Member Info for Madpunter

IMHO if Block 12 has not been legally transferred, then it is held by a company being liquidated, which gives the right of the GOGC to take back Bock 12. Also, if the reason for the GOGC not allowing the transfer of Block 12 was that FRR could not show that they had sufficient funds to work on Block 12, the arrival of the two CEO's would make sense. If two CEO's did visit Georgia with Zaza to strike a deal, this could have met the criteria to allow the transfer to be legally registered. If the GOGC wanted to expropriate Block 12, which the events of the arbitration and the subsequent 28 day termination notice suggest, then it would explain why the GOGC wouldn't meet the delegation. IMHO when the GD are defeated in the forthcoming election, a deal can be undertaken and the court cases over the pond just become noise.

and counting.

https://days.to/until/halloween

If no candidate has more than 50% of the vote, there's a second round consisting of the first two candidates in the majority seats. If the GD polls 39%, they would be unlikely to win any of these majority seats this time, whereas the previous elections, with many parties, 39% would be enough for first past the post.

The GD polled 39% last time and got 75% of the seats. This time they would probably get less than 59 of the 150 seats. 39% of the 120 seats under PR = 46.8 seats. If they won 39% of the 30 majority seats = 11.7 seats. The opposition parties are with the exception of one party, nominating a candidate to represent the united opposition parties in the majority seats, so they don't split the vote and let the GD win those seats. Therefore, if the GD polled 39%, the remaining 61% is available to the nominated opposition candidate and the candidate for the party that didn't agree to stand down. This should make it more difficult for the GD to win these seats. The result is likely to be a coalition of the united opposition parties.

Also there's the strong possibility that with a united opposition, PR, US and EU political pressure and international observers that the GD lose the election. If this happens, then with the boot on the other foot, will the GD find themselves in court and a possible prison sentence? A deal with FRR, especially if it involves US and EU diplomats may include a 'get out of gaol free card' for representatives of the GD party. All still to play for IMHO.

IMHO it will be won and lost in Georgia and the cases in the US are just noise. If the asset transfer is deemed not to have been allowed by the GOGC, then it remains in an insolvent company and the GOGC take back Block 12, as there would be insufficient funds to comply with the PSA. If the GOGC have allowed the asset transfer and are negotiating a deal, maybe involving the removal of ZM, then monies from a farm in can payoff FRR's debts.

I did mention yesterday that IF Zaza has been removed the GD could put spin on his recent interviews, due to board removal possibly discrediting him. This could be in return of a licence extension for Block 12, as without it the media publicity could be more detrimental to the GD. Also, this would reduce any future threat of Zaza as a political opponent to BI and the GD.

and counting.

https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/halloween

Looed's post from the 22/08/20 :-
The loan approval was approved in April. The form says that FRR where able to retain 12 jobs as a result of this loan. It also shows the name of the bank providing the bailout.

"Companies and nonprofit organizations that receive PPP loans may have the loans forgiven if they meet certain criteria, including not laying off employees during an 8-week period covered by the loan. Applicants must attest in their application that the loans are necessary for their continuing operation. Note: This data includes loan applications approved by banks and submitted to the SBA. It may not reflect money distributed to, or credit used by, a given company."

It would seem this money hasn't been used to pay the staff in Georgia?

I wonder if this is how FRR are able to pay US$160,000 so far in lobby fees? Not sure thats how such a loan should be used.

https://projects.propublica.org/coronavirus/bailouts/loans/frontera-resources-corporation-f1e0248725b005d33267b59b4df0cb7c

The last sentence from Looed's post @ 01:03 today :-
Quick point on finances - FRR has spent a minimum of US$160K this year on lobbying, so cash is coming from somewhere.

Looed I think you need to state that FRR has NOT spent $160k this year on lobbying or that the 'loan' may have been used for this purpose. IMHO ZM and SN are the most likely sources for the money and as they are directors of FRR and the lobbying is relevant to FRR, FRR is listed on the 'Opensecrets' website.

NOTE: The organization itself did not donate, rather the money came from the organization's individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate family members. Organizations themselves cannot contribute to candidates and party committees. Totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.

