Is This The Same Brent Coralli?

97keepersdad wrote:

Blank77 wrote:

GrandTXSoccer wrote:He didn't make a mistake, he knowingly broke the law. You don't have to be well versed in the law to know that being a bookie (or even an agent for a bookie, that's kind of like saying that a pimp is just an agent for a prostitute) is wrong. A mistake is forgetting to pay a parking fine, getting busted as part of a HUGE criminal conspiracy is not.

I really don't care what happens to Sting or this guy but stop acting like what he did was no big deal.

It isn't that big of a deal, and he is being punished criminally.  I just don't think it is on the level as the sexual, physical, drug related crimes out there.  I also don't believe that he should resign HIS company and leave the community in shame.

If he was a coach, this wouldn't keep him from coaching.

It is that big of a deal.  This is not his first go around with illegal gambling.  Also taking some guy for $400,000 on an investment scam.

This idiot is the owner of a youth soccer club.  His first concern should be setting the right example for the kids.  It's bad enough he's rippng off the families with his cheap knockoff uniform crap.

Plain and simple.....THE GUY IS A SCUMBAG!

You obviously have something personal here - I don't know this guy at all and just going by what I have read briefly.  That investment thing, there is no way to tell what happened.  There is no case, people get sideways all the time on those types of deals and saying this guy was the crook and not the other is pure speculation.

I am pretty sure that the owner's of most entities are owners because they want to make money first and provide a good customer experience second.  

I won't defend the uniforms, you got me there - although in a group the size of Sting, I doubt any decisions are done by one guy.  The group has a whole decides where to cut corners and increase profit.

If this guy really gets to you, the obvious course of action is to play somewhere else.  Honestly, if you don't play for Sting, I am not sure why you would care.  From what I see, the obvious trend (now this is just in the 01 world) is that people are flocking to Sting - so besides having the founder be a bookie, they must be doing something right.

layinlow wrote:

aTmAg wrote:Wasn't the $400,000 case was dropped?  I saw something about that when I was googling for details about this case.  

It was dropped but I can promise you it happened.  The only reason I know is because he and his father scammed my friends and I out of 100k.  They had another group they got for 100k at the same time as us.  They're good at stealing from people and know what it takes to not get in trouble thru the court system.  My lawyer told me my group had no chance in court and it wasn't worth my money.

Hopefully the IRS gets him good on this one.

The IRS needs to check him for sure, and the chick from Planet Popcorn. Anyone watch The Profit on CNBC, good show.

It was dropped but I can promise you it happened. The only reason I know is because he and his father scammed my friends and I out of 100k. They had another group they got for 100k at the same time as us. They're good at stealing from people and know what it takes to not get in trouble thru the court system. My lawyer told me my group had no chance in court and it wasn't worth my money.

It appears that it was not just dropped but thrown out by the judge. I don’t know what investments are involved, but could it be that they were merely high risk investments that didn’t work out? Is it possible that he sucks at investing? It seems to me that he can only do something like this for so long. Who in their right mind would invest money with him now after this has been made public? I don’t know what other ventures he has going, but it wouldn’t surprise me to see him sell Sting in the future. It’s one thing he’s got which has real value.

aTmAg wrote:

It was dropped but I can promise you it happened.  The only reason I know is because he and his father scammed my friends and I out of 100k.  They had another group they got for 100k at the same time as us.  They're good at stealing from people and know what it takes to not get in trouble thru the court system.  My lawyer told me my group had no chance in court and it wasn't worth my money.

It appears that it was not just dropped but thrown out by the judge.  I don’t know what investments are involved, but could it be that they were merely high risk investments that didn’t work out?  Is it possible that he sucks at investing?  It seems to me that he can only do something like this for so long.  Who in their right mind would invest money with him now after this has been made public?  I don’t know what other ventures he has going, but it wouldn’t surprise me to see him sell Sting in the future.  It’s one thing he’s got which has real value.

I hope so.  Then maybe the club can get a real name and real uniforms.  

When did he buy sting?

Edit: It seems that it was in 2007. That's pretty recent. HS Juniors who are "lifers" have been with the club longer than Brent Coralli. Yet some here would expect those girls to leave teams that they helped build right before their most important recruiting year? All because a guy they never met and who has no real influence in their lives broke a gambling law? That is asking way too much.

97keepersdad wrote:

layinlow wrote:

aTmAg wrote:Wasn't the $400,000 case was dropped?  I saw something about that when I was googling for details about this case.  

It was dropped but I can promise you it happened.  The only reason I know is because he and his father scammed my friends and I out of 100k.  They had another group they got for 100k at the same time as us.  They're good at stealing from people and know what it takes to not get in trouble thru the court system.  My lawyer told me my group had no chance in court and it wasn't worth my money.

Hopefully the IRS gets him good on this one.

