Tony Xia (no longer involved with AVFC)

[7392craig]

3 minutes ago, Phumfeinz said:

I'm fairly certain they are working on transfers as we speak, guys. They can't just snap their fingers and say "we want your player, give him to us". With respect to outgoings, we all saw how shit our bad players are. I'd be amazed if anyone was willing to take the likes of Gabby/Bacuna/Lescott off our hands. It's going to be hard as **** to move these players on.

I swear some of you folks think Xia and Matteo are just sitting around drinking beer in the sunshine chatting about Pokemon Go or something. They're working on it, I'm sure.

I don't think they're doing nothing as such. I'm concerned that either we've spent our budget or DiMatteo is happy with the squad as it is. I'm not sure which one would worry me the most. I know I could be completely wrong, it's just a dark cloud of negativity I've become associated to with us, and I'm looking for real signs to be positive. We've heard owners come out with the "biggest club in the world" statement before.

[Phumfeinz]

Cancelling the contracts asap and getting the miserable stink out of the club would be favourable going forward imo, but I suspect that if no-one wants to buy them then Matteo is going to be content giving them a run in the Championship to see how they fare in a lower division.

[AntrimBlack]

38 minutes ago, Richard said:

About the shit players I've just posted this on another thread...

Think about it like this.  Are we saying we wont be able to shift the shit players?

Well if thats the case then they are with us until their contracts run down and we have several Nzogbia type situations.  They will hardly play and contribute nothing apart from bad atmosphere stinking the club out and effectively taking up a squad place and wages from someone else and preventing us from improving.  If the whole idea is that we should improve and there are funds available then cutting losses on some of them now may be a huge benefit.  Players like Lescott, Guzan, Gabby, Bacuna if these are the ones we believe we cannot get rid of them to another club and we all know they will be shit for us,  what do we do? I would suggest that cancelling a few contracts would be the wisest move if we are sure no one wants them.

No point in cancelling their contracts this early. Surely we need to give it a bit of time to see if anyone comes in for them.

[Godders]

1 hour ago, backofthenet said:

New company address at villa park

I take it you've been through all the companies registered at all the football stadiums in the UK and confirmed that they're all only football related businesses then?

 

1 hour ago, backofthenet said:

run by a mate of Chris Samuelson called Jamie banfill who from what I hear specialises in shifting money around an no apparent expertise in the health food industry

 An awful lot of people in this world specialise in shifting money around. Anyone who works in the finance industry in most capacities will specialise in moving money around. It's an incredible assumption to make that they're all crooks. Also, he's a director. Your point pretty much falls flat on it's face when you consider that there are plenty of above-board directors of successful businesses who have little to no working knowledge of the industry the business operates in.

Be honest here - if you were reading that, say West Brom, had registered a new company at their stadium that didn't seem to be football related, would you reach the conclusion that something was very fishy about how that club was run? Because if not, you're letting your bias against Samuelson cloud your judgement.

1 hour ago, backofthenet said:

seems completely normal!!

Correct. It does.

I honestly don't know why you think you're able to see what everyone else can't and that AVFC is doomed by who we have in charge. In this takeover there would have been countless lawyers, bankers and accountants involved, all of whom have their own, and their company's reputation to protect. They wouldn't have done this deal if it wasn't above board. The football league and the premier league have both had their lawyers and corporate intelligence people scrutanise this takeover and those involved, and they've said everything and everyone is above board. Some Journalists have done their best to try and dig something up and not been able to. Some Journalists have spoken to those involved and surmised that this takeover is above board. The ex Chairman of the Bank of England said of the takeover when asked that the future looks bright for the club, clearly he's happy everything is above board. 

You can carry on thinking that the club is f**ked if you want. You would have to be smarter than all of these people put together to be right though.

[srsmithusa]

I personally think that cancelling a few contracts will be the best option for us after two things have happened, but not before:

1) it is perfectly clear that nobody is willing to come and offer anything.  It makes more sense to pay off 3/4 of a contract than to pay off a full contract.

2) RDM is convinced that the right coaching and/or mental outlook will rapidly change both the player performance AND the fans patience with the player.

My guess is that he is getting close to confident on the second, hence his recent statement that he needs to move some players out.  But it's too early to feel confident on the first.

Serious question.  can a club sell a contract?  i.e. here is Jolean and his contract, we will pay you XXX to take them both.  Jolean gets his salary, the new team gets him at a greatly reduced total cost/risk, we pay out much less than buying out his contract.

[backofthenet]

25 minutes ago, Godders said:

I take it you've been through all the companies registered at all the football stadiums in the UK and confirmed that they're all only football related businesses then?

 

 An awful lot of people in this world specialise in shifting money around. Anyone who works in the finance industry in most capacities will specialise in moving money around. It's an incredible assumption to make that they're all crooks. Also, he's a director. Your point pretty much falls flat on it's face when you consider that there are plenty of above-board directors of successful businesses who have little to no working knowledge of the industry the business operates in.

Be honest here - if you were reading that, say West Brom, had registered a new company at their stadium that didn't seem to be football related, would you reach the conclusion that something was very fishy about how that club was run? Because if not, you're letting your bias against Samuelson cloud your judgement.

Correct. It does.

