Cicero 5,267 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 6 minutes ago, True Blue said: Well now it is obvious we won't get a new striker in time for the pre season. Unless we sign him mid pre season and he joins the team. He will have limited time to gel with the team who ever he turn out to be. Fail to prepare, prepare to fail. You teach grade school kids this shit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redcanuck 175 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 2 hours ago, The Liquidator said: For some reason Sky have felt the need to break what they call exclusive news Sky Sources: Chelsea have serious & strong interest on signing Sergio Aguero from Manchester City They say, they first heard this from a source over the weekend, but now have had it confirmed from other sources Seems highly unlikely that City would sell Aquero to a club that finished above them last season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cicero 5,267 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Very little to go by, but Belotti didn't appear in Torino's new kit reveal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Liquidator 259 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 1 hour ago, Redcanuck said: Seems highly unlikely that City would sell Aquero to a club that finished above them last season. Yeah I agree with you. However, I am not convinced their new manager believes Aguero is good for him. Sky are becoming like the weather man, giving you all options before telling you.... "told you so" I wonder if this is a smoke screen for the true target? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cicero 5,267 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 10 minutes ago, The Liquidator said: Yeah I agree with you. However, I am not convinced their new manager believes Aguero is good for him. Sky are becoming like the weather man, giving you all options before telling you.... "told you so" I wonder if this is a smoke screen for the true target? BEEEELOTTTIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike 5,109 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 1 hour ago, Redcanuck said: Seems highly unlikely that City would sell Aquero to a club that finished above them last season. I disagree. Guardioloa doesn't want Aguero and there are very few possible destinations for transfer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cicero 5,267 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Odds of Conte walking grow each day Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike 5,109 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 2 minutes ago, Cicero said: Odds of Conte walking grow each day You need to calm the fuck down, m8. The pre-season just bloede started. Plenty of time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redcanuck 175 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 1 hour ago, The Liquidator said: Yeah I agree with you. However, I am not convinced their new manager believes Aguero is good for him. Sky are becoming like the weather man, giving you all options before telling you.... "told you so" I wonder if this is a smoke screen for the true target? More likely Sky looking to intice people to bet. There are always smoke screens and Chelsea have to sign some striker if they let Costa go. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redcanuck 175 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 1 hour ago, Spike said: I disagree. Guardioloa doesn't want Aguero and there are very few possible destinations for transfer. I think Aquero to Arsenal for Sanchez is more likely than City selling to Chelsea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFCMadLad 2,080 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Roman's getting bored. Was always going to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cicero 5,267 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 2 minutes ago, Spike said: You need to calm the fuck down, m8. The pre-season just bloede started. Plenty of time. He has a squad of 17 players at his disposal. We are getting rid of far too many players without having replacements coming in. Conte has always expressed the importance of pre-season work and training. Conditioning and tactics being a huge part of it. There is a reason why Conte is holding back in signing an extension. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike 5,109 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 47 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said: Roman's getting bored. Was always going to happen. ? The club has been very 'frugal' for several years now. Chelsea hasn't spent over 34,000,000 pounds on a transfer in seven years. It's the club's new business model. I don't think there has been a transfer made by Abramovic's money in a while. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike 5,109 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 49 minutes ago, Cicero said: He has a squad of 17 players at his disposal. We are getting rid of far too many players without having replacements coming in. Conte has always expressed the importance of pre-season work and training. Conditioning and tactics being a huge part of it. There is a reason why Conte is holding back in signing an extension. The club is trying to be self-suficient. There has been too much wasteful spending, no more are the days where the club will drop an obscene amount of cash on players like Cuadrado. This isn't new, the club is very methodical and slow in the transfer market. People still think that Chelsea are a spending machine like United or City but that hasn't been true for years, big money does get thrown around but to the extent of those two clubs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFCMadLad 2,080 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 35 minutes ago, Spike said: The club is trying to be self-suficient. There has been too much wasteful spending, no more are the days where the club will drop an obscene amount of cash on players like Cuadrado. This isn't new, the club is very methodical and slow in the transfer market. People still think that Chelsea are a spending machine like United or City but that hasn't been true for years, big money does get thrown around but to the extent of those two clubs. Of course Roman wants Chelsea to be self sufficient. You don't think he continually wanted to plough his own money into it do you? It would also defeat the purpose of what he actually bought the club for, which was to clean his Russian mafia money. He does it by paying clubs an extra couple of million to report sales of £60m for players such as Oscar when in fact Chelsea probably received about £20m. This then enables Roman to put £40m of his mafia money through Chelseas books. Simple laundering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike 5,109 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 (edited) 17 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said: Of course Roman wants Chelsea to be self sufficient. You don't think he continually wanted to plough his own money into it do you? It would also defeat the purpose of what he actually bought the club for, which was to clean his Russian mafia money. He does it by paying clubs an extra couple of million to report sales of £60m for players such as Oscar when in fact Chelsea probably received about £20m. This then enables Roman to put £40m of his mafia money through Chelseas books. Simple laundering. That is