Member Info for Looed

Posted by Goit on the 15th Feb :-

Zaza's interview
This is my brief understanding of what Zaza said about the arbitration.....

The GG want the PSA torn up and a payment of $70-80 million.

Zaza says we have not broken ANY of the PSA and we are not sueing the Government for $3.5 billion.

I must be missing something as Regdik mentions the $3.5 billion claim in his last post... anyway...

A couple of things to add..

My thoughts on the $3.5 billion claim are that I dont believe we are claiming. The value of the field is $10s of billions , why would we let the GG get away with a payment of say $1-2 billion and keep the asset. I was glad to hear that we are not claiming anything from them on reflection. It's a show of confidence to me that we are not sueing the GG if that is so.

I was pleased that Zaza mentioned the employees wages. If it was me this would be the first subject I would want to address. He sounded honest. Didn't deny it, said money was owed to some employees and in a nut shell said it had been blown out of proportion by the GG and that the GG had sort of colluded with the workforce to get them not to accept what Zaza was offering so the GG could use it to blacked Zazas name in the country...my take.

Great to hear that 5 american companies have completed an 18 month study of Block 12 and confirmed that we have a huge reserve , the opposite of what the GG are saying. This might be the crux of the arbitration. If we can prove that we have booked reserve it would be obvious to the arbitrators what the GG were up to.

The congressmen getting involved could be to do with getting the GG to do a deal before any decision on the arbitration . A long shot but possible.

I believe that the arbitration from what we know .. and theres alot we dont is about the GG getting more of the pie. What have they got to lose , not much ... legal fees of $6 million compared to maybe getting billions more of the pie over 25-50 years.... no brainer for them . If they lose they still have what they had before bringing the arbitration.

Part of "Zaza interview" posted by busy-b 14th Feb
1) In what arbitration dispute are you currently involved with the Government of Georgia?

"First of all I want to emphasize that we are not in dispute, the state is in dispute with us. The contract is in the form of GOGC and the State Oil and Gas Agency. We have no violations under the contract, we have been operating in Georgia for over 20 years and have never violated any. The promise of this contract, however, is not only a matter of course bitrazho dispute began, but other disputes were initiated in the courts. I mean the courts of disputes. So for us it is not new. Since 2013 is different from the dispute against us.

Difficulties have virtually begun since 2013 in our work and operations. Prior to that, our business was running smoothly. There were no major issues that we could not solve.

Since 2013, after investing heavily in oil and gas, and especially in the supply of natural gas; As soon as we announced that we were going to move on to the next phase of work, it was then that there were major problems and practically a narrowing of our work, which resulted in several lawsuits being brought against us by the state. Subsequently, the Court of Arbitration sued and so on.

Because we have a very strong position on what the Georgian court is trying to do, this process has been going on for a long time, and the final decision has not yet been made. "

2) According to the Oil and Gas Corporation's 2018 report, You asked for $ 3.5 billion in compensation According to the Oil and Gas Corporation, you had a claim for this sum, but you later declined.

"This is not true. First of all, we did not sue the state, the opposite is the case. The state is suing us. I reiterate that the company does not charge the state $ 3.5 billion.
9) If you can tell us in more detail what the state is currently looking for? What is the point of this dispute?

" , Although we can still work on the ground for many more years - which is an existing contract is identified.

They want to prematurely stop our this agreement and ask us by about $ 80 million dollars, as if we are in the state have the money to pay, which is also not true. "

13) The decision of the Arbitration Court is already approaching. What are your expectations about Verdict?

"The court hearings were held in London, awaiting a ruling. We do not know when. We expect to be positive in that we do not have, and we know that we have never had nearly $ 70- $ 80 million in debt to the state and we know the terms of the contract have not been violated, so We are optimistic, we hope and believe it is Georgia will continue to work and move in the right moment, when not only the company, but also for the very large benefits will be discovered by our oil and gas resource potential. "

