Member Info for Arsenal221

ODR
Agree that Zen is an asset to this bb & let's believe on Frr being a massive asset to all holders through 2019.

Will there be an update concerning yesterday's hearing?

Not if Frr can show they are in talks with a Nomad of which all hope they are.

I think it is a case that you cannot, as it is classed as pension money.
Overall best to check with whoever the sipp, is controlled by. As I am defintely not an expert on this matter.

If in a sipp account you can withdrawer, if I think it is you are 55 or over.
Obviously above does not apply when share, is suspended.

If Nomad not announced very soon then would hope on Frr announcing that they have had an extension on the mth, due to them being in advanced discussions with a Nomad.

On the injunction would think that Frr would have known that was going to be needed, so Frr's request for the injunction would have been drafted 1/2 weeks before, if not a bit sooner & changes made if needed, closer to it being filed with the court.

Above, is only how I see it.

Re a new Nomad the selection process is two way - particular given the Cairn resignation. And appointing a new Nomad is one thing - but going back to normal trading without a solid news update would be a nightmare. So the Court Case and Nomad selection are inevitably inter-linked. It is worth trying to put yourself in the position of a likely new Nomad - what would you want from FRR? I would suggest:

Clear evidence of a viable future business, including funding
Clear evidence that the Hope/Outrider process is going in the right direction
Evidence that the BoD is at least working to a common agenda
An opening market update that includes references to the historic disclosure issues - ie some sort a “clear the air” comment. Any new Nomad will insist on this in my view
A site visit - though if WHI this might be avoided
Any new nomad will also formally and informally talk to Cairn, so all of the issues - warts and all - will need to be addressed. But of course real progress on dealing with Hope/Outrider will help enormously

As others have suggested a Nomad appointment with trading suspended until the court case is resolved would be ideal - but not sure how feasible this is.

Overall on what Dev has mentioned above is along same lines as I mentioned earlier in week that on Frr announcing a Nomad that would give a positive on Frr coming through this.
So lets see if anything on the court hearing is released over next few trading days & announces a signing up of a Nomad with trading staying suspended, if needed.

Zen
Another excellent post on that short bit of timeline.

Zen
Thanks for that timeline.

bugsy
Along same lines I was thinking that on a Nomad signing up that would I feel add a positive on Frr coming through. As cannot see many Nomads being interested in a company that is not looking to good on a court case.

5p
Agree & sure many, if not all would as well.

If we announce a Nomad then we still need the shares suspended otherwise that would give the shorters a field day.

Prod
I agree, as I have always believed that the Default & Claim are very interlinked.

As this is a directions hearing then that does not look to be where a decision on the injunction would take place.

It will give Frr a much better position on an OOCS.

Exactly how I have seen it & on that Frr should have a good case against Hope.
Will add though we still need on seeing a positive Rns on this.

On BP & the NY Fund would think both of them knew/knows more than has been released & on that it is positive that they are still interested.
On top of the above there also is BHG still on board at the moment.

It has been mentioned that if Frr can say they are in talks with Nomad then an extension of up to 2 weeks can be added onto the mth.

Of course you are right TOT - the 30 minutes was a suggestion based on a “directions” hearing - and as the day is set aside could be much longer

In 2016 the hearings were of course US based (Galveston) - and Norton Rose acted for FRR, supported by Gibbs and Bruns - all Houston based. Not sure who represented Outrider - but of course Janet S. Casciato-Northrup acted as trustee on behalf of the loan note holders. No doubt each had their own lawyers facing off to the trustee.

So this time around the action is in the Caymans - instigated by FRR and different lawyers. I wonder what choices existed - and if the view is that the Caymans might be more supportive of the FRR viewpoint? Re Moruant I would be pretty sure of the need for FRR to avoid Maples on this issue - but there could be several interpretations around the Hope/OMF representation.

Also interesting to see what is going on in Debenhams - with Ashley blocking some debt restructuring proposals. Of course there is one fundamental difference - Ashley has 29.7% of the equity.