Oh good, so it's a family business.  A family of scumbags.

http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Vulture_s_Wisdom.html?id=jY36PAAACAAJ

Blank77 wrote:

You obviously have something personal here - I don't know this guy at all and just going by what I have read briefly.  That investment thing, there is no way to tell what happened.  There is no case, people get sideways all the time on those types of deals and saying this guy was the crook and not the other is pure speculation.  

I am pretty sure that the owner's of most entities are owners because they want to make money first and provide a good customer experience second.  

I won't defend the uniforms, you got me there - although in a group the size of Sting, I doubt any decisions are done by one guy.  The group has a whole decides where to cut corners and increase profit.

If this guy really gets to you, the obvious course of action is to play somewhere else.  Honestly, if you don't play for Sting, I am not sure why you would care.  From what I see, the obvious trend (now this is just in the 01 world) is that people are flocking to Sting - so besides having the founder be a bookie, they must be doing something right.

Sting players must buy their kit from a company called Vola Sports.

Take a look at who owns/manages "Vola Sports":  Vola Sports

BTW:  the quality of the $600+ Vola kits was pathetic.  Numbers peeled off jerseys, backpack stitching unraveled, socks lost elasticity, etc...  

Sure the uniform quality clearly sucks and they are over priced, but you guys act like there is some conspiracy on who the owner of Vola is. It's not like a congressman is rewarding a contract to his wife's company our anything. He has a right to pick whatever uniform provider he wants. Coralli easily could have just made it part of Sting rather than a second company named Vola.

aTmAg wrote:Sure the uniform quality clearly sucks and they are over priced, but you guys act like there is some conspiracy on who the owner of Vola is.  It's not like a congressman is rewarding a contract to his wife's company our anything.  He has a right to pick whatever uniform provider he wants. Coralli easily could have just made it part of Sting rather than a second company named Vola.  

I've been reading this thread off and on with little concern about the outcome. From the gist of things, Coralli is a scoundrel, he got busted, sounds like he ripped some investors off who made very stupid decisions to invest in anything with the words "Peruvian Lottery" in the title, and now he has probably bought his way out of the problem with some high-priced legal council. None of it seems to really impact Sting... except the part about the uniforms.

I've never seen more effort at spin control on here than that posted by aTmAg thus far. Are you and Coralli related, in business together, or married? The uniforms are lousy, over-priced, mandated by Sting, and made by yet another company this conman owns. But isn't Sting a "non-profit" organization? And here we have the owner of the "non-profit" using it to garner for-profit money. What a tangled web he has woven. It sure sounds like this guy knows how to run a scam; and we probably only know about 1% of it.

Uncle Numanga wrote:What if it's found that he was using Sting to launder money?

Or perhaps any of these entities:

Jet Text, Sting Group Holdings, Royal Nation, Texas Titans Futbol, Coralli Inc., etc....

Mia Hamster wrote:

Uncle Numanga wrote:What if it's found that he was using Sting to launder money?

Or perhaps any of these entities:  

Jet Text, Sting Group Holdings, Royal Nation, Texas Titans Futbol, Coralli Inc., etc....

Farrow Tech?

Blank that avatar is just wrong! I thought you were defending the guy....make up your mind.

Obviously, he needs a criminal attorney.

It is interesting, wondering if any Sting involvement at all. Feds probably like "it's only soccer". He does need a criminal lawyer and probably a tax lawyer. Next shoe to drop.

Never met the man, not sure that I'd want too. Seems to be a great deal of hope and speculation that he being a bookie is going to somehow affect HIS club or other assets. Unless he was dumb enough (and the man doesn't strike me as dumb) to use proceeds from his gambling enterprise for his personal assets and/or legitimate businesses or is forced to liquidate assets/holdings to cover legal proceeding and penalties, those personal assets and/or legitimate business will (rightly) remain his property. The IRS will get involved if it is determined that taxes were not paid on the gains from those illegal activities, so there is still hope for those of you that don't enjoy the services of a good bookie. Couple other points of interest:

1. Depositing different businesses into separate legal entities is a sound business practice that mitigates risk; allowing those separate entities to trade with each other protects revenue streams. Individuals buy property to lease back their other businesses all on the time; providing poor quality uniforms for top dollar is not just greedy, but poor business... Put THAT CRAP on your product? $600?Now I see why they're always a sting uniform for sale...

2. The girls that play for Sting are not assets; they are clients. If the CEO of the bank that's owns your mortgage gets convicted of being a bookie, it doesn't relieve you of your monthly mortgage payment. You are entitled to change your mortgage to a bank devoid of crooks (good luck).

3. Playing poker with your friends at a buddy's house for real money is not illegal; if your buddy is collecting a fee or a portion of the gambling proceeds to host the game at his house is illegal.

