AI Spam Report Reference Thread

[lovesmayfamilis]

I have noticed that Copyleaks sometimes works by detecting AI where there is none.

Hmm, can you share some false positives that you encountered while scanning? IMO, Copyleaks will give you false negatives way more than false positives, unlike Sapling AI. I mean, I am not arguing with you in any sense, but to me it is very rare to have a false positive in Copyleaks, compared to other detectors (even GPTzero).   

For a long time, I couldn't remember where I had seen posts that Copyleaks identified as written by 100.0% AI, and only today I found them. Other detectors say that the text was written by a person or partially by AI. The fact that there is no AI in these texts makes me doubt it, but to rely only on Copyleaks and send a report to the moderators, frankly speaking, I did not dare.

Adding to what’s been said here, I think the core of Giovanni’s Power Law Theory is less about trying to predict exact prices and more about understanding Bitcoin’s deep structural behavior over time and the consistency of that behavior in mathematical terms. It’s refreshing because instead of chasing short-term market noise or narratives, it takes a step back and asks: What if Bitcoin behaves like a natural law?

Now, sure, some folks (like franky1) rightly point out that adjusting parameters across cycles weakens the “law” status. That’s a fair critique if your model needs constant tweaking, is it really a law or just a fancy fit? But I’d argue that what Giovanni is offering isn’t about perfection; it’s about probabilistic guidance. That’s still valuable, especially in a space where chaos and speculation are the norms.

Also, what struck me was the analogy to living systems cities, mountains, even organisms. That’s powerful. It reframes Bitcoin not just as digital gold or a financial tool, but as something with its own internal logic, a kind of economic biology driven by scarcity, time, and energy.

Where this theory shines is in its philosophical implications:

Bitcoin isn’t just “money” it’s a self-governing system of economic order.

Halving doesn’t break it it amplifies the law of conservation.

Scarcity isn’t a constraint it’s the source of its value continuity.

That said, we should be cautious about hero-worshipping any one model. Giovanni’s work is exciting, but science thrives on falsifiability. If it’s a real theory, it should hold up under scrutiny, over time, and without needing to fudge the inputs every few years.

Maybe the real takeaway isn’t that he’s predicted the future but that he’s pointing us toward a different way of thinking about Bitcoin: not just in charts and cycles, but in laws and lifecycles.

Honestly, I think what’s happening with central banks and financial institutions selling gold to the public is kind of revealing. It’s not just about gold as an investment—it’s about trust.

Central banks usually guard their gold like a dragon guards treasure, right? But now, some of them are quietly allowing regular people to access tiny slices of that same gold. Coins, bars, digital tokens, gold-backed bonds whatever form it takes, the message is the same:

“We know people are worried about inflation, about weak currencies, about instability… so here’s a more solid option.”


It’s not them dumping gold or trying to get rid of it. In fact, many central banks are buying more gold behind the scenes. What they’re doing is kind of strategic—they’re giving the public access to gold as a safety valve. It’s like saying:

 “We still control the system, but if you need to protect yourself, here’s something trusted.”


To me, that’s powerful. Gold isn’t just an ancient relic anymore. It’s becoming relevant again not as the main currency, but as a quiet backup. A side-door out of a failing system.

And you can see the shift happening especially in countries with economic trouble Turkey, Zimbabwe, Nigeria, India. In those places, people don’t want to hold cash anymore. They trust gold more than their own currency. And governments are realizing it’s better to let them hold gold, in a controlled way, than to push them toward dollars or crypto.

So my take?

If you’re in a country where inflation is rising or the local currency is shaky, owning some gold makes sense—even just a gram at a time.

But be smart. Don’t just buy anything that says “gold.” Look into how it’s stored, if you can redeem it, how easy it is to sell later.

And finally this might be a sign that the world is slowly drifting away from total faith in fiat money. Not overnight, but step by step. And that’s worth paying attention to.

🚀 Making Bitcoin Fast, Cheap & Ready for Everyone: Layer 2s

So here’s the thing Bitcoin is amazing when it comes to security and being a decentralized store of value, but let’s be honest: it’s not the best when it comes to speed or low fees for everyday payments. That’s where Layer 2 technologies come in they’re like add-ons that make Bitcoin faster, cheaper, and more useful without messing with its core foundation.