From "FRR Statement" of 10th Feb
In 1997, the company won a tender announced by the state of Georgia and obtained a license to conduct oil and gas exploration and extraction in the 12th block of East Georgia.
After a year of negotiations with the Government of Georgia and after the terms of the agreement were agreed with the Cabinet of Ministers, the State Investment Council and the Parliament of Georgia, the Company signed a Product Share Distribution Agreement with the State of Georgia and the State Company Saknavobi.
The mandatory contract investment program was $ 18.5 million. The company has exceeded this obligation by about 30 times.
For the first time in its history in Georgia, Frontera:
Together with US banks JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley, Shell Capital and Deutsche Bank, they began investing in the 12th Block Project, successfully performing three-dimensional seismic research, drilling up to 60 wells with modern technology, horizontal drilling of oil wells with leading US companies, Netherland With Sewel & Associates, Ryder Scott and Miller & Lens approved the 12th block of oil and gas reserves. (The acquisition of these supplies will fully meet the country's demand for oil products and natural gas consumption and increase the volume of Georgian oil and gas exports.)
In 2004, he placed shares on the London Stock Exchange for the Georgia Project. This was the first time the Georgian stock market had raised capital. This transaction successfully introduced Georgia to the international stock market capital market.
The first gas pipeline and compressor station was built to supply locally supplied gas to users in various regions of Georgia.
Total investment in oil exploration and extraction since 1997 is approximately US $ 580 million, while US $ 60 million worth of oil and natural gas has been extracted and sold during the same period. The state has received tens of millions of dollars in taxes. The project employs hundreds of people.It is also noteworthy that Frontera Resources fully assumes the responsibility and risk of capital investment in the project, with more than half of the oil and gas profits owned by the State of Georgia.
The company began harassment from the state in 2013, which resulted in the issuance of various types of operating permits and repeated attempts to revoke the license to extract oil and gas.
In 2017, the State and the Georgian Oil and Gas Corporation launched an international arbitration dispute against Frontera, which significantly hampered the Company's operations and the inflow of planned investments in Georgia.

Posted by busy-b 3rd Feb

" The Georgian Oil and Gas Corporation and the Georgian State Oil and Gas Agency blame Frontera for violating Georgia's financial obligations. More specifically, the case of the so-called agreement of the company with the Georgian side. It deals with violations of the income-sharing clauses. Another contentious issue in the dispute was the debt for the use of natural minerals, which the company was reluctant to pay"..

Posted by Gipps51 on the 5th Feb :-

Owed Taxes and VAT
I screen shot a press report on 27th Dec . Within the article its reported FRR are owed $3.5 million in VAT and excise taxes.

It's been said before that if we had that money paid to us we could then pay the employees. The GG are withholding this money and using it to their advantage. If the employees had been paid what would they have to bash FRR with ?

It's also been said that the liquidation of FRCC could be another reason why they have not been paid , the bank accounts could have been frozen and are now in complete control of the liquidators, again the arbitrators will know this.

The Arbitrators will certainly know that FRR are owed this money. Zaza does not need to come out and say this.

It's clear oil and gas has been coming out the ground most of last year and that the wells are producing commercially. If the wells had dried up this would have been over long ago .

Posted by Mickthegambler on the 6th Feb :-

GOGC is currently involved in a litigation with Frontera Resources Georgia Corporation (FRGC), a Cayman Island company, regarding the breach of the production sharing agreement (PSA) related to exploration, production and sharing of crude oil and natural gas. In January 2018, GOGC and the State Agency of Oil and Gas (SAOG) initiated arbitration proceedings against FRGC, who has allegedly breached certain provisions of the PSA including but not limited to the relinquishment of approximately 99% of the Contract Area. On the other hand, in September 2018 Frontera Resources launched a counterclaim on US$ 3.5bn against GOGC and SAOG claiming lost profits for 2012-27 per GOGC’s 2018 audit report. Management believes that GOGC and SAOG have factual and legal bases to win the case, and that possibility for Frontera to win these claims is remote. The court hearings are planned for October 2019. Significant growth in other expenses is related to the above-mentioned on-going litigation case with Frontera Resources. Other operating expenses increased 58.1% y/y to US$ 10.4mn in 2018. Legal fees, related to litigation case with Frontera Resources, which were up 3.9x to US$ 2.7mn was the main reason behind the growth. Transportation, materials, repair and maintenance expense was up 20.4% y/y to US$ 3.1mn in 2018. Other costs remained mostly stable.