just conjecture. It would be far more refined that what you are proposing and I doubt he needed to spend a billion dollars to clean some chump change. I'm sure there are far easier ways for him to launder in his native Russia and I doubt that going through a famous football club is the easiest hoop to jump through. Edited July 17, 2017 by Spike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Liquidator 259 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 2 hours ago, Redcanuck said: More likely Sky looking to intice people to bet. There are always smoke screens and Chelsea have to sign some striker if they let Costa go. Very well said Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFCMadLad 2,080 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 4 minutes ago, Spike said: That is just conjecture. It would be far more refined that what you are proposing. You believe what you want. I'll believe that Roman bought Chelsea on the cheap with one intention. To build it into a top club that could justify his money laundering because he's as dodgy as fuck and needed to clean his money. Or it could be that he really really loves Chelsea football club and always dreamt of owning them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick 2,283 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 1 minute ago, LFCMadLad said: You believe what you want. I'll believe that Roman bought Chelsea on the cheap with one intention. To build it into a top club that could justify his money laundering because he's as dodgy as fuck and needed to clean his money. Or it could be that he really really loves Chelsea football club and always dreamt of owning them. I believe it's the second one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFCMadLad 2,080 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 3 minutes ago, FOYM said: I believe it's the second one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike 5,109 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 1 minute ago, LFCMadLad said: You believe what you want. I'll believe that Roman bought Chelsea on the cheap with one intention. To build it into a top club that could justify his money laundering because he's as dodgy as fuck and needed to clean his money. Or it could be that he really really loves Chelsea football club and always dreamt of owning them. I'll believe that he owns dozens shell companies throughout the world that he launders money through, with a confusing paper trail to the moon and back. I really doubt he does in a publicly visible company. Love and dreamt of owning them? Pull the other one; there is a grey area between the two extremes. There isn't anything odd about an eccentric billionaire playing football manager. Chelsea is a toy, not a tool. For fucks sake mate, it is public knowledge he owns shell companies in Panama. I really doubt he needed to buy Chelsea and invest a billion pounds to 'clean his money', he'd have been doing that for the previous decade with far more refined means through internal corruptions and connections. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFCMadLad 2,080 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 1 minute ago, Spike said: I'll believe that he owns dozens shell companies throughout the world that he launders money through, with a confusing paper trail to the moon and back. I really doubt he does in a publicly visible company. Love and dreamt of owning them? Pull the other one; there is a grey area between the two extremes. There isn't anything odd about an eccentric billionaire playing football manager. Chelsea is a toy, not a tool. For fucks sake mate, it is public knowledge he owns shell companies in Panama. I really doubt he needed to buy Chelsea and invest a billion pounds to 'clean his money', he'd have been doing that for the previous decade with far more refined means through internal corruptions and connections. You see, you are even admitting how dodgy he is. He's not going to be able to clean the amount of money he extorts through Shell garages ffs He's a crook, well known to be involved with the Russian Mafia. People who think he's 'in it' for the love of Chelsea are just kidding themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike 5,109 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Just now, LFCMadLad said: You see, you are even admitting how dodgy he is. He's not going to be able to clean the amount of money he extorts through Shell garages ffs He's a crook, well known to be involved with the Russian Mafia. People who think he's 'in it' for the love of Chelsea are just kidding themselves. No shit he is dodgy, I never once said he wasn't. How do you know that his company cannot? I really doubt either know the finances of companies as large and powerful as Abramovic's, and I doubt either of us could ascertain how much money can be extorted through a shell company. I never said he was in it for love, in fact I outright rejected that idea and called the club a toy. I sincerely doubt it took him over a decade to figure out a method of cleaning money. Hang on a sec, do you even know what a shell company is? I'm not talking about the bloody gas/oil company! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike 5,109 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 (edited) @LFCMadLad Read this: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-shell-companies-launder-dirty-money/ https://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/setting-up-your-own-tax-haven-shell-company-takes-10-minutes/7297094 It is for this reason I doubt he uses Chelsea to launder. Not that I'm biased, but I just don't believe using a publicly well known entity like Chelsea (where everyone known the owner) is a particularly smart method of laundering. I really doubt he doesn't use anonymous shell and dummy companies for that, even legitimate organisations like Disney use the later for working it's way around laws. You can literally Google 'Cayman Islands shell corporation' and in ten minutes you're an anonymous owner of a 'company'. I am 100% certain that the man owns a web of shell corporations to launder through, I wouldn't be surprised if there were shell corporations that owned other shell companies to muddy the waters further. Edited July 17, 2017 by Spike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFCMadLad 2,080 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 2 minutes ago, Spike said: @LFCMadLad Read this: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-shell-companies-launder-dirty-money/ https://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/setting-up-your-own-tax-haven-shell-company-takes-10-minutes/7297094 It is for this reason I doubt he uses Chelsea to launder. Not that I'm biased, but I just don't believe using a publicly well known entity like Chelsea (where everyone known the owner) is a particularly smart method of laundering. I really doubt he doesn't use anonymous shell and dummy companies for that, even legitimate organisations like Disney use the later for working it's way around laws. You can literally Google 'Cayman Islands shell corporation' and in ten minutes you're an anonymous owner of a 'company'. I am 100% certain that the man owns a web of shell corporations to launder through, I wouldn't be surprised if there were shell corporations that owned other shell companies to muddy the waters further. Fair enough. I've been told off by Stan so we'll have to leave it there mate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.