I honestly don't know why you think you're able to see what everyone else can't and that AVFC is doomed by who we have in charge. In this takeover there would have been countless lawyers, bankers and accountants involved, all of whom have their own, and their company's reputation to protect. They wouldn't have done this deal if it wasn't above board. The football league and the premier league have both had their lawyers and corporate intelligence people scrutanise this takeover and those involved, and they've said everything and everyone is above board. Some Journalists have done their best to try and dig something up and not been able to. Some Journalists have spoken to those involved and surmised that this takeover is above board. The ex Chairman of the Bank of England said of the takeover when asked that the future looks bright for the club, clearly he's happy everything is above board. 

You can carry on thinking that the club is f**ked if you want. You would have to be smarter than all of these people put together to be right though.

Like I said earlier let's wait and see shall we but as the villa supporters club have asked for a meeting to question the make up of the board I'm hardly on my own in being concerned about this guy that no one has ever heard of buying the club

and a point that I've raised before is that why xia didn't appear to have another soul from the recon group attached to Aston villa, every single member of the board is connected to Chris Samuelson who has a chequered past when it comes to having involvement in football clubs

if you think this is completely normal then fair enough

[Barney_avfc]

He used to be a striker. Sign him up! Likes long sleeves though,  so Under Amour will have to pull there finger out 

[limpid]

3 hours ago, backofthenet said:

New company address at villa park run by a mate of Chris Samuelson called Jamie banfill who from what I hear specialises in shifting money around an no apparent expertise in the health food industry

seems completely normal!!

My employer has a lawyer on the board, an accountant, someone who deals with marketing, someone who does HR, someone that looks after customer services and someone else that does sales.

We deliver parcels.

This is completely normal. A business is run by a team with a variety of skills.

[limpid]

51 minutes ago, backofthenet said:

Chris Samuelson who has a chequered past when it comes to having involvement in football clubs

Please provide evidence for this or retract it.

[Zatman]

4 minutes ago, Barney_avfc said:

He used to be a striker. Sign him up! Likes long sleeves though,  so Under Amour will have to pull there finger out 

the Chinese Doug Ellis?

[Heretic]

I hope we can start a song about our owner having more shadows than yours?

 

 

 

 

 

 

(4 to be precise).

[backofthenet]

17 minutes ago, limpid said:

Please provide evidence for this or retract it.

Retract what? That he has a chequered past, Google Chris Samuelson and FBI I'd say that's chequered

[limpid]

17 minutes ago, backofthenet said:

Retract what? That he has a chequered past, Google Chris Samuelson and FBI I'd say that's chequered

Please provide evidence. Telling me to Google is not providing evidence. Google has lots of things that are true and lots of things that aren't. If I get asked for your details as part of a libel case, I'd like to think you have a way to defend yourself. Telling a judge to "Google" will get you locked up for contempt.

Let's start by listing the charges the FBI have brought as part of their extradition request (NB. There isn't one). The FBI only have jurisdiction within the US, so you are alleging an offence has been committed by him either in the US or against a US citizen who cannot act on their own behalf (who or what was this?). Go on, Google.

Or retract your statement as it's just you repeating things you found elsewhere on the internet without substantiation.

[TheStagMan]

4 hours ago, villa89 said:

Agreed. We're much better off getting more retired army general's who wouldn't know a soccerball if one hit them in the head on the board.

*thud* Hey, errrrrr, why is this ball a funny shape guys?

[TheStagMan]

3 hours ago, StefanAVFC said:

Jeremy Corbyn is looking tired these days...

[backofthenet]

52 minutes ago, limpid said:

Please provide evidence. Telling me to Google is not providing evidence. Google has lots of things that are true and lots of things that aren't. If I get asked for your details as part of a libel case, I'd like to think you have a way to defend yourself. Telling a judge to "Google" will get you locked up for contempt.

Let's start by listing the charges the FBI have brought as part of their extradition request (NB. There isn't one). The FBI only have jurisdiction within the US, so you are alleging an offence has been committed by him either in the US or against a US citizen who cannot act on their own behalf (who or what was this?). Go on, Google.

Or retract your statement as it's just you repeating things you found elsewhere on the internet without request to attend cou

http://www.gudavadze.com/court.news.christopher-samuelson-denies-money-laundering-allegations.html

there you go, after reading that that was in the telegraph in 2012 gives me my opinion that someone has a chequered past secondly I didn't state anyone was charged with any offence

Edited July 18, 2016 by limpid
fixed broken quote

[limpid]

26 minutes ago, backofthenet said:

http://www.gudavadze.com/court.news.christopher-samuelson-denies-money-laundering-allegations.html

there you go, after reading that that was in the telegraph in 2012 gives me my opinion that someone has a chequered past secondly I didn't state anyone was charged with any offence

From that link (which appears to be a random conspiracy theory site, not the telegraph):

Quote

Samuelson responded to The Daily Telegraph: “I have no knowledge of being investigated as Adler claims” and described her statement as “farcical”.

I'd rather assume he's innocent until there is some evidence. Accusations are not evidence.

[maqroll]

[backofthenet]

17 minutes ago, limpid said:

From that link (which appears to be a random conspiracy theory site, not the telegraph):

I'd rather assume he's innocent until there is some evidence. Accusations are not evidence.

You can assume that if you wish but given this an the similarities between our takeover and that of reading fc I'll remain very sceptical until I see otherwise

[limpid]

3 minutes ago, backofthenet said:

You can assume that if you wish but given this an the similarities between our takeover and that of reading fc I'll remain very sceptical until I see otherwise

I'm not really assuming it, it's the law of the land.

What similarities? You mean the takeover of Reading that didn't happen? In what way is that similar and why are you blaming one individual for its failure when you know nothing about why it failed?