It's happening. 

https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/sport/17405193.bolton-wanderers-close-to-takeover-from-uk-based-consortium/

Thank fuck

1 minute ago, JJ10 said:

Can it fuck 😂.... you can’t just pump £1m of dodgey money from nowhere to a solicitor for them to send it back and it all of a sudden be ‘clean’ without ever being checked or investigated 😂

This just got interesting

It tends to be a little more sophisticated to avoid detection, but in principal it doesn't have to be. That is the placement of dirty money into the system, potentially with layering if it moves between solicitors. The money is then extracted from the solicitors' account back to the party making the payment and integrated back into the business operations of the party to whom it was paid. It may need to be disguised eg as a "compensation payment" or some other legitimate sounding legal transaction, but it will have been received from a "clean" source. Money will then be distributed by that company / recipient and it's gone.

Solicitors, Banks, accountants etc are meant to conduct checks / report suspicious activity to prevent a risk of money laundering, but that won't always happen. And because of the above, Birch is right that it is more common to see much more complex methods of placement, layering and integration / extraction through cash payments (disguised as revenue), that is then treated as profit with tax being be paid on it. It's not always done that way, though. 

Have a read of the Solicitors Regulatory Authority note on money laundering and see if you can spot anything familiar in terms of money laundering red flags.

https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/guidance/warning-notices/Money-laundering-and-terrorist-financing--Warning-notice.page

Edited April 28, 20197 yr by Jol_BWFC

5 hours ago, Jol_BWFC said:

It tends to be a little more sophisticated to avoid detection, but in principal it doesn't have to be. That is the placement of dirty money into the system, potentially with layering if it moves between solicitors. The money is then extracted from the solicitors' account back to the party making the payment and integrated back into the business operations of the party to whom it was paid. It may need to be disguised eg as a "compensation payment" or some other legitimate sounding legal transaction, but it will have been received from a "clean" source. Money will then be distributed by that company / recipient and it's gone.

Solicitors, Banks, accountants etc are meant to conduct checks / report suspicious activity to prevent a risk of money laundering, but that won't always happen. And because of the above, Birch is right that it is more common to see much more complex methods of placement, layering and integration / extraction through cash payments (disguised as revenue), that is then treated as profit with tax being be paid on it. It's not always done that way, though. 

Have a read of the Solicitors Regulatory Authority note on money laundering and see if you can spot anything familiar in terms of money laundering red flags.

https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/guidance/warning-notices/Money-laundering-and-terrorist-financing--Warning-notice.page

What a crock of shit.

You just pasted this from somewhere else and don't understand what you're talking about.

 

Where’s H and John Galt when you need them?

31 minutes ago, Mantra said:

Where’s H and John Galt when you need them?

One or both could be back next week, watch this space.

We're about to be discussed on Sunday supplement, if anyone's assed 

14 minutes ago, auckland_bwfc said:

We're about to be discussed on Sunday supplement, if anyone's assed 

Just caught the back end, the last journo seemed to think we are £200m in debt still - we’re the rest as Ill informed? Depressing viewing no doubt

12 minutes ago, Biggish Dave said:

Just caught the back end, the last journo seemed to think we are £200m in debt still - we’re the rest as Ill informed? Depressing viewing no doubt

Yep, and the bloke supposedly used to cover Wanderers for the MEN. 

https://mobile.twitter.com/SundaySupp/status/1122417169873108992

Or should I call it the Meano.

24 minutes ago, Biggish Dave said:

Just caught the back end, the last journo seemed to think we are £200m in debt still - we’re the rest as Ill informed? Depressing viewing no doubt

They are all quoting a £200 million  figure that is included in today's Times article

 https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/sport/striking-players-money-woes-and-furious-fans-will-boltons-turmoil-ever-end-0th29vnng

 

 

 

 

 

£200m has got to be a joke, no way on earth can we be in so much debt, not having it, sorry.

Haha fuckin ell imagine if it was somehow £200m

I’ve just seen the Times piece, they also seem to think we are a nomadic club, what the fucks that all about? 

Complete lack of understanding, it just shows for such a big story they can’t be arsed looking into it. It’s just lip services ahead of Man United v Chelsea 

A sad state of affairs indeed 

16 minutes ago, Benny The Ball said:

They are all quoting a £200 million  figure that is included in today's Times article

 https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/sport/striking-players-money-woes-and-furious-fans-will-boltons-turmoil-ever-end-0th29vnng

 

 

 

 

 

I used to like Rod Liddle and found him amusing in an un pc kind of way. If all his articles are as accurate as this though shows him up to be just a grandstanding populist goon. Basically using our plight to make fun of us northern monkeys the two faced millwall muppet. £200 million debt, nomads, trotting through filth, looking down on us hes really enjoying it isnt he? Jog on you cahnt

Nixon latest:

BOLTON. There is a new buyer around. Maybe even more than one. Contact made. Bassini has until Monday. Admin an option. Ameobi wanted in China.

Another pat on the head article. Poor old Bolton Wanderers. Anyway back to the title race.

Fuck off Worzel Gummidge cunt may as well not have bothered.

2 minutes ago, Clarence Carter said:

Ameobi wanted in China.

Presumably for crimes against football?

£200m is frightening, 

6 minutes ago, Leyther_Matt said:

Presumably for crimes against football?

Seeing the trouble Jack Bauer had in China i don't fancy Ameobi's chances much.

3 minutes ago, Tommy Banks said:

£200m is frightening, 

It’s also not true.

200 million my arse! Have these journalists forgotten to take off all the debts that Eddie wrote off into account?

25 minutes ago, Leyther_Matt said:

Presumably for crimes against football?

With some of their air pollution, he'd not even make the pitch!

3 hours ago, irvtheswerv said:

What a crock of shit.

You just pasted this from somewhere else and don't understand what you're talking about.

 

It couldn't have been pasted from a legal source as they know the difference between "principal" and "principle".

56 minutes ago, Benny The Ball said:

They are all quoting a £200 million  figure that is included in today's Times article

 https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/sport/striking-players-money-woes-and-furious-fans-will-boltons-turmoil-ever-end-0th29vnngcouldnt read it as i dont subscribe. but how in the hell can we be 200m in dept. sure he muct be talking about depts that e davies wrote off. unless his family want it back but cant see thats possible if its wiped out

 

 

 

 

 

 

We have no idea about the current level of debt as the accounts haven't been published for two years. The only thing we do know is that the business has been in the hands of a guy previously convicted for syphoning company funds into his personal accounts. And with Anderson handing out NDA's to everyone who has tried to invest in the club over the last two years, nobody who has had the chance to find out what's really going on has been in a position to talk about it. 

That said, the chances of the Times having got the real inside story are negligible. This is a Murdoch company after all, a world in which the facts are usually irrelevant. It's just lazy journalism.

The real level of debt will eventually come out though.

The national media generally know fuck all about provincial clubs...Folk in Bolton who don't even follow football are probably more well informed than clowns like Liddle.