Let’s break it down 👇


⚡ 1. Lightning Network (LN)

This is the big one. Think of it like a fast lane built on top of Bitcoin.
You can send or receive Bitcoin instantly, and it costs almost nothing.
It’s great for small stuff like buying coffee, tipping online, or sending money across borders.
Apps like Strike, Cash App, and Wallet of Satoshi already use it, and it’s spreading fast.


Why people love it: It's fast and private.
What’s still tricky: It can be a little technical to use, especially for people who aren’t Bitcoin nerds yet.


🏛️ 2. Fedimint – Community-powered Bitcoin banks

This one is new and exciting. It’s all about local communities setting up their own mini-banks to share Bitcoin in a more private way.

You don’t need to deal with big exchanges.
You can hold Bitcoin privately, and even grandma in the village could use it if someone sets it up for her.
It’s perfect for places where the government can’t be trusted or banks don’t work.

Real-world vibe: Local people, local Bitcoin, global freedom.
Backed by: Obi Nwosu, a respected Bitcoin advocate.


🧩 3. Ark Protocol – Still early, but looks promising
This one’s still in development, but here’s the cool idea:
You can receive Bitcoin without being online.
You don’t need to open special channels or deal with the headaches of other tech.
It focuses on privacy you can send and receive money without anyone watching.
It's not ready yet for the masses, but the idea is gaining attention in Bitcoin dev circles.


🧠 So, Why Should You Care About Layer 2?

Because without them, Bitcoin would never be able to scale to billions of people using it every day.

Right now, Bitcoin can only handle 7 transactions per second. Visa handles thousands. If we want Bitcoin to be used globally — in Nigeria, Argentina, the US, everywhere — it has to work better, faster, and cheaper. That’s what Layer 2s help with.


⚔️ The Big Debate in the Bitcoin World

Some people say:

> “Let Bitcoin be digital gold. Don’t mess with it. Just hold and forget.”

Others say:

> “If Bitcoin is going to actually help people escape bad currencies and oppressive systems, it has to be usable — not just something you store.”

Honestly? They both have a point. That’s why these Layer 2 solutions are such a big deal — they let us keep Bitcoin’s rock-solid base, but make it usable on top.


🎯 The Bottom Line

Bitcoin Layer 2s are opening the door to things like:
Everyday spending
Borderless micro-payments
Better privacy
Community ownership

Less reliance on banks or middlemen
It’s Bitcoin growing up — not by changing its DNA, but by building better tools around

[Z_MBFM]

- These three accounts have been revived after a long time and are posting Ai. So can it be said that the 3 accounts belong to the same person?

Nice catch. Their AI posts have already been deleted, probably the moderator deleted them. I don't think there is one real owner of these accounts because they have different registration years and there is also an account registered in 2017. These are completely brand new accounts so tagging them is pointless. Maybe they were given the opportunity so only their posts were deleted by the moderator without red tag.

[memehunter]

Other detectors say that the text was written by a person or partially by AI.

Upon scanning with GPTZero (origin) and stealth writer, these posts are giving a high detection rate. IMO, it is comparatively rare to see a post detected as AI by Copyleaks but not by other detectors. I still think the combination of Copyleaks + GPTZero is quite good. 

@purple_sparkles, please do not pm me again regarding removing neutral feedback unless you have made 100 quality posts. I can see that you are using humanizers, consider this as a friendly suggestion, 'do not dig a deeper hole for yourself'.

[memehunter]

I have a query for @Ultegra134, @nutildah, @lovesmayfamilis, @Dark.Look, + any other member who deals with AI detection.
I checked the post history of one account (can't disclose, don't want to make the AI spammers smarter + I can't prove anything right now). Out of his last 50 posts, 32 are showing 100%  detection by Sapling AI. No other detector like Copyleaks and GPTzero is showing AI. Posts are long and detailed (IMO, AI). What do you make of it? 
IMO, this is a case of humanizing AI content. I mean, is it normal to have such a high amount of false positives by Sapling AI? Have you encountered this before?
I can pm the details to @Ultegra134, @nutildah, @lovesmayfamilis with the condition of confidentiality. 
I am not accusing anyone right now. It is a part of my brainstorming to detect AI spammers who are using humanizers.

[leonair]

user BankyCrypt65 Create a topic on Bitcoin Discussion by AI BTC Movement: Is It Just Market Activity or Now Fundamentally Driven?