4. Some solace for Sting Parents: According to the Sopranos, crooks don't hire crooks to run their legitimate businesses.  But, just to be safe, I would I wouldn't withhold the club payment until you find out what the "juice" is.

5. "Owners" typically don't see profits if they don't provide good customer experiences. If your dd enjoys her Sting coaches, teammates and she is on her way to being the next Mia Hamm, BC has fulfilled his obligation to you.

I've never seen more effort at spin control on here than that posted by aTmAg thus far. Are you and Coralli related, in business together, or married? The uniforms are lousy, over-priced, mandated by Sting, and made by yet another company this conman owns. But isn't Sting a "non-profit" organization? And here we have the owner of the "non-profit" using it to garner for-profit money. What a tangled web he has woven. It sure sounds like this guy knows how to run a scam; and we probably only know about 1% of it.

I've never met the guy, and I think he is a jackass. I know a coach who was on the Titan side who told me some dirt stories about him. Nothing about scams, but about him throwing F-bombs and being a jackass in negotiation involving teams/parents.

My main argument is the implication that "any coaches or players who willingly stay a part of Sting/Titans are complicit in his jackassery" is a load of crap.

My secondary argument is that the whole gambling thing is bogus crime, IMO. There are no victims, the state of Texas hypocritically encourages gambling through the lottery, etc. The FBI and police would be better served if they were directed to find murderers, and whatnot.

JustaSport wrote:
 But isn't Sting a "non-profit" organization?  And here we have the owner of the "non-profit" using it to garner for-profit money.  What a tangled web he has woven.  It sure sounds like this guy knows how to run a scam; and we probably only know about 1% of it.  

Just to be clear, Sting is not a non-profit organization. A non-profit entity is not "owned" by a single person or group of people. It has no owners. It's overseen by a board of directors. It has no equity that can be bought or sold.

There is a related entity Sting Soccer Foundation that is non-profit. It's stated mission in the latest Form 990 IRS filing I could find (2011) is, "Providing scholarships to young soccer players in need of financial assistance." Actually, there's an interesting section that expands on that mission that states something to the effect of the foundation will assist players with dues at any soccer club (I find that hard to believe). Also according to this filing BC does not directly receive any compensation from Sting Soccer Foundation, but does serve as its president.

There are other legal/tax advantages of having a non-profit entity related to a for-profit soccer club which includes fundraising, land ownership, etc. Other local clubs have similar legal entity structures.

aTmAg wrote:
My secondary argument is that the whole gambling thing is bogus crime, IMO.  There are no victims, the state of Texas hypocritically encourages gambling through the lottery, etc.  The FBI and police would be better served if they were directed to find murderers, and whatnot.

Prostitution is a victimless crime too. So does that mean you'd be okay having your daugter associated with a person who runs a call girl service? You may be able to personally reconcile the moral relativism argument, but I think most people cannot.

Prostitution is a victimless crime too. So does that mean you'd be okay having your daugter associated with a person who runs a call girl service? You may be able to personally reconcile the moral relativism argument, but I think most people cannot.

Depends on what you mean by "associate"? If the pimp owns a lot of stock in Adidas and my daughter likes to buy Adidas cleats, then I have no problem with that association. She never meets or even knows the pimp exists. Obviously, I wouldn't want her meeting or interacting with the guy ever.

The same is true with Coralli. If she likes her coach and her teamates (and I'm ok with the price), then I'd have no problem with that association. Sting players are customers of Sting and are far removed from Coralli himself. Most probably never heard of the guy and they likely never met the dude except for maybe a yearly speech at a banquet or something.

aTmAg wrote:

Prostitution is a victimless crime too. So does that mean you'd be okay having your daugter associated with a person who runs a call girl service? You may be able to personally reconcile the moral relativism argument, but I think most people cannot.

Depends on what you mean by "associate"?  If the pimp owns a lot of stock in Adidas and my daughter likes to buy Adidas cleats, then I have no problem with that association.  She never meets or even knows the pimp exists.  Obviously, I wouldn't want her meeting or interacting with the guy ever.  

The same is true with Coralli.  If she likes her coach and her teamates (and I'm ok with the price), then I'd have no problem with that association.  Sting players are customers of Sting and are far removed from Coralli himself.  Most probably never heard of the guy and they likely never met the dude except for maybe a yearly speech at a banquet or something.

aTmAg: You are one Slippery Dude. Okay, answer this:
What if the soccer club owner was a bookie AND a pimp, who owned a lot of Adidas AND Nike stock, and was seen at your favorite coffee shop... While leaving it is noticed that he was wearing an Under Amour shirt ... Would you PERSONALLY think it would MORALLY appropriate to allow your dd to have her favorite drink--cookie crumble mocca from that SAME shop??  

Probably not. Too much caffeine.