Member Info for Awax

As I've posted before, Exxon heavily involved in TYNDP in Georgia which will be massive for the country over the next ten years. But what is their role with little ole FRR?

Kenirogas...........it would be deemed reasonable and in fact common practice, for a lender to insist on first charge over the assets. However it is also common for another charge to be made in preference as long as the first loan is redeemed before the new first charge is made. The ability in Hope's role to veto any other loan would seem a tad restrictive in such a business which needs regular access to finance.
To me he 'fiduciary' bit of the charge against Hope is the key. He must always put FRR first in his role on the bod.

Hope's primary responsibility as a member of the board for FRR was to safeguard FRR's future. By using a veto re the finance, in preference to a third party he put the business at risk. His conflict of interest and the fact that he could have abstained is clear. A previous post before Xmas mentioned a possible precedent in Cayman Island law. Separately, if they have been 'trading' in FRR securities ( and it seems YA might have been doing the same ) then there may be evidence to support this second charge against Hope. Finding 'trading' evidence against YA doesn't seem to have been a problem for FRR.

TEN further documents supporting the FRR action, possibly too damning to publicise. Really see this as only going one way now, with the defendants and their negativeers running for cover to save destruction.

pophead.....the NY funding seems to be a strong card they may wish to play first, followed by NOMAD. Both these will positively move the share price pending OOCS, flow rates and SM?

It is more than terrible for shorter to be locked in whilst company changing news is being written in a RNS. Don't they stand to make unlimited losses?

Who does the deals......... and importantly have they given evidence/are they compelled to give evidence to FRR under disclosure rules?

I would agree. Shirley the company has to proceed with its business including the offer of re-financing, particularly if the case is delayed. This still indicates to me that an OOCS is coming. Zaza has enough evidence and SM waiting in the wings to proceed following the flows on recent drills/testing.

daniel1son.......would it be possible to still now put the NY scheme to the board? The business continues to trade and April becomes a long time without this capital. Hope if still around has then to make a decision?

Hindsight provides the solution achieved with YA. Defeated in their endeavours. Shown to be errant in their relationship with FRR and underhand market activities. Zaza has a source of evidence, one could say 'mole'. It's just a matter of time and $ as to the OOCS. Intrigues me though as to when the NOMAD will be appointed as that may signify an outcome a la white smoke. All the best to FRR LTH in 2019.

Least ramptastic!! £2-3 come on!! 2019 is the year for Condorians.....wouldn't want to be out of this over the New Year......severely manipulated today..... must be trawling for a very large background buy....etc etc Happy New Year all......,,,and next year Rodders!

Hope negotiations with b2g going well. If it's more substantial by way of total buyout, then I'm looking at £2-3 minimum.

Maybe they think trolling will encourage exits, when suspension lifted and this motors through 0.4......0.5........0.6? There's going to be one massive bonfire of shorts. They say such damage causes total destruction........oh how the pendulum has swung with the OOC settlement! Question is how low can I add to fan their flames?

Investors in Outrider will be pushing for an OOC as we speak. The biggest worry has to be with shorter though?

Hope...... he hasn't sent the emails to TW?

Arsenal....... just to clarify, will we be thanking the nomad ie WHI or Zaza for burning the shorters "ass's"?

YA and Outrider/Hope dealing in shares with privileged information............ surely not? But isn't this where YA got caught and had to step back?

Jester they're called vultures for a reason. Imagine the damage caused by inside vultures?

12 hours later and someone thinks we might have looked under a different rock mp?

The main focus seems to be on the finance, but consider one other aspect please. The evidence held on a member of the board having links with persons actively dealing in the company's stock, to its detriment both damaging the business and the wealth of shareholders?