(part of a) Posted by Looed on the 23rd Jan :-

I am not sure there is anything new here (maybe the reason for the FRR debt?) here but this piece does seem to pull all the bits and pieces we know / assumed together. -

For the past few years there have been disputes between Frontera and the Oil and Gas Corporation, though almost no one has known. All this has only recently become known and details have just been revealed.
In the summer of 2019, the Georgian Oil and Gas Corporation issued its 2018 audit report, stating that in July 2018 the Georgian Oil and Gas Corporation and the Georgian State Oil and Gas Agency arbitrated a dispute over the financial obligations of Georgia to Frontera. They started. The case was related to breach of the PSA (Revenue Sharing) Articles by the Company. Another clause in the dispute was a debt on the use of natural minerals, which the company was reluctant to pay.

And
It is noteworthy that Frontera has already expressed its willingness to abandon the $ 3.5 billion demand, but the company is pushing for other demands. The corporation hopes that the verdict will be announced in the first half of 2020.

From Mid Jan there was a lot of chat about the "5%"

Posted by Madpunter on the 23rd January :-

Tsbs - No, the GG were to get 51% due to the PSA when it was FRCC. If FRWG is a 50/50 licence split the GG get 50% instead of 51%, but not under the PSA. In other words they get 50% ownership instead of 51% of the hydrocarbon production. Therefore, the GG would get half of the money if Block 12 is sold to the SM's under a 50/50 licence split. However, under the previous PSA split of 51/49, the GG would have to wait for years for the infrastructure and revenue under the PSA to get that amount. In other words the GG get the money sooner under a 50/50 licence split, rather than later under a 51/49 PSA split. The GG will still get a royalty for oil and gas transported through the international pipelines, plus a possible 5% royalty depending upon the 5% RA from FRCC. FRR will have only lost the 5% RA (due to having to transfer the licence because of SH/O) and the Eastern parts of the Shallow Fields and Basin Edge, assuming that B-2-0 is correct (due to the arbitration). Also, as there's decades of extraction, these lost fields may never be produced by the SM's due to the move towards renewable energy. However, if they were owned by the GG (Eastern SF + BE), they could still bring in revenue from interested smaller O+G companies.

Posted by Oopsi on the 22nd January :-

Arbitration
I know there has been some discussion on here and over on iii on the prospects of appealing on arbitral award which I thought it may be helpful to clarify. The starting point is that it depends on the governing law of the contract. I am not aware of what that is on our case. If the governing law clause is English, then the Arbitration Act provides very limited grounds for appeal (jurisdiction, procedural irregularity). Grounds for appealing an arbitral award are far more limited than a normal appeal. Other governing laws may also provide for a similar limited appeals process.

Its also worth bearing in mind that arbitral awards can be in parts - so they can be broken down into the various issues before the arbitral tribunal and decisions made on each of those issues. In effect there could be an overall winner/loser or an award that finds in favour of both parties across the various issues. For what its worth, if Frontera are successful, I don't think the GOGC will appeal. If FRR are unsuccessful, I suspect there will be an appeal (and they have probably already been advised on possible grounds). Why do I say this? Well FRR have already raised issues with the way the arbitration has progressed and the proper parties to the arbitration.

I am not hopeful of a positive outcome out of the arbitration. I become extremely nervous when parties do not participate in preliminary hearings, change lawyers and raise procedural issues which the tribunal effectively ignore. For me, everything is riding on an equitable resolution of the dispute. This will need compromise from both sides (the Georgian government don't want to alienate the US and FRR need traction to raise much needed finance). Let's hope the recent letter is a catalyst for the parties to thrash something out that works for all.

Posted by Looed (who he?) 21st Jan
By: Shota Tkeshelashvili
Georgian Oil and Gas Corporation is involved in an arbitration dispute with US energy company Frontera. Frontera demands from the state to fulfill the terms of its contract with the state and return 99% of the contracted territory to Georgia. For its part, Frontera puts forward the demands of the state. In September 2018, the company filed for arbitration seeking a $ 3.5 billion compensation from the Georgian Oil and Gas Corporation.
The British-American law firm Hogan Lovells International is defending the interests of the Oil and Gas Corporation in the dispute. The service contract with the company was signed on November 6, 2017 on the basis of a government decree and its total estimated cost is $ 7.4 million. It is one of the most expensive contracts awarded by a state-owned company for legal services. At today's exchange rate, the volume of the contract exceeds GEL 20 million.
According to documents uploaded to the State Procurement Agency system, after the contract was signed in 2017, the actual amount paid to Hogan Lovells International is $ 6,485,594. The payment was made with 28 individual payments. (Purchase code CMR170189525)
Hogan Lovells International itself is a law firm founded in 2010. Headquartered in London and Washington, DC, it is one of the largest law firms in the world today. The company employs 2,800 lawyers. In 2018, the company's revenue from services was $ 2.12 billion.
In addition to the Oil and Gas Corporation, Hogan Lovells International also has a contract with the Roads Department of the Ministry of Infrastructure. The aforementioned acquisition cost 472,000 euros. (Purchase code CMR200002902)

What's going on with Frontera in dispute?

