Our new website is coming soon, give it a try now and let us have your feedback. Take me to the Beta



Register
Login:
Share:
Email Facebook Twitter

TSX Lithium explorer International Lithium Corp prepares to drill at Raleigh Lake Watch Now

TSX Lithium explorer International Lithium Corp prepares to drill at Raleigh Lake
Exclusive: Hardman & Co Investor Forum - Severn Trent, Calculus Capital, Volta Finance, Residential


Frontera Resources Share Chat (FRR)



There is currently no data for Frontera Resources.


Share Discussion for Frontera Resources




View all FRR Messages

Please login or register to post a message on Share Chat.

Posts per page:

Previous Share Chat Page
2
Tsbs
Posts: 9,686
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
25 May '19
at least we only have got to wait until tuesday to know our fate

cant see hope going to court

if they sign then it will be relief to all of us then i expect an ocs to be reached
 
jester16
Posts: 8,977
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
25 May '19
They need some strong evidence that's all I'm going to say.
Arsenal221
Posts: 34,922
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
25 May '19
On Frr winning their claim against Hopeless then anything awarded to them can go towards the pay off or maybe pay off the L/Notes completely & still have a nice looking amount of $s left.

In the end though we need to see that Frr have signed the declaration to the court by Tuesday 28 May & on that coming about then Frr should be looking to be in a fairly strong position for the claim, if not strong one.
jester16
Posts: 8,977
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
25 May '19
No matter what we say on here it all comes down to how the judge sees it and he has to follow the law. Whatever is written in that contract is legally binding he has to follow what the law stipulates otherwise theres no point in having rules and regulations. Gla
StarRage
Posts: 2,437
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
25 May '19
Madp, with interest the debt is now already over $30m.

Plaintiffs Frontera Resources Corporation (“FRC”) and Frontera International Corporation (“FIC”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs” or “Frontera”) seek a preliminary injunction to enjoin and restrain defendants Stephen Hope (“Hope”), Outrider Management, LLC and Outrider Onshore, LP (collectively, “Defendants”) from “directly or indirectly” causing Outrider Master Fund, L.P. (“OMF”), a Cayman Islands entity that is not a party to this action, from exercising OMF’s rights as a secured creditor in possession of a promissory note for which FIC is indisputably in payment default and in arrears for over $30 million.
Arsenal221
Posts: 34,922
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
25 May '19
Madp
Agree that if Frr can show the court that it can pay off L/Notes within 12mths or pay the the amount into Escrow then the full trial will be down to the Frr claim against Hope & its cronies.
Gipps51
Posts: 351
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
25 May '19
Your right, I did miss the point. Thank you.
Madpunter
Posts: 2,060
Premium Chat Member
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
25 May '19
Gipps - Your missing the point. IMHO as FRR required SH/O off the board, they gave him the opportunity to liquidate FRCC, which first required his resignation. IMHO this was the risk to FRR in allowing the liquidation process to be initiated. If FRR get as far as the trial, then IMHO they will have shown that they can pay the $22.9m within 12 months or they will have paid it already into Escrow. As long as FRR are certain the debt owed to SH/O is covered, then even if they lose the case against SH/O there is no risk of losing Block 12. IMHO the trial is then just about winning damages off SH/O, with the only risk to FRR being to lose and have to pay the court costs.
Gipps51
Posts: 351
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
25 May '19
Madpunter.

Oopsi said he would never advise a client that they would have a better than 70% chance of winning. I would not be happy with a 30% chance of losing in open court and I dont believe Zaza would take that risk. . It would certainly put us in the driving seat to get a good deal though.
WHamBoy
Posts: 456
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
25 May '19
I think Goit has hit the nail on the head.
1 - back in December the plan was to get Hope off the board and pay him off via the Durham loan.
2 - Starage listed all the docs on this BB which highlighted the mis-information re the interest payment, causing the Nomad to resign. Hope it seems then acted to ensure we were unable to get a new Nomad. On this basis, the Durham loan fell through.
3 - without a Nomad we entered in to a delaying game, making regular money from the wells and finding new money via the $150m loan
4 - as MadPunter says, the plan is now to prove solvency and then come back in some form. And as others have explained, the solvency issue is now the real key to our survival.
GLA
Goit
Posts: 366
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
24 May '19
As someone mentioned on here I think the original Plan B was the durham loan, which, i'm guessing got thwarted by the unexpected delisting of the shares. Win or lose we would of had the money to pay Hope off and maybe some bonus money from the fiduciary case. Since delisting, it looks like we've been riding the wave and I'm guessing trying to buy time to get another loan (or a better option). Showing that FRR can get 150mil loan solves the solvency issue immediately but it may be on very unfavorable terms but lets face it, most would rather lose a leg than be on the chopping block. Let's hope the production numbers and scaling that can be achieved in the 12 months can easily service the debt already. The extra time bought by all the legal fiasco has definitely allowed work on the ground to progress still - if nothing else, strengthening FRR's position.