The recent tension in the Middle East - particularly between Iran and Israel - seems to be reshaping how Bitcoin (BTC) reacts to global events.

Initially, BTC was responding mostly to buyer momentum, trading steadily. But on June 22, things changed dramatically. Iran launched missiles at Israel, followed by Israel’s retaliation, causing a sharp drop in BTC price, dipping below $99K.

Then, on June 23, an Iranian nuclear plant was reportedly hit. Instead of another dip, BTC reacted bullishly - breaking the usual war-dip pattern. The following day, June 24, BTC continued to climb after former U.S. President Donald Trump called for a ceasefire, calming market fears and boosting risk appetite.

While analyzing charts via TradingView on BingX, I noticed:

A strong resistance forming around $106K. If broken, BTC may push toward $107,500 and $109K.

On the downside, if support at $104K fails, BTC could fall to around $102,200.
There was liquidation on those traders who sort BTC yesterday due to surge in price movement majorly as a result of the ceasefire announcement.

I also ran a check using BingX AI to get insights into possible fundamental impacts. The AI hinted that current events are playing a strong role in BTC’s behavior.

So the big question remains:
Is BTC still mainly driven by trader activity and technical patterns, or are we seeing a shift where global fundamental events - like wars and diplomacy - are steering the market?

copyleaks.com ---100% AI Content Found
app.gptzero.me -- 98% AI generated

[Dr.Lender3]

I have a query for @Ultegra134, @nutildah, @lovesmayfamilis, @Dark.Look, + any other member who deals with AI detection.
I checked the post history of one account (can't disclose, don't want to make the AI spammers smarter + I can't prove anything right now). Out of his last 50 posts, 32 are showing 100%  detection by Sapling AI. No other detector like Copyleaks and GPTzero is showing AI. Posts are long and detailed (IMO, AI). What do you make of it? 
IMO, this is a case of humanizing AI content. I mean, is it normal to have such a high amount of false positives by Sapling AI? Have you encountered this before?
I can pm the details to @Ultegra134, @nutildah, @lovesmayfamilis with the condition of confidentiality. 
I am not accusing anyone right now. It is a part of my brainstorming to detect AI spammers who are using humanizers.

I'm not good at English, so I have to communicate with my client by using Google Translate.
Even though I write by myself without using any AI agent,
but I have noticed that most of the time, AI detector tools give false positive results when I check my writings.

Example:
I wrote it by myself without using any AI agent; it is totally my experience-based writing:

আমি bitcointalk ফোরামের একজন মেম্বার। আমি এই ফোরামকে অনেক ভালোবাসি। আমি এই ফোরামে অনেকদিন হলো যুক্ত হয়েছি এবং এর লেখাগুলো পড়তে আমার অনেক ভালো লাগে। আমি সর্বপ্রথম আমার একজন বন্ধুর কাছে এই ফোরাম সম্পর্কে জানতে পারি, সে আমাকে শিখিয়েছে কিভাবে বিটকয়েন কিনে সঠিকভাবে হোল্ড করতে হয়। সে আমাকে কিছু বিটকয়েন কিনেদিয়েছে এবং একটি সফটওয়্যার ওয়ালেট ইনস্টল করে প্রাইভেট কীয় সংরক্ষণ করা শিখিয়েছে। পাশাপাশি আমাকে ফোরাম এ যুক্ত করে দিয়েছে যাতে করে আমি এই কমিউনিটি থেকে উপকার পেতে পারি। আমি আমার বন্ধুর প্রতি অনেক কৃতজ্ঞ। ধন্যবাদ।

Translator output:

I am a member of the bitcointalk forum. I love this forum. I have been a member of this forum for a long time and I really enjoy reading its posts. I first came to know about this forum from a friend of mine, he taught me how to buy and hold bitcoins properly. He bought me some bitcoins and taught me how to install a software wallet and store my private keys. He also added me to the forum so that I can benefit from this community. I am very grateful to my friend. Thank you.

AI detector Result:
Copyleaks: 0% AI-generated
Sapling: 100% AI-generated


By using sapling i just give an example. Not only Sapling but also other AI detector like Copyleaks/gpt zero/undetectable...... gives false positive results if you use translator tools.

