Member Info for Looed

Jmolina - correct. I think it was a few days after the 19 September statement by Deloitte.

Miss Mapp - RR posted here fairly recently. Though still "RR" they have rebranded under a new name as you can see if you check his profile page -

https://www.lse.co.uk/profiles/rufus-ruffcut/

WHamBoy - in case you don't already have it, you can see the cut-off dates and publishing dates here using this link, as you can see there is roughly a 10-14 day lag between the deadline and the publication.

https://www.gov.ky/gazettes/gazettes-dates-deadlines

WHamBoy - in these types of situations the JOL's will typically wait until the process has completed before making any public update. That's why I put Deloitte at the end of the sequence of events. A dissolution is 'done' when the court so orders and it's 'done and dusted' once published in the Gazette. At that point the JOL's are usually able to make a statement. But I do agree with you on checking the link you provided.

Montiburns - with regard to your point 2 and the ZM trial. I suggest you compare the award in that case and the amount declared in the Deloitte statement of September 19th and what that implies.

I was scratching my head at your last para and then I wondered if you were referring to a post I made. If so you have entirely misunderstood my intent. My point was that relying on heavy hitters tends not to favour the smaller or retail investor and I gave examples (or I meant to) of some shares where holders regardless of holding or means had formed groups with varying degrees of success. My numbers might be off but one of the shares had a pool of around £350k, if not more, sitting with counsel for the collective interest of all those who took part, not relying on others to do it for them and hoping it cascades down which as a general rule seems more risky.

As a very general rule, a straightforward / routine Order for Dissolution takes approx. 1-4 weeks to process, longer if there are additional legal considerations. Assuming Deloitte proceeded to file a routine request sometime after their 19th September statement - "The Liquidators will submit an application to the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands seeking an order for the Company's dissolution" - then it is possible the strike-off occurred after the 31/10 cut-off date. So eyes peeled for upcoming Gazettes.

The sequence of events for a routine S/O are - JOL's petition the court for Dissolution - court approves the Order - Order is filed with the Cayman Registrar - company is struck-off the Register - Registrar submits a notice to the Gazette - Strike-off is published in the next scheduled edition - and if Deloitte are true to their word, it will be uploaded to the Deloitte FRC page.

The latest scheduled Gazette has just been published which lists Strike-offs as of 31/10/24. No notice for, nor any other mention of, FRC.

Many thanks Lifeishard. Robin Dunnigan is a long shot to be sure, but nothing ventured nothing gained. Thanks for trying.

Thanks Lifeishard. As I said it is a long shot but so was expecting commentary from the GOGC yet comment they did. Every avenue must be explored because you will get a hit when you least expect it.

Wadassistant – the situation is as Lifeishard points out. The only timelines that are set are the Cayman gazette publishing dates which is how we will learn about any strike-off. You need to balance the admittedly vague messaging against the black & white of Deloitte and the GOGC. That is why I said in a reply to WHamBoy that 3rd parties are presently a more reliable news source.

The post that Lifeishard mentioned contained a link to a GOGC document with contact points. The GOGC were forthcoming with additional info so it might be worth reaching out to those people to ask for more information.

More of a longshot but the US Ambassador will soon have a town hall and anyone can submit a question without the need to supply a name or nationality. Whilst the questions already submitted might not be addressed in the meet, they might well be flagged for someone’s attention. Nothing stopping others also submitting questions given Frontera has previously been discussed at the ambassador level.

Tsbs1 - what a pity you couldn't turn the anger into anything other than apathy. But I can say that for sure me / others will keep pushing and sharing what we can. If anyone takes a swipe at me, they cannot really complain when I swipe back.

Thanks for the advice and I agree - let's not engage further.

Tsbs1 - that great you have taken action.

As for calling out hypocrisy, apathy etc - it baffles me that people hand over their hard earned cash, fret that it has been squandered, and then sit back and do sweet F.A. about it.

As for your doubts about me - what a shame you weren't so discerning about ZM.

Phil_2018 – Your first paragraph is certainly a novel way of seeing things.

According to your theory, the best approach is to sit back and hope that a ‘cabal’ of influential players retains counsel and turns out to be generous enough to let you benefit from their successes—assuming they have any. But if this group exists, what’s to stop them from striking a deal that serves only their interests, leaving behind anyone they view as ‘dead weight’?

This kind of passivity allows companies to take advantage of shareholders who effectively disenfranchise themselves, making the company’s job of sidelining them all too easy.

I have been taking action for years. You ?

While ideas like no-win-no-fee legal actions or shareholder committees may have merit in theory, they're pointless without real follow-through. Instead of simply posting ideas here and hoping someone else will pick them up, why not take action and present a concrete, viable plan? If you believe your idea has potential, then pursue it. Compared to other forums—such as those for COPL and BIDS.L—this board is one of the least proactive.

As for the nonsense claims of being 'controlled,' that comes across more as a feeble excuse for personal inaction, simply waiting for others to do the work while you assume the role of the armchair critic. Easy way out I suppose. That you chose to do nothing was a choice of your own making—a classic 'anyone but me' deflection by those who dodge taking responsibility for their own apathy.

WhamBoy - 3rd parties currently look to be the best source of information.

WHamBoy - thanks for checking and much appreciated. Not sure if you are aware but specific to strike-offs, these are considered routine listings and so won't appear in EG's. They are listed in the scheduled G published every couple of weeks or so. I can give you a link for the publishing dates if you don't already have it. That said, EG's cover all other types of issues that require immediate actions so definitely worth monitoring, just not for a strike-off notice.

Keyseroze - company.

As I said, I will keep at them and be back if there is any update.

You can also see details here - https://www.businessinsider.ge/index.php/ka/ssip-navtobisa-da-gazis-sakhelmtsifo-saagento-atskhadebs-tenders-xii-salitsenzio-blokze and https://docs.google.com/file/d/1vSj7pCjbVr5vAjJFAne45gpE6tSRfzoy/edit?filetype=msword which was supplied directly by the GOGC.

In addition to the above, I have seen screenshots from the GOGC that state that -

1- The tender covers all of Block 12, with no partial division (no 99% / 1% split)

2- Frontera has exited Georgia.

3- Any company is eligible to bid on the new tender.

The retendering was announced towards the end of October. Despite several requests for comments and giving them ample time to respond, I have yet to receive a response. I will continue to seek clarification and I’ll update you if there’s any response.

Based on these points—and barring any new developments suggesting otherwise—the next likely step is a formal announcement in the Gazette confirming court approval of the company’s dissolution.

Until that publication, the company remains in liquidation. We’ll monitor events closely and recommend that you do the same, keeping in mind the GOGC’s retendering of the entire block and their additional commentary.

Despite the previously alluded to last ditch efforts regarding recovery, this is the current state of play.

Thanks Chris572. Lifeishard you ask "but does it matter" to which I would say no, I don't think it does.

As stated in the Deloitte report at p8, "the only known active subsidiary is FRUS". On that same page you can see that all the Moldova entities (especially the one that sat under F.R.I. LLC) are removed. There is no reference to Moldova being an asset or in any other capacity in the Deloitte report.