You can enter Oz via ANY airport and your goods can arrive via ANY sea-port. There is no obligation to go anywhere near Sydney if you don't want to.
I don't think you really want to agonise to the Minister, do you? Most people in your situation would simply accept the job in Adelaide, fly to Adelaide, get the goods shipped into Adelaide and get on with their lives! There are times when people simply keep their traps shut - it saves an awful lot of paperwork, you know! I doubt whether DIAC would try to cancel a sc 176 visa in your situation, even when they are told about it. There has never been a reported case in which DIAC have cancelled a sc 176 visa because of this. I think they probably think that you have to draw a line in the sand somewhere once the visa has already been granted. The immigrant will be boosting the Aussie exonomy somewhere, so does the Government really care about where?
S124 (?? it is Section One Hundred and Something, anyway) really only comes into its own when there has been a medical calamity of some sort. DIAC tend to become nosy if somebody is trying to validate a visa by making their Initial Entry to Oz on a stretcher, and sometimes the medical calamity makes it impossible to make the Initial Entry by the due date. In that situation, there is no option but to tell DIAC about the medical calamity, obviously.
Also, in another case that I read about, the visa holder had broken his shoulder badly but he had also got married between the grant of the visa and his Initial Entry. There is a Visa Condition that says the visa holder must not marry before making the Initial Entry - that Condition was slapped onto my 84 year old widowed mother when her Contributory Parent Visa was granted in 2006. She's in a wheelchair, and I had a delicious image of Mum trundling into the old folks home near me in the UK, kidnapping some decrepit old codger from there, marrying him with the aid of a shotgun and then bundling him onto the same flight out to Oz as herself! Mum's generation don't remarry on the whole, when a very long marriage has ended in the death of the other spouse, so I really wondered what on earth DIAC were doing, slapping such a daft Condition on Mum's visa! The idea of Mum with a toyboy was inconceivable to anyone who knows her, and the CO knew how old she was. They'd seen Mum & Dad's Marriage Certificate and they'd also seen Dad's Death Certificate. Where was their sense of proportion, I wondered?!
When I read the Tribunal report about the first case, my impression was that the Medical Officer of the Commonwealth was not worried about the shoulder injury, even though it had not been disclosed, but his other colleagues in DIAC seemed to have been mighty p*ssed off about the chap's marriage. Marriages of convenience are illegal in Australia, so DIAC expect to have a proper chew of the legal cud if a visa applicant has a Partner stashed away and they positively spit their dummy if the visa holder has allegedly suddenly had a whirlwind romance, especially when he was a High Risk visa applicant in the first place! That much seemed clear.
Is yours a sc 176 visa or a 475, please? There are a couple of extra steps when the visa is a 475 but if you have a 176 then we needn't worry about that.
Does this help?