[Ultegra134]

I have a query for @Ultegra134, @nutildah, @lovesmayfamilis, @Dark.Look, + any other member who deals with AI detection.
I checked the post history of one account (can't disclose, don't want to make the AI spammers smarter + I can't prove anything right now). Out of his last 50 posts, 32 are showing 100%  detection by Sapling AI. No other detector like Copyleaks and GPTzero is showing AI. Posts are long and detailed (IMO, AI). What do you make of it?  
IMO, this is a case of humanizing AI content. I mean, is it normal to have such a high amount of false positives by Sapling AI? Have you encountered this before?
I can pm the details to @Ultegra134, @nutildah, @lovesmayfamilis with the condition of confidentiality.  
I am not accusing anyone right now. It is a part of my brainstorming to detect AI spammers who are using humanizers.

Feel free to contact me with more details. I've had a few false positives (or negatives) with Sapling.ai, but never that many as in your case. I don't consider it a 100% trusted AI detector, but it hasn't failed me in most cases. Let me know which user it is and I'll check their posts as well, if something is fishy I'll get back to you as soon as possible. What other detectors did you try out, except GPTZero and Copyleaks? Originality and Winston.ai are 95% spot-on, but they're paid tools and if my memory serves me right, Originality stopped providing free credit trials.

[memehunter]

I have a query for @Ultegra134, @nutildah, @lovesmayfamilis, @Dark.Look, + any other member who deals with AI detection.
I checked the post history of one account (can't disclose, don't want to make the AI spammers smarter + I can't prove anything right now). Out of his last 50 posts, 32 are showing 100%  detection by Sapling AI. No other detector like Copyleaks and GPTzero is showing AI. Posts are long and detailed (IMO, AI). What do you make of it?  
IMO, this is a case of humanizing AI content. I mean, is it normal to have such a high amount of false positives by Sapling AI? Have you encountered this before?
I can pm the details to @Ultegra134, @nutildah, @lovesmayfamilis with the condition of confidentiality.  
I am not accusing anyone right now. It is a part of my brainstorming to detect AI spammers who are using humanizers.

Feel free to contact me with more details. I've had a few false positives (or negatives) with Sapling.ai, but never that many as in your case. I don't consider it a 100% trusted AI detector, but it hasn't failed me in most cases. Let me know which user it is and I'll check their posts as well, if something is fishy I'll get back to you as soon as possible. What other detectors did you try out, except GPTZero and Copyleaks? Originality and Winston.ai are 95% spot-on, but they're paid tools and if my memory serves me right, Originality stopped providing free credit trials.

I have checked in Copyleaks and Origin GPTzero only apart from Sapling AI. I know Sapling AI can give false positives, but IME, this is the only one that is hard to bypass if you are using humanizers or copy-paste translation.
I have pmed you the user's profile in question.
Yes, many good AI detectors now require paid subscriptions. You can bypass that with vpn and all, but I am not suggesting that 
 

[nutildah]

Out of his last 50 posts, 32 are showing 100%  detection by Sapling AI. No other detector like Copyleaks and GPTzero is showing AI. Posts are long and detailed (IMO, AI). What do you make of it? 
IMO, this is a case of humanizing AI content. I mean, is it normal to have such a high amount of false positives by Sapling AI? Have you encountered this before?

There's a couple reasons for this:

1. Sapling will give a result no matter how small the input text is. So it will give a result even if there is only 10 words, which is not a big enough sample size for it to give an accurate result.

2. Sapling detects Google Translate & Grammarly rephrasings as AI-generated, which is correct, because they are. However, using AI in this regard is not as bad as using it to construct a post from the ground up. So this is why its good to use another detector (or two) in concert with Sapling, to rule out the chance that these are (semi) false positives.

I'm not good at English, so I have to communicate with my client by using Google Translate.
Even though I write by myself without using any AI agent,
but I have noticed that most of the time, AI detector tools give false positive results when I check my writings.

This is because Google Translate uses AI. Sapling detects this while the other detectors don't.

[memehunter]

1. Sapling will give a result no matter how small the input text is. So it will give a result even if there is only 10 words, which is not a big enough sample size for it to give an accurate result.

The posts of the user in question are not short by any means, with around 800-1100 characters on average.

Posts are long and detailed

 

his is why its good to use another detector (or two) in concert with Sapling, to rule out the chance that these are (semi) false positives.

That's the catch, though, otherwise, I would have already posted the username in public.

This is because Google Translate uses AI. Sapling detects this while the other detectors don't.