Vazha Khidasheli, an adviser to BMG's Oil and Gas Corporation, said that at this point Frontera had expressed readiness to reject the $ 3.5 billion request, but that the company is making other demands. Arbitration proceedings are pending in The Hague Permanent Court of Arbitration. GOGC hopes that the verdict will be announced in the first half of 2020.
"There is talk of an arbitration dispute between the parties. The arbitration dispute is being conducted at an impartial arbitration tribunal formed by the parties on a parity basis. Accordingly, qualifying an arbitration dispute or attempting prosecution or expropriation is absolutely inappropriate.........

Around 22nd Jan we had lots of Russian articles slating FRR, US involvement and that FRR was a "gas scam" such as -

The reason for this was the situation with the company Frontera Eastern Georgia, which is conducting proceedings in the Stockholm arbitration with the Georgian International Oil and Gas Corporation. The reason for this arbitration was the failure of history with 5 trillion cubic meters of gas, which American experts allegedly found in Georgia, but which in practice turned out to be a media illusion.

ODR replied on 20th Jan
The first article you shared in the early hours seems fundamentally flawed to me in that it focuses mainly on suggesting that there is little gas there. If that was the belief then surely the GG wouldn't be trying to get the block back? They would let Frontera extract and take their wedge. The fact this fight is happening is proof that there is a significant asset involved.

From a Devex post 20th Jan

The GOGC contact has said they are awaiting the outcome and will abide by the decisions. So the process is clearly at the end stage and the decision is I believe binding (as has been pointed out elsewhere I do not believe any appeal can be made against such decisions)
Ignore stuff like the $3.5 billion claim. All parties will have laid out their most extreme positions, but will also have indicated other positions that will be viewed as more reasonable
Interesting that GOGC had made an “offer” and this was rejected by Frontera. Don’t know when and what - but the Court will be certainly aware of the detail. Those who were at a Zaza meeting in - I think - 2018 will recall that he talked about the right within the contract to extend the duration on proven production. I would bet the issue is the definitions here in terms of both duration and location extent within Block 12 - and that any third party involvement is in turn again dependent on the outcome
If I didn’t have so much at stake I would describe this as a pretty fascinating saga - but I do sense there is much still to play for here. Lets hope we hear soon and that there is at least some basis to progress from.

Also by regdik 12th Jan

FRR have a lot of sunk costs (400M+) in B12 and a loss of the LtO this would not be recoverable. As you see by Oppsi’s post ARMCHAM are still debating the Geopolitical issues of the region so I do not underestimate the value of the US Gov backing US interests in Georgia (and FRR’s).
B12 could be worth many many Billions if 10% of the reserves are true. However, it will be in the billions to monetarise this asset and get it to market. So you need some one with deep pockets and a vested interest in the region as an ideal partner. GG, FRR and the majors know this as do the Russians and Chinese. FRR even with 150Mil loan it would take years to reach the billion dollar target ZaZa set. I do not think this is acceptable to the GG as their future security lies in NATO and ultimately joining the EU. To achieve this aim it would not be to bad to announce a large energy field (5th in the world) and an agreement with a Super Major to develop their joint fortunes. However, the best prospect is with a tiny bankrupt prospecting company but unfortunately have the ear of senior US politicians.
So IMO a deal has to be (is) agreed that is in the best interest of GG, FRR and US pollical interests.
Haven’t a clue what that will end up looking like but it will be better than where we are now.
My own thoughts it will involve payback of some of the sunk costs (explains our Ukraine bid money and looking for other opportunities) and a production/profit share deal. It cold be the GG/FRR + Major partnership or a one off payment and bye, bye to FRR in Georgia.

oopsi posted 17th Jan

Two NEW frontera entities registered yesterday (links below). Assuming that is Zaza’s son. Very interesting. Answers on a postcard.

