Member Info for Looed

Thanks toatie hope you had a good holiday.

Well played sir ;)

The first sentence of the report should tell you how out of date and out of touch it is. If you read the company info section I think it's AI generated payable clickbait picked from other marketing sites.

Thanks MadP - will do.

Monti - please bear in mind that the "day-to-day" progress of the liquidation is under the control of the liquidation committee not Deloitte, although of course they work within the parameters set by Deloitte / Cayman Law. The L.C. will report to Deloitte who will make their determinations and then report to the court. That is why I think you will only get boilerplate responses from Deloitte until a conclusion is reached and the final account is published.

Montiburns – happy to be corrected but I think the email you got from Deloitte was merely repeating what was stated in the C.R. regarding the potential for funding. Outside of reports to court, Deliotte reporting obligations are explained on the liquidation page.

The situation remains as previously highlighted by the company and stated in the C.R. I doubt there will be any messaging for public consumption until that process completes. If all other communication channels fail, the Cayman Gazette is obligated to publish the outcome.

Deloitte are not checking this BB. Officially they have virtually zero funds and anyway their priority is to the creditors, not shareholders. However, for the company, and those trying to maintain relations with them, ongoing reckless acts by holders just feed the cycle of shareholder self-sabotage and they don’t draw any distinction between acts that are willful or mis-guided. Result – radio silence.

Finally, what nonsense to say that this BB has been “suppressed” or shareholders manipulated to stop…well, to stop what exactly? 9On the plus side, I suppose I can add ‘ability for remote mass mind control’ to my resume). I have never seen any plan here expect the hope that others do the graft and get positive results. It is not the same situation as FRC, and I don’t follow it closely, but I saw COPL was recently suspended. Those shareholders formed an action group, are courting investors for a potential take-over of some sort, have retained counsel, have a website and publicity campaign going, and a lot more and have done so in a matter of weeks. Probably a bit much initiative for the kippermanbikes of this world, far easier for them to sit on the sidelines and complain.

turbovb2 - the app of the website you shared sent me 246 10-second alerts yesterday out of a total of 400 aftershocks. Luckily today is much quieter.

Yes aftershocks aside, hopefully it is at least 25 years before the next big one hits.

Thanks MadP - Shaken, stirred but otherwise OK! That was the biggest quake for 20+ years, luckily it happened early morning when most people were out and about.

Montiburns - yes we are saying the same thing. At some point Deloitte will contact shareholders.

I always encourage people to contact the company so yes, worth reaching out. The info@ email address is monitored.

Hi Bezzy –

The meeting in Cayman was the first creditor meeting. If there is a deal in place, or, as Deliotte have previously stated, there are no assets, it could very well the last creditor meeting or one of only a few that will take place. Once these meetings are concluded the JOL’s will prepare a final report / statement that will be distributed to stakeholders informing them of their findings, disbursements, fees etc. as well as the JOL’s recommendation to the court. If there is a deal agreed and with the right ratio of creditors, the JOL’s still need to present it to the court for final approval. Regardless of what happened at the meeting yesterday, it needs the court to sign off on it.

I have no information to share from the company side.

There is certainly a lot of lobbying going on the get the USA to agree a Free Trade Agreement with Georgia. Lots of articles along these lines popping up over the past few days, many of them downplaying recent developments involving Georgia and China. Here is an example -

https://www.mccaininstitute.org/resources/blog/us-georgia-relations-from-strategic-partnership-to-strategic-alliance/

Montiburns – You might assume most people are astutely aware of the type of liquidation, but someone had recently posted a link to info on voluntary liquidations of a solvent company, so it is important people understand the type of procedure in play.

FTI prepared a report (relating to FRGC not FIC) that stated the there was no commercially viable pathway to pass on the PSA to another party, and so their recommendation was that for the GOGC to terminate the PSA, which is what the GOGC did. Following that, we know the situation regarding the assignment and the MoU.

Theprodigy - I am saying the return to pre-liquidated state is more common in other liquidation scenarios. Not impossible in an involuntary liquidation but not very common. But the company seems to think it's possible.

Also, I don't have any other information to share that hasn't been presented here.

The last line got cut off, should read - "I think its the strangest investment story any of us have been involved in!"

Theprodigy – I see some people are confused about the type of liquidation that is taking place. FRC-C is subject to involuntary liquidation / compulsory winding up.