IME, this is also right, Sapling is good at narrowing down spammers, but again, one detector (who has so many proven false positives) is not proof to accuse someone.

I have heard back from @Ultegra134, and he has the same opinion as I have . Thanks for all his efforts to go through all the details.

[lovesmayfamilis]

As far as I could tell, for Sapling.ai everything would be AI if there were very few grammatical errors in the text. However, the absence of errors cannot be evidence of the use of AI, and at the same time, grammar-checking tools are becoming more and more perfect every time. Additionally, I can add that the use of words that AI loves is becoming a normal phenomenon for most people since most websites and news on the Internet pass their materials through a robot, and we are simply used to using these words more often. As a result, it is difficult to say who picks up frequently used expressions from the Internet faster, a bot or a person.

[memehunter]

As far as I could tell, for Sapling.ai everything would be AI if there were very few grammatical errors in the text.

IMO, this assumption is wrong.

However, the absence of errors cannot be evidence of the use of AI,

Agreed. I am sure everyone would agree to this while investigating any post for AI. 

the use of words that AI loves is becoming a normal phenomenon for most people since most websites and news on the Internet pass their materials through a robot, and we are simply used to using these words more often.

Hmm, interesting, but I still think it is very hard to match the perplexity (which is the basis of AI detection) of an AI chatbot, especially with so many long and detailed posts.

[Ultegra134]

New user who's asking on how to get merit by using AI to write the even simplest sentence for him. Posts reported and hopefully detected, will also neutral tag him.

User: Dhadse55

Post 1.

Honestly, this is one of the more interesting real-world use cases I've seen lately. Unlike most NFT projects that offer just digital art or hype-based utility, Delorean seems to be building something practical by tying NFTs to vehicle reservations. If DMC can truly be used for future purchases or exclusive perks, it brings real value—and that’s what the Web3 space needs right now. The fact that it’s launching via Bitget also adds credibility. I’ll be keeping an eye on how the token performs post-launch. If executed right, this could set a new standard for legacy brands entering crypto.

Copyleaks: AI Content Detected
GPTZero: 32% AI generated | 43% Mixed | 25% Human
Sapling.ai: 100% Fake

Post 2.

Hi everyone! I'm still new here and trying to improve my post quality. I’ve read a lot about the merit system and understand it's important for ranking up, but I’m not sure what exactly makes a post “merit-worthy.” Is it about length, research, or timing? I’d love to know what type of content usually earns merit and what mistakes I should avoid as a beginner. Any tips or advice would be appreciated!

Copyleaks: AI Content Detected
GPTZero: 100% AI generated
Sapling.ai: 100% Fake

Post 3.

Lately, I've been reading a lot about AI-based cryptocurrencies like Fetch.ai (FET) and Render Token (RNDR). With the growing use of artificial intelligence in Web3, I wonder if these altcoins will lead the next big wave in the market. Some say they’re overhyped, while others believe they have real-world utility. I'm curious to know what experienced community members think about these projects. Are they solid long-term holds, or just part of the current AI trend? Would love to hear your views.

Copyleaks: AI Content Detected
GPTZero: 100% AI generated
Sapling.ai: 100% Fake

Post 4.

Thank you for your honest feedback.

I understand how my post might have come across, and I appreciate you pointing it out. You're absolutely right—as a new member, I have much more to learn about how this forum works and how to contribute meaningfully.

I've already started reading the “Newbies — Read Before Posting” thread you linked, and I plan to focus on engaging with quality content and not just the earning side.

Thanks again for guiding me in the right direction—I’ll do my best to grow properly here. 🙏

— Nikhil

Copyleaks: AI Content Detected
GPTZero: 99% Mixed
Sapling.ai: 100% Fake

[Z_MBFM]

New user who's asking on how to get merit by using AI to write the even simplest sentence for him. Posts reported and hopefully detected, will also neutral tag him.

Nice catch. This user created an account yesterday and is running around for merit today and he is posting AI. This is very funny.

As far as I could tell, for Sapling.ai everything would be AI if there were very few grammatical errors in the text. However, the absence of errors cannot be evidence of the use of AI, and at the same time, grammar-checking tools are becoming more and more perfect every time. Additionally, I can add that the use of words that AI loves is becoming a normal phenomenon for most people since most websites and news on the Internet pass their materials through a robot, and we are simply used to using these words more often. As a result, it is difficult to say who picks up frequently used expressions from the Internet faster, a bot or a person.