(There was lots of discussion on these new entities but I don't think we reached an agreement about the meaning of this)

From Mid Jan we started the trickle of letters supporting & warning Georgia either specific to FRR or in general terms.

part of a post by Regdik 19th Jan

GG wants 99% and it looks like FRR proposed 50% if previous finding are an indication. Or around these figures (5% in the liquidated company will revert to GG).
However, it is a positive that the US are openly backing FRR plus Exxon have finished their review of Georgia and two offshore blocks are up for grabs. I will also add into the mix is that Russia do not have the expertise of BP or Exxon to develop such a complex fields (B12 and offshore) they will be reliant on Western knowhow and technology. Those at the top know this.
I have said this was always political and the outcome will decide FRR future and not Texas/Cali.
The 3.5Bil CC treat could be the deciding factor to how this plays out and I hold no hope to regaining any sunk costs as this is baked into the core of the LtO franchisee – expenditure is at the prospectors risk. FRR are alive but god knows how so I remain on the positive side.

Part of a post by Oopsi 10th Jan -
As others have mentioned, this and the Texas dispute are unlikely to have a material impact on the immediate investment required by FRR. The Californian dispute is being driven by us and can be dropped. The Texas case involves individuals and not the company. The Arbitral dispute is, however, critical. If FRR are successful, that deals with that particular legal issue. If unsuccessful, I can see the matter dragging on unfortunately. Frontera have already raised an objection to the arbitration in terms of the correct parties to the dispute and the arbitral tribunal have chosen to split the issues, dealing with the main legal issue of breach first. If the Georgian Government are successful, expect a further arbitration issue on the secondary point or Frontera to appeal/prevent enforcement. The preferred alternative is for a resolution.

Part of a post by regdik 11th Jan

Oppsi pointed this out and referred to one of my earlier posts that in black and white FRR have defaulted on their licence to Operate (LtO). This (and I suspect Oppsi) is one of my Middle management skills is that I know a lot about. Most LtO’s are constructed in the same way (differences are mainly around boundary, duration, investment, targets, share and using local services).
What stands out is that GG have more than a strong case to relive FRR of their LtO without the pain of arbitration. Oppsi pointed this out with reference to GG removing a contract from the deep water port due to failing to hit target and finance plans although work was progressing.
LtO’s also have a fit and proper clause that is to ensure that companies follow the law and financial rules and of course any FRR default would immediately validate the LtO. I think one poster in particular could point out several failures of FRR

This raises a question why go down the arbitration route and why the FRR counter claim (3.5B).

You can only speculate that this is a land grab for B12 and the high profile US Gov involvement is pivotal to ensuring that GG have to be squeaky clean. Why the sum of 3.5B as this would have to be based on production (what production), proven reserves (not less that 90%) or figures based on a potential agreement. Any court would/will throw this out without a factual evidence trail.
FRR are still in existence so focus should be on the Georgian arbitration and not court documents this alone will decide the future of FRR and any potential gain/loss to all that have traded in FRR shares (long or short).

Posted by Oopsi on the 28th December :-

The article certainly makes interesting reading. The first point is that arbitration proceedings are supposed to be confidential. There is enough information in the article to suggest that someone from the State has leaked this information.

I found the comment that this dispute relates to 100% of the contracted area outside the acquisition area very interesting. I don’t know what the acquisition area is but it does confirm that the dispute is about everything but that area. I would assume therefore that that area will remain in Frontera’s hands.

The other interesting point is that the arbitration hearing appears to have recently happened and the parties have been given the opportunity for final writer submissions before the arbitrators will make a final decision, probably in the first half of next year. The fact that we struggled with legal representation and appear to have disputed the hearing right until the end doesn’t bode well for a favourable outcome. That being said the article is clearly biased so who knows what the position is. There is also the separation of the issues between the legal claim and the validity of the transfer.

