Member Info for granto

Mr Z put that liquidity into the bank earlier this year. Changes nothing IMHO

YES and a bank with a Moodys credit rating of CCC. ( just about as dangerous as they come ). I think in the end they were unable to get the money out. But it should never have been in the CEO's private Piggy Bank in the first place. what a joke.

as stated when the collapse came, the market is valuing this on the company alone. Nice to see the recovery to 35p, a stabising RNS would hugely help here. The Central Bank of Ukraine behaved very rashly, and has potentially dmaged the international reputation of the banking system there. swooping down on a bank after issuing several positive reports seems overzealous.

To be fair to RR the website has been updated and improved. The fact is we are still in rampup and startup phase. It is a small team, so time is always a factor. Looking forward to the next RNS, I hope its detailed and expands into detail .

The Central Bank's policy of placing corporate creditors after the Deposit Guarantee Fund in the priority of creditors in insolvent banks is really obscene. It make investing in an Ukraine company really risky if the keep their cash in the country. The Central bank of Ukraine is basically saying, International investors can screw off if our banks collapse, they are at the back of the queue. In the EU and USA the deposit funds and corporate deposits are EQUAL and share the proceeds of the assets equally.

agreed,

to be honest Max I don't know. I was blessed selling all my shares here earlier this year. I bought back in when the crash came, That was am error of judgement because I assumed we were equal creditors to the Deposit Fund But we are not ( scroll down for more on that ). quite simply the named asked Mr Z to liquidate assets to prop up the bank. and while he seemed to be compiling for some time, he didn't recently for some reason. as I understand ti reading Central Bank press releases. They promptly stepped it. The thing is he had $100m's in share here he could have sold to cover any loan he had there. I understand that he owes no money on these shares having paid back his original borrowers. also, they stepped in after the FXPO dividend costing $30m. why didn't they arrive two days earlier ? The Central Bank gave the reason for the banks collapse on the impairment of a senior shareholders loans, clearly pointing the un-named finger at Mr Z. On that basis, if he honored those loans, would the administration process be reversed. I doubt it. I think the assets of the bank will be sold on the cheap and come the end of the administration they NCB will go,'look the assets don't meet the liabilities so we are liquidating', even though it may be no better or worse than any bank there. His best bet is to swiftly apply to the Highest court in Ukraine calling it a 'smash n grab' job and present the court with the entire money to clear his loans and demand a reversal. would it be too late? probably

with the central bank devaluing the local currency back in February every bank in Ukraine automatically deteriorated. I think there may be several reasons behind this. Bottom line is our money is trapped inside a bank that is in administration.

The company is fully operational in Ukraine with funds in place. yes the market is unaware. also the latest two months accounts would help here. the message needs to get out that the company is surefooted.

according to that Media report he was shocked and stunned by the central bank's action. Indeed, the question has to be asked, did the Central Bank act with undue haste and not give the man a fair and reasonable chance. I am not privy to the events, but certainly it came suddenly. what if he applies to the High Court in Ukraine and asks for a reversal, and proves he has the financial ability to clear his debts. nothing would shock me here.

a conflict of interests For sure. Legally liable ? Could be argued I suppose under some wreckless trading law ? What happens if he stumps up the $160m he owes the bank ? Are we out of administration ? This might have a twist in this yet. Could the CB have underestimated his position

good article. I am not sure what recourse legal action will have. I said here from the start that this move was 'prompt and swift'' and possibly without notice. he may have a case. as I said his shareholding here alone would have covered his entire debt to the bank, and given that it was his debt that caused the insolvency it could be argued that the Central Banks 'raid' on the bank was heavy handed, the collapse in the SP here could be his claim in losses. however , i don;t fancy his chances. they will say he missed his repayment agreements or didn't inject capital from asset sales at the agreed time etc. was fair WARNING GIVEN ?

under the legislation there is no provision for partial payout, as is the way in the USA. In other words the Fund releases the money as they get it themselves through asset sales and recovery of loans etc….in any case, I have to concede that there appears to be dim prospects of recovering the $174m in full. Indeed, queueing in line behind the DGF while assets and loan books are sold off at the 'fire sale' discount. the prospects are bleak. However, the company FXPO is in itself a fine company that has made fortunes in good times, and made profits during recessions and wars. the company is on target to turn in annual profits of $200m plus. so what is a fair Mart Cap for that ?

read Reuters ? Company has no short term loans , and $108m in cash . What do you think ?

The company responded to that article an hour later saying it was completely untrue - it's in Reuters

IPhone - sorry

I just read the entire legislation . It is true ,unlike the USA the Ukraine places the Depisit Gusrantee Fund BEFORE corporate and large depositors . Makes business I Ukraine banks very U safe for businesses. But there it is - 76 pages of a report I read , my answer was on the last pages !!!!! Well the market prices in NO recovery so it was probably correct .

The only thing that could save the $174m is if the bank survives the administration . That could happen

its correct to say the sub 200,000h depositors get paid first , but technically they are not paid by the bank . I am shocked to hear that the Govt Depisit fund place themselves before corporate depositors - that's a disaster for us if that true . In the EU and USA its 100% certain that they are treated as equals , I assumed the scheme would work the same here, and yes you are correct I didn't read it but assumed the would follow our banking codes . If we are placed behind the insurance fund , getting 93% of depositors money , some €900m - we'll be blessed to see a dollar . Do you have a link ?

I'm surprised with the fall today. this one despite the upside recovery potential, is not without risk. Not for the faint hearted that's for sure.