I don't understand how to use Sapling.ai. I couldn't find any option on its website how to check text with it. I saw instructions there to download the chrome extension, which I did, but it doesn't work properly for me. What could be the solution? I copied some fake detected posts from this topic and pasted them there, but I don't see any results. Is it a problem with my PC, or is it a misunderstanding of my way of working?

[Ultegra134]

Nice catch. This user created an account yesterday and is running around for merit today and he is posting AI. This is very funny.

I don't understand what such people are trying to pursue, do they really think they'll get far by using AI? Especially when they're asking how to get merit, with a post created with AI. That's pathetic.

I don't understand how to use Sapling.ai. I couldn't find any option on its website how to check text with it. I saw instructions there to download the chrome extension, which I did, but it doesn't work properly for me. What could be the solution? I copied some fake detected posts from this topic and pasted them there, but I don't see any results. Is it a problem with my PC, or is it a misunderstanding of my way of working?

What do you mean? Sapling.ai is the most straightforward scanner, doesn't require an account, you just paste the text on the landing page's text box and press "Check" or "Check again". Are you using the right link? I wasn't even aware there was an extension.

https://sapling.ai/ai-content-detector

[Z_MBFM]

I don't understand how to use Sapling.ai. I couldn't find any option on its website how to check text with it. I saw instructions there to download the chrome extension, which I did, but it doesn't work properly for me. What could be the solution? I copied some fake detected posts from this topic and pasted them there, but I don't see any results. Is it a problem with my PC, or is it a misunderstanding of my way of working?

What do you mean? Sapling.ai is the most straightforward scanner, doesn't require an account, you just paste the text on the landing page's text box and press "Check" or "Check again". Are you using the right link? I wasn't even aware there was an extension.

https://sapling.ai/ai-content-detector

Thanks for sharing the direct link. I have only been using sapling.ai for a while now, but I couldn't find any text box on its home page where I could check any text. My stupid mind never thought that ai-content-detector could have a separate page. Thank you, I can use it now.

[babo]

https://sapling.ai/ai-content-detector

in my experience it's not a decent scanner, it has a lot of false negatives, so I would just avoid using it
gptzero is the one that has given me the most satisfaction at the moment, exactly the best even if you can't use it much, since it requires payment

but couldn't theymos buy it and use the API to check every post inserted? is bad idea?

[Bitcoin Smith]

~
but couldn't theymos buy it and use the API to check every post inserted? is bad idea?

Still, we can't be sure that it has 100% accuracy and for the fact no detector can promise 100% accuracy because LLM uses what humans wrote in the past, so it is possible for someone to write something that can be flagged for AI.

Even though spam is against the forum rules, still it's not enforced strictly unless the user create spams too often.

But what can be done is to add something that show us what's the percentage of AI text present in every post using what you suggested can be helpful and it can be next to merit button or anywhere that looks good.

[memehunter]

https://sapling.ai/ai-content-detector

in my experience it's not a decent scanner, it has a lot of false negatives, so I would just avoid using it
gptzero is the one that has given me the most satisfaction at the moment, exactly the best even if you can't use it much, since it requires payment

but couldn't theymos buy it and use the API to check every post inserted? is bad idea?

Yes, you cannot use Sapling AI in isolation for a single post, but it is good at detecting humanized and similar posting styles. Your suggestion of using an API is good, but it has to be a combination of at least two detectors. IMO, Copyleaks + GPTZero. It will create some barrier to AI spam for sure.

[SatoPrincess]

I responded to this post last week and it caught my eye. It’s uncommon to see a legendary account using AI to generate posts, I would like to hear his response. So far I haven’t seen any posts in his account history that is AI written. The post I quoted looks human written but the source link clearly shows that it’s gotten from ChatGPT. I want to know, are cases like this given a pass?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/35383362/man-utd-transfer-news-live-hojlund-rashford-mbeumo-updates/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Apparently some big Italian clubs are interested in Manchester United player Hojlund. Currently Inter are in the lead, and also have the player's appreciation but the English club would like a direct transfer, Inter instead opts for a loan with obligation to buy! As a third striker he would be ideal for Inter, even if honestly I would never spend 45 million for a reserve
What are your opinions?