I seem to remember one of the emails posted on here that came before the others regarding the loans, where Hope is asking about the fire-sale price of the assets. Whether or not it was chronologically before the veto'd loan talk I cannot remember. I would say that is a pretty strong piece of evidence of his lack of fiduciary concerns for the company, specially if that is his first solution to FRR's financial problems...

Both sides seem to be claiming they were triumphant in the Caymans, it would be interesting to actually know the real story there.
Flakey5185
Posts: 850
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
24 May '19
Painful ODR, just goes to show what a perilous position we are in here, whether those of us that are trying to stay positive choose to believe it or not.
GL ODR
OneDayRodney1
Posts: 2,468
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
24 May '19
spike: I am afraid that this: 'good lawyers only take cases they will win' line just doesn't hold true alas. They just get rich whatever. My only other (albeit much smaller) investment was CHL and posters kept saying that we would win the all determining court action as Clifford Chance only take cases they will win. Well we lost everything ... although Clifford Chance weren't out of pocket and live (richer) to fight another day...
Madpunter
Posts: 2,060
Premium Chat Member
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
24 May '19
Gipps - The risk of FRR losing the lot is prior to a jury trial and the risk of SH/O losing the lot starts with the jury trial. IMHO if FRR get an injunction or pay $22.9m into Escrow, then they have no need for an OOCS.
Gipps51
Posts: 351
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
24 May '19
Neither side will want a jury trial, if that’s what it’s heading towards that’s when an OOCS will be agreed. Neither side will risk losing the lot.
jester16
Posts: 8,977
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
24 May '19
Yeah same to you let's hope we enjoy next Christmas unlike the last one
spike912
Posts: 6,078
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
24 May '19
Ditto jester. I think it’s going to be a case of you bottles it first, bit like in a Wild West bar lol.
Have a good weekend
jester16
Posts: 8,977
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
24 May '19
Spike I'm hoping they have something and hope gets himself in that deep he cant get out like setting a trap and they release the mother of all evidences. Fingers crossed...
spike912
Posts: 6,078
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
24 May '19
Jester I agree, but as with any Contract there are implied terms which are not necessarily written, there are also reasons why the Contract may be defaulted, so the judge should and likely will slowly as look at the “intention at the point of signing the contract”. Clearly this intention changed, and legally it’s the intention of both parties at the point of signing. However, next week hopefully a bigger picture will become clear.
I must say, in all my time going over and reviewing contracts in my corporate days, I’ve never found a good legal firm that would take on a case with no hope of winning. The fact we have one of the best, and their reputation taking our case, you would like to think they see merits (somewhere...we hope!)
Suns out, it’s a long weekend and we are all healthy so enjoy the bank holiday, frr saga will no doubt continue long after this weekend lol
Arsenal221
Posts: 34,922
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
24 May '19
OLAD
Agree
OLADAPO007
Posts: 100
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
24 May '19
Jester, what if it so happens that one party in a contract did everything possible to ensure that the other party couldn't carry out their own part of the deal?
OLADAPO007
Posts: 100
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
24 May '19
Very well thought of piece by SB. Hope basically by his actions never gave the company a chance to grow. His conflict of interest here ha done the company no good. If you are a director of company the fiduciary duties you are entrusted with must be well carried out. You are like the father of a kid and as things go fathers don't look for all ways of killing their kids. Hope basically looked for all ways of killing FRR. The MND story should blow the mind of the jury no end and other sorts of stunts he pulled.