As some shareholders have recently received notifications regarding the liquidation then yes, the liquidator has its hands on the Cayman register (though a register can also sit outside Cayman, we don’t yet know if that is the case here). The BoD ceased to have any controlling interest once the Winding Up Order was granted, and FRC-C passed to the JOL’s.

The liquidators appear to have found the cupboard very empty but there are several mouths still expecting to be fed. So, assuming everything else is found to be in order, the JOLS’s will consider any realistic deal that can be made. The liquidator must determine that any deal is fair to as many creditors as possible and it must be acceptable to the Grand Court. Such deals need meticulous planning. This system also means the liquidator can earn a nice commission which they won’t get from an empty cupboard.

We saw a broadly similar process play out (and fail) in the FIC case where FTI considered various options from potential parties before making their final recommendations.

Yes, we are reliant on SN, but we are also reliant on the creditors / liquidators / courts reaching an agreement. Typically, shareholders are wiped out in these types of deals but “all stakeholders” does mean shareholders and other interested parties.

The assignment from FRC to FRUS was contingent on FRUS fulfilling certain conditions including paying sums of money. We don’t know if that has / has not yet taken place.

As to our shares, the talk of a “return to the status quo” would indicate they plan to remain a Cayman entity = FRC-C. On the face of if that seems almost impossible given the company did not challenge the WUP from Mourant and the liquidation seems to be proceeding as a typical Cayman liquidation. I don’t know any case where a company came back from dissolution, but the liquidation process is still ongoing and so not dissolved yet. So perhaps it’s possible, but I cannot find an example.

In Cayman liquidations, the law does allow for behind-closed-doors discussions between parties either before or during a liquidation. This typically occurs during so-called provisional liquidations (where it can sometimes suit company and creditors to liquidate and restructure) but I think harder to find during involuntary liquidations (which is the type of liquidation FRC-C is undergoing). Not impossible, but not common.

If the parties are cooperating via Deloitte, then the 1st creditor meeting in March could be significant. Sometimes these first meetings are procedural (appoint a committee etc.) but if matters are being discussed – and hopefully resolved – ahead of time then perhaps some important decisions can be made at the meeting.

You said “Strangest investment and story I’ve ever been involved in

Ricardo2019 - Not necessarily.

If you had clicked on the link I supplied you would see that it states "...except in the case of an exempted company in which case the register of members may be kept at any place within or outside the Cayman Islands"

HouseofGold - as per Cayman company law, share certificates are optional. Details should be maintained on the register, and as you say you have your transaction records.

"Exempted companies do not issue share certificates as this is not required by the Companies Act"

https://www.harneys.com/media/kuhpdrtt/cayc16-continuing-obligations-for-cayman-islands-exempted-companies-cayman-aug-23.pdf

WhamBoy - I wouldn't assume that to be the case. No link between silence and possible deals.

FRC-C, as a Cayman Exempted Company, is subject to the applicable Company Act and associated regulations, details of which can be easily found online. Specific to registers -

“Each company is required to keep a register of directors and officers, a register of members and a register of mortgages and charges…. The register of members (i.e. shareholders) must contain the names and addresses of the shareholders of the company, the number and category of shares held by each member, the distinguishing numbers (if any) of those shares, the amount paid or agreed to be paid on the shares, whether each relevant category of shares held carries voting rights under the articles of association of the company and, if so, whether those rights are conditional, together with the date on which each shareholder became and ceased to be a shareholder of the company”

https://www.campbellslegal.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Continuing-Requirements-for-Cayman-Islands-Companies.pdf

Many people had their shares moved between accounts years ago, so I think this is housekeeping given recent events in Cayman.

In terms of key dates, Deloitte will hold the first creditor meeting on 14th March.

Monti - I think it makes sense that the Georgian Ambassador visit Texas to meet heads of business and promote Georgian exports. The Ambassador has a lot of connections to SN / FRC both during his tenure in government and now as a career diplomat. As an example, he was very involved in the “Senators letters” incident so he dealt with many of the senators who wrote / visited Georgia. Perhaps that interplay played a part in his selection as Ambassador.

He has spoken many times about FRC, adversely at first but then more warmly as the government suspended the termination and as matters relating to ZM unfolded. Also, the GG entered into a MoU with the company, so another reason to meet and update on the current situation (especially as the WUP was inbound). SN has deep connections in the industry, so it makes sense to include other players and related businesses, especially if Exxon / others are trying to grow their footprint in the area.

What is the “dire position with the GG” you mention as I don’t recall any recent statement from the Georgians to that effect?