(I know this was already reposted earlier and many dispute B-2-0's comments-)
Posted by B-2-0 on the 1st January :-

2020 here's the Cherry
B12 split, FRR Western to hold alll currently proven assets, Eastern to be returned to Gocg ( Basin edge, shallow fields). FRR Western jointly owned by FRR/GOGC, however, FRR transferred holding to investor (BP as part of deal. 2020 the alliance is initiated). Bushido B20

Madpunter 22:28
WHamBoy - Don't forget that under the PSA the GG were getting 51% of the oil after the sunk costs were recovered. If B - 2 - 0 is correct then FRR gain 1% of the proven reserves under a 50/50 split, but only lose the Shallow fields and Basin Edge. The GG would also gain the opportunity of cash/shares upfront, rather than waiting years for the wells, gathering pipelines etc until full production. If this is what the GG wanted, then they will still get future royalties from the oil and gas transported through the pipelines. As there's decades of supply, would the extra from the Shallow fields and Basin Edge add to any buyout valuation?

I am going through the archive. Hopefully with the benefit of hindsight we might better understand what is going on. I started early Dec and will repost what I find that might help - (hopefully no hinder) - any understanding. Thanks in advance to MadP and all the posters. I am posting as I find so apologies if its ultimately a waste of time.
Posted by Hoops09 on the 27th December :-

Translation of Ivypsivey's link

“The contractor responded to the corporation and agency lawsuit with its willful claim on September 14, 2018; The dates of the arbitration hearings were set for October 1-11, 2019.
The hearings would cross-examine the witnesses and experts involved in the "dispute" by the parties. According to the procedural timetable of the dispute, the arbitration hearings may have been followed by a brief summary of the parties' submissions, after which the arbitral tribunal decided. The need and timing of this procedural stage should be decided by the arbitral tribunal on the basis of the outcome of the hearing and the views of the parties to the dispute. In view of the timeframes established in the aforementioned and arbitration proceedings, it became clear that the arbitral tribunal's decision on the dispute should be expected in the first half of 2020.
On April 15, 2019, the Contractor notified the Corporation and the Agency of its rights and obligations to the Subsidiary of the Contractor.
On April 24, 2019, the Contractor notified the Arbitration Tribunal of its rights and obligations under the Contract, including the transfer of a fraudulent claim to an Affiliated Company.
The Corporation and the Agency did not declare the "transfer" validity and objected to the contractor's claim that the "transfer" did not comply with the "contract" requirements.
In view of the above, the arbitral tribunal decided on 7 June 2019 to separate the dispute over the validity of the transfer into a separate proceeding. The arbitration proceeding was divided into two independent lines - one dealing with the corporate and agency claims, and the other dealing with "transfer" liability and contractual claims.
However, the arbitration hearings, scheduled for October 1-11, 2019, would be devoted to the corporate and agency lawsuit claims and the issue of "transfer" validity, and the arbitration tribunal would determine the timing of the litigation claims.
On September 1, 2019, and several times thereafter, the Contractor applied to the Arbitration Tribunal seeking suspension and / or termination of the Arbitration Proceedings on the ground that it had allegedly reached an agreement with the Government of Georgia to settle the dispute. Contractor's claims were not satisfied by the Arbitration Tribunal;
The Contractor refused to pay the additional deposit on the order of the Arbitration Tribunal dated June 25, 2019, and accordingly the Corporation, in agreement with its Partner, paid a "Deposit" [EUR 150,000] instead of the Contractor.

PJohn - hope you are keeping safe and sane. The April date was mentioned quite a few times - by the GOGC and I think by Zaza himself in one of his - few - interviews. But that was at least 3 months ago if not more- and in a very different world! The arbitration boards do state they are functioning pretty much as normal and we know the case is concluded. As ODR says, deals might well have been done / going on in the background. The Hogan Lovells letter is still on the GOGC homepage - but how often are websites being updated during this crisis? Also, we don't know how arbitration results are announced, so we might not get news on the announcement right away or it might get lost in the CV coverage.

I won't cut & paste the whole piece - this is the conclusion -

"The optimistic views of OPEC members and the US are that the demand will increase by summer. This is an overly confident projection. Coronavirus continues to have a large impact on global economies and in turn has a certain effect on the oil industry. This hope is, of course, conditional since the behavior of such diverse players as Russia, the KSA and the United States can hardly be predicted in advance and with great accuracy. The signing of the deal did positively impact the stock markets. Since the pandemic, the stock market has been showing historic lows and this deal helped strengthen confidence.

The Kremlin remains a wild card and it is hard to say if they will even honor the deal going forward. KSA is another dark horse with possible issues within their fractions. Do not discount Venezuela and how Russia and US are embroiled in a geopolitical struggle for control in that country.

