into his stretch in a 27-page affidavit filed with a federal court in New York on August 27 on behalf of CA stockholder Sam Wily, who has been fruitlessly trying to get the court to reopen a shareholder class-action suit settled in 2003.
When CA bought Wily's company, Sterling Software, in 2000 it paid for it in conflated stock. A quarter later, when CA pre-announced, its stock price tanked. Wily has been seeking readdress ever since, twice kicking off a proxy fight to unseat CA's board.
His lawyers are now hoping Kumar's so-called new evidence will persuade the judge to reopen the case.
Kumar, however, claims that he told this story to CA's internal investigators in 2006 and 2007 but that his version of the events never made it into the Special Litigation Committee's report that was made public, which is kind of odd considering it accused Wang of fraudulent accounting and urged legal action.
"Fraud pervaded the entire CA organization at every level, and was embedded in CA's culture, as instilled by Mr. Wang, almost from the company's inception," it said.
It also described CA under Wang as a "one-headed dragon" and said "no significant decisions were made without his participation and approval."
CA thought at the time that it could make a $500 million claim against Wang, who was never charged by the government reported because of a five-year statue of limitations. It has reportedly also asked the court to reopen the stockholders' suit.
Anyway, Kumar says that when he went to work for CA in 1987 its 35-day month was "firmly entrenched" and "considered to be the way CA did business." He claims Wang "personally directed the implementation of this practice in my presence."
More to the point, Kumar claims that Wang, then still CA's CEO, personally directed him to bring in and backdate contracts for quarters Kumar is serving time for, including sending Kumar to Paris to close a deal with AXA.
Kumar also claims that "Wang insisted that CA stonewall the government, explaining that, if CA did so, the investigation would eventually ‘go away.'"
Kumar says D'Amato was "aware of Wang's participation in those practices...and told me on more than one occasion that it was best not to discuss Wang's involvement," warning him "Don't piss on the past," which Kumar calls "D'Amato's standard phrase for instructing me not to implicate Wang."
Kumar claims Raineri, then a member of the board's Audit Committee and eventually Kumar's replacement as chairman of CA, "instructed me not to divulge the full extent of the 35-day month practice to [Walter] Schuetze, the chair of the Audit Committee" because "Schuetze would have a heart attack" and "would ‘turn on us' if he found out."
Raineri reportedly told Kumar that CA had to "play hard ball" with the government and reportedly told CA's former head of worldwide sales Stephen Richards in Kumar's presence that if he took the Fifth or told the SEC the truth that he would be fired, but "as long as he was in the company, Ranieri would protect him."
Richards lied and is now serving a seven-year sentence for obstruction of justice and perjury.
D'Amato, given his connections, was allegedly supposed to fix CA's problems with the government and arrange a settlement.
Kumar says D'Amato brought in his buddy, Sullivan & Cromwell lawyer Robert Giuffra, to run an internal investigation when the government insisted on such a probe and that "Giuffra undertook conducting CA's defense against the government investigation to minimize the investigation's depth and any damage that might be done to D'Amato, Ranieri and Wang."
According to Kumar, from 1999 through 2003 Wang paid D'Amato's consulting firm $390,000 through The Smile Train, the Wang-established charity, to make up for the consulting fees from CA that D'Amato lost when he joined the CA board.
Kumar says he found out about the payments through an "anonymous source" and offers IRS filings demonstrating payments from Smile Train to Park Strategies LLP, D'Amato's company.
D'Amato is still on the CA board; everybody else except Artzt is gone.
Artzt supposedly told Kumar "that he questioned whether I should implicate Wang when asked by the government about CA's accounting practices. By the end of the conversation, however, Artzt thought it was best not to disclose the 35-day month practice or Wang's involvement. Artzt told me to remain silent because he thought that D'Amato would ‘get this fixed.'"
Kumar says Artzt, who like Wang was never charged, "played an instrumental role in persuading a number of CA customers to sign license agreements after the close of the quarter in which the revenue associated with the agreement would be recognized." He claims Artzt knew the contracts would be backdated. |
7th Woman - May 6, 2009 06:31 PM (GMT)
Without having time to read the entire article Steve, I will respond with a few things.
1) I work in accounting for a multi-million dollar company that is privately owned.
2) I, myself, have worked with 35 day months. (Some times 40) It is basically a common practice.
3) Sam Wily is more of an underhanded crook than anyone else.
4) If the courts have already addressed these issues and wang is walking free, I'm imagining they didn't have enough to convict him and therefore he is innocent of wrongdoing.
5) In the same time that Wang is being criticized for unethical and illegal business practices, has anyone mentioned the amount of money he has given to local and global charities?
and lastly...
what the hell is robert esche still doing in net for team usa in Swtizerland. SOB!
stevedepot - May 6, 2009 06:39 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (7th Woman @ May 6 2009, 02:31 PM) |
5) In the same time that Wang is being criticized for unethical and illegal business practices, has anyone mentioned the amount of money he has given to local and global charities? |
Sam Wyly has been equally charitable over the years (maybe not on LI, but look it up) but that has zero to do with getting a gut feeling about them.
agree to disagree.
but know this. I know someone who worked at CA, for years.
But I will not start any rumors here. I'll keep that to myself.
:cheers:
Webb20 - May 6, 2009 06:43 PM (GMT)
Not for nothing steve, but posting these attacks on Wang by someone sitting in jail arent going to do a whole lot but keep Islander fans away who dont want to hear what wrongdoings Wang did at CA, they want to hear what he's going to do for the Islanders.
I'm not in Wangs corner, and I'm not happy he's made the Lighthouse a higher priority than the team, but I'm not one for crucifying the owner of our Islanders on charges he wasnt found guilty of.
It's time to look ahead at our 1st round pick, talk hockey, and hope the future is bright with the young team we're assembling.
oldislesfan - May 6, 2009 07:08 PM (GMT)
For some strange reason I have the feeling we have one or possibly two ringers from Kate Murry's office posting here. They have had nothing good to say about the Isles, ever. Pull up all kinds of data, articles, etc, that most people would not have the time to do.
The sad thing here is a lot of posters are following their crap like blind sheep.
All of a sudden Wang has turned to the dark side, and can you imagine he wants to make money. What nerve.
What the hell ever happened to "innocent until proven gulty"
BWTFDIK
stevedepot - May 6, 2009 07:20 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (oldislesfan @ May 6 2009, 03:08 PM) |
For some strange reason I have the feeling we have one or possibly two ringers from Kate Murry's office posting here. They have had nothing good to say about the Isles, ever. Pull up all kinds of data, articles, etc, that most people would not have the time to do.
The sad thing here is a lot of posters are following their crap like blind sheep.
All of a sudden Wang has turned to the dark side, and can you imagine he wants to make money. What nerve.
What the hell ever happened to "innocent until proven gulty"
BWTFDIK |
Jerry, that is EXACTLY how I feel about some fellow fans who BLINDLY follow WANGSWORLD.
No, I don't work for Murray. Not a fan.
She can't be trusted either.
Heck, if running 2 laps around someone equals a mile, something ain't right.
;)