Let's see how the case goes, I see a lot of injustice in the whole thing which I expect the jury to deal with effectively. A director's duty is towards the company and its growth and progress. Nothing probably wrong with the veto power in that in the right hands it would only be used to disallow frivolous loans and not ones that should help the company progress .Hope abused that power and that should be easy to prove.
jester16
Posts: 8,977
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
24 May '19
To me it looks like bye bye frr unless they make a discovery of damning evidence. Contract law is a written agreement between 2 parties if you break those promises within the agreement then you dont stand much chance in front of a judge. I've yet to see any compelling evidence that says wow go zaza and get the vulture. Only they know why they brought this court action will it be the end of frr a costly mistake? all will soon be revealed.
Madpunter
Posts: 2,060
Premium Chat Member
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
RE: Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
24 May '19
Part 2

This is a war to the end NOW, either it’s bye bye Outrider or bye bye FRR, no middle ground. Shame they couldn’t see a win-win situation. But what is clear from the submissions is that Hope was cheer leading for FRR to fail so he could exercise his plan.

JMO
Madpunter
Posts: 2,060
Premium Chat Member
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:0.00
Posted by Symore_Bottoms on ii
24 May '19
I think it is important to note that FRR has always been in a precarious financial position and this is not a new phenomenon that Hope’s lawyers are trying to portray now. As an early O&G junior explorer, this is the modus operandi not just for FRR but for nearly all small oil companies. So for over 20-yrs, these incumbent long term Directors have balanced the books by honouring their fidicuary duties to employees and creditors (I can’t recall any legal action been brought against them, so great track record). In fact, historically speaking, they have personally financed the company when there was no other finance option available, which was subsequently converted to ordinary equity at a premium. How much Director RPNs converted? $26m. This is Directors level of commitment to their stakeholders. Then we know that Zaza offered a personal loan of $5m, but what did Hope offer? Sweet FA. Infact, Hope lawyers go back to claiming that Hopes actions were to protect Outrider and other creditors and therefore fulfilling his fiduciary duties. And this is going to be crux of the legal argument. Well, that cant be true, because if it was, he would have started raising these issues as soon as became the Director of FRR back in Feb 2017 and not from April last year. There are clear cut legal cases where a Director should excuse himself from Board discussions when he is conflicted, not use his veto power to protect his own position. This vulture is now arguing that he vetoed the proposals to protect creditors but did he then offer superior terms for his own $2m loan?

As far as Judge Kawaley’s comments are concerned on the financial state of FRR (and this shows how little he understands the early explorer industry), FRR has been in this financial state for over 20-yrs without any creditor not getting paid. Infact you could argue that over the 18months, FRR made more progress with new equity raised, progressing drilling operations and securing discussions with international heavyweights. I can also name at least half a dozen AIM O&G companies that have a similar financial position to FRR. And what about the Regulators such LSE who continually monitor these small companies.

Anyway, I think this is why FRR want a Jury trial because when the facts are heard, and Hope is exposed for the vulture that he is and how he has taken advantage of the opportunistic purchase of heavily discounted company debt. When the facts are finally presented, then you could see his motivations which resulted in him not honouring his fiduciary duties.

Will the preliminary injunction be granted? I don’t know. It will depend on the hearing on the 6th June; it will all come down to the persuasion of the argument from the respective lawyers. But as it is FRR who has brought this action, they should be given their day in the court I believe.
Previous Share Chat Page
2




Share Price, Share Chat, Stock Market news at lse.co.uk
FREE Member Services
- Setup a personalised Watchlist and Virtual Portfolio.
- Gain access to LIVE real-time Regulatory News (RNS).
- View more Trades, Directors' Deals, and Broker Ratings.
Share Price, Share Chat, Stock Market news at lse.co.uk









Datafeed and UK data supplied by NBTrader and Digital Look. While London South East do their best to maintain the high quality of the information displayed on this site,
we cannot be held responsible for any loss due to incorrect information found here. All information is provided free of charge, 'as-is', and you use it at your own risk.
The contents of all 'Chat' messages should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Limited, or its affiliates.
London South East does not authorise or approve this content, and reserves the right to remove items at its discretion.