As much as the deal was a historic breakthrough, the chances of the Kremlin sticking to the deal is 50/50. Only time will tell if there will be actual benefits and results. For now an appeasement has been reached, but for how long?"

Source - https://communalnews.com/the-new-oil-deal-is-putin-playing-chess-and-will-deal-fall-through/

Title - Moldova Seeks IMF Loan to Avoid Financial Collapse

Source - https://balkaninsight.com/2020/04/16/moldova-seeks-imf-loan-to-avoid-financial-collapse/

WHamboy - sorry you are on a bit of a downer, and I doubt anyone would judge you for having a mood swing with everything that's going on. I will keep searching as I think its easy for the news - be it good or bad - to be lost in the CV and CV-related coverage. As you say, one day - and hopefully it is soon!

1- UKRAINE RAISES OIL IMPORTS BY 22% IN Q1 - https://open4business.com.ua/ukraine-raises-oil-imports-by-22-in-q1/

2- Ukraine's gas producers call for upstream incentives amid industry slump - https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/natural-gas/041420-ukraines-gas-producers-call-for-upstream-incentives-amid-industry-slump

Quite a long wide-ranging article that discusses Russian strategy, its weaknesses, Ukraine and its neighbours, US energy policy, the recent oil reduction agreement and Covid-19. As I said - wide-ranging!

Source - https://www.cepa.org/putins-not-quite-2020-energy-vision

(the author is "Dr. Benjamin L. Schmitt is Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Harvard University and former European Energy Security Advisor at the U.S. Department of State.")

Also an interesting article - this is just a small piece

Timeline of WHO actions

January 14, 2020 - Endorses the preliminary investigation conclusion by the Chinese authorities that there is no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission
January 23, 2020 - Recognises human-to-human transmission of COVID-19 and recommends airport exit screening. WHO’s Emergency Committee meets for the first time
February 4, 2020 - Pledges to share information with governments
February 7, 2020 - Highlights the global shortage of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)
February 12, 2020 - Publishes Operational planning guidelines for countries
February 20, 2020 - Warns that the window of opportunity “may close”
February 24, 2020 - Recognises potential of a pandemic
February 27, 2020 - Lists “vital questions” for health ministers
February 28, 2020 - Releases “Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission on Coronavirus Disease 2019”
March 5, 2020 - Recommends wide testing
March 11, 2020 - Announces a pandemic

DG Tedros’ permanent and forceful endorsement of Chinese actions throughout the crisis has, of course, created a counter-reaction: the organization itself is now accused of having missed the opportunity to forestall a global pandemic. This is the result of two decisions. First, WHO’s failure to recognize proven human-to-human contamination until January 23 (and going along on January 14 with China’s refusal to admit human to human contamination), despite strong and persistent indications to the contrary, and alerts by Taiwanese health officials directly conveyed to the WHO. Second, the organization’s refusal to declare a pandemic until March 11, when 114 countries had already reported 118,000 cases. These decisions have had global consequences, as WHO guidelines are for better or for worse followed by countries and even by private actors who can base – and later justify – their actions from these guidelines. Such was the case for example in France, where public authorities were still saying there was no proof of human to human contamination on January 20. Beyond the issue of what WHO can do at times of epidemics, there is a ripple effect from its statements.

Source - https://www.institutmontaigne.org/en/blog/fighting-coronavirus-pandemic-chinas-influence-world-health-organization

This is a snippet from Wikipedia on WHO - there is lots more like this on the page -

"Travel expenses
According to The Associated Press, the WHO routinely spends about $200 million a year on travel expenses, more than it spends to tackle mental health problems, HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria combined. In 2016, Margaret Chan, Director-General of WHO from November 2006 to June 2017,[168] stayed in a $1000-per-night hotel room while visiting West Africa.[169]

Robert Mugabe's role as a goodwill ambassador
On 21 October 2017, the Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus appointed former Zimbabwean president Robert Mugabe as a WHO Goodwill Ambassador to help promote the fight against non-communicable diseases. The appointment address praised Mugabe for his commitment to public health in Zimbabwe.

The appointment attracted widespread condemnation and criticism in WHO member states and international organizations due to Robert Mugabe's poor record on human rights and presiding over a decline in Zimbabwe's public health.[170][171] Due to the outcry, the following day the appointment was revoked.[172]"

Source - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Health_Organization#Taiwanese_membership_and_participation