Gladys Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 (edited) 9 hours ago, Albert Tatlock said: I'd be asking to serve my sentence in the offending jurisdiction if I were them. Not many people come out of Chinese prisons...not alive at least. Do they have the choice? They were Chinese nationals, tried in China for scams of Chinese nationals. ETA any claimed political asylum? Edited August 26 by Gladys Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amadeus Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 9 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: There an interesting comment in the BBC piece, where their informant 'Jordan' says: He did notice, however, that his new employer seemed quite secretive - for example, he and his colleagues were forbidden from taking photos at company social events. That sort of ties in with the same secrecy. Not unusual. During the 188BET annual dinner and dance in Manila you could take pictures of yourself and your mates but not of the shareholder tables at the front. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 2 hours ago, Amadeus said: Not unusual. During the 188BET annual dinner and dance in Manila you could take pictures of yourself and your mates but not of the shareholder tables at the front. What goes on in Manila stays in Manila? But this seems to have extended to all employees rather than just a few shareholders who wanted to keep a low profile. The BBC article also says: In late 2021, nearly 100 people had been transferred to the Isle of Man to work for a company which Chinese court documents refer to as "MIC". They had come from the Philippines where they had worked for another scamming firm. The BBC has discovered that MIC stands for Manx Internet Commerce. And Philippines Companies House does have an entry for an entity with the same name. Not sure what caused the move. It's interesting that Edge's WQ about visas back in April specified a start date of October 2021. I assumed she was just having a go at Cannan, but it may be she had heard something, though the Question was tabled before the raids on 24 April. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 17 hours ago, Albert Tatlock said: Why didn't you just post the link? In the case of court listings you need an image as the information will be overwritten by subsequent weeks' listings and may be meaningless even a day after it's posted. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 46 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said: And Philippines Companies House does have an entry for an entity with the same name. Not sure what caused the move. It's interesting that Edge's WQ about visas back in April specified a start date of October 2021. I assumed she was just having a go at Cannan, but it may be she had heard something, though the Question was tabled before the raids on 24 April. The FS2021 prefix to the number may mean it is some kind of foreign entity registration, possibly in 2021? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luker Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 12 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: I think that's a bit unfair. A lot of people with industry links may have felt there was something a bit odd about the business, but there were clearly parts of it that were also similar to what happens elsewhere. The employment tribunal may have revealed a secretive and exploitative employer, but there are quite a few like that. I don’t think it’s unfair at all. It’s funny how all the experts come out now posting links to tribunal hearings and other stuff that’s been online for years and saying it should have been obvious because of X, Y & Z. Yet they’ve probably spent the last few years using their anonymous account to take the piss out of MHKs and blaming government for being useless rather than trying to expose any of this stuff they now claim knowledge of. Too many making a nice tidy living out of this filthy industry to risk anything. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Buggane Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 (edited) 20 hours ago, Banker said: Whatever we think we know or say the government should have known etc, these sophisticated frauds are operated all over the world on larger or smaller scales and it’s impossible to stop everyone. Regulators or police can’t just call in at every place foreigners are staying and check if they’re fraudsters or not. How big do you think the island is and how many company's do you think there are to check. This is not Shanghai or Tokyo its a pretty small jurisdiction. Edited August 26 by Dirty Buggane 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 33 minutes ago, Dirty Buggane said: How big do you think the island is and how many company's do you think there are to check. And how many do we employ to do it and how much do we pay them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Buggane Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 Most likely quite a few on a fair few bob who sit there perusing reports written by underlings, who rang the firm up with a tick box set of questions or arranged a time to call round for a chat over coffee or maybe lunch. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 27 minutes ago, Gladys said: The FS2021 prefix to the number may mean it is some kind of foreign entity registration, possibly in 2021? I wasn't sure, hence my vague wording. I was hoping someone else might have an idea if it was that sort of thing or a local company with the same name. The Manx MIC has been around since 2017, and it will be interesting if it can be discovered if the alleged activity is said to have dated from then or more recent. Grant Thornton were appointed receivers earlier this month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 6 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said: I wasn't sure, hence my vague wording. I was hoping someone else might have an idea if it was that sort of thing or a local company with the same name. The Manx MIC has been around since 2017, and it will be interesting if it can be discovered if the alleged activity is said to have dated from then or more recent. Grant Thornton were appointed receivers earlier this month. No, I tried to find what the prefixes meant, so I could be way off. However, not sure it means very much for this discussion, other than to confirm the link with the Philippines, but we knew that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lxxx Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 In all fairness the people we have in key positions here that have had touchpoints with all this probably have little knowledge and experience in dealing with things of this nature. As we have seen over the past decade or so, it's not exactly difficult to bamboozle the great and the good of Manx government once you start waving money and grand promises around. 2 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 2 hours ago, Dirty Buggane said: How big do you think the island is and how many company's do you think there are to check. This is not Shanghai or Tokyo its a pretty small jurisdiction. What are they going to check for and under what powers? Even the people working there did not know what was going on, see the post above. The activity was probably kept in an isolated group of people completely outside of the regulated areas, so the regulator wouldn’t have access. We don't know how it all worked, so it is not possible to say how (in)effective the regulator has been. Reference has been made to government silos making the joining of dots difficult. On the one hand, you have DFE who probably have a less pessimistic/cynical approach, right through to the regulator(s), who will be very cynical. That is not to exonerate, by any means, but it probably isn’t as black and white as people are presuming. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luker Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 7 hours ago, Lxxx said: In all fairness the people we have in key positions here that have had touchpoints with all this probably have little knowledge and experience in dealing with things of this nature. Oh they do. It’s just that the party line that keeps the bumper cash coming in to their households is that it’s the best and cleanest sector all round and they’ll spread anonymous rumours about just about any other person or sector than their own. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 Just now, Luker said: Oh they do. It’s just that the party line that keeps the bumper cash coming in to their households is that it’s the best and cleanest sector all round and they’ll spread anonymous rumours about just about any other person or sector than their own. That is quite a claim, can you give an example? 1 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.