My post from the 22nd August 2020 :-
IMHO we cannot make assumptions about FRR using loan money for lobbying. If my memory is correct there was lobbying paid by both ZM and SN, which as it was linked to FRR's business resulted in the amount listed on some websites as from FRR.

Posted by Oopsi on the 22nd January :-

2020 contributions - Mullin
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000071040&cycle=2020

The Oopsi post can be found here :-
https://www.lse.co.uk/chat/general/commodities-and-mining/frontera-archive-41C7D130-7E51-4344-82E7-83B697F53322.html?page=45

The relevant part from the Oopsi post link which explains why the lobbying money is NOT from Frontera Resources, but presumably from ZM and SN is copied below :-

NOTE: The organization itself did not donate, rather the money came from the organization's individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate family members. Organizations themselves cannot contribute to candidates and party committees. Totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.

No twisting required. Your words 'And if us taking action did jeopardise the company'.
To jeopardize a situation or activity means to do something that may destroy it or cause it to fail.
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/jeopardize

'And if us taking action did jeopardise the company - what a perfect opportunity for a simple statement, light on detail, to say "company is aware that SH await a communication from the company and this will be dealt with when possible" or words to that effect.'
So you're happy to jeopardise the company as long as they promise a reply. In other words information from FRR is more important to you than the economic success and survival of FRR. After that statement from you I don't think I need waste my time discussing any of the other points.

CF73 - It's no wonder that Zaza was on the defensive in the SH meeting when Cheesie walked out (I don't think Cheesie is an enemy of FRR). Zaza suspected some of those aligned with SH/O, Tw et al and possibly the GD were present. Reading this board at times it would seem that the enemy is around and wanting to finish off FRR through any means. Lawyers, journalists and politicians all readily use spin to win, whereas directors are hampered with what they are able to state, hence the need for a NOMAD in official statements. IMHO Zaza has had to counter any spin with whatever means deemed necessary, which may not have been possible playing strictly by the rules. Therefore, by not having to disclose information to SH's, it may have been possible to convey information countering an enemy broadside, without shooting himself in the foot. This is not a normal business environment that FRR is negotiating. However, both Uncle Sam and the EU appear to be backing a change of regime in Georgia and FRR seem to have friends in high places. This is hardly the situation of a company perpetrating some sort of scam. I understand the pessimism of some on here, but other's constant attacks on Zaza may play into the hand's of the enemy, which beggars the question of whether they are actually aligned with the SH's?

IMHO we cannot make assumptions about FRR using loan money for lobbying. If my memory is correct there was lobbying paid by both ZM and SN, which as it was linked to FRR's business resulted in the amount listed on some websites as from FRR.

and counting.

https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/halloween

Kurt Volker about 20th of June: People Can’t Forget That
https://www.georgianjournal.ge/politics/36622-kurt-volker-about-20th-of-june-people-cant-forget-that.html

Former NATO General: Nobody has Done More for the Alliance than Georgia
http://georgiatoday.ge/news/22121/Former-NATO-General%3A-Nobody-has-Done-More-for-the-Alliance-than-Georgia

Is now accessible on here back to March 2005 when FRR joined AIM. Last time I looked I don't think all the RNS's were available, but there are now 430 of them on 9 pages.

Also, there's no guarantee plugged wells will ever flow again, as the well structure, permeability etc can be damaged. This is why even when the oil price went negative, some oil companies in the shale belt decided to continue losing money rather than plugging the wells, as it may have cost more if the wells couldn't be brought back into production, or flowed at a lower rate. The difference in the flow rates in 2020 could also be due to loss of permeability due to plugging the wells, if the GD wouldn't let FRR operate.

Mick - My estimates for production gave a figure of 312 bbl/d for 2018 without T39. IMHO T39 was plugged after the EWT due to the flaring of the gas, and it would seem unlikely that permits for a gathering pipeline and processing plant were obtained (knowing the obstacles from the GD with recent media). The fracking of wells in the US shale requires constant new wells, as existing wells need to be re-fracked or plugged enabling possible recharge after 3 - 5 years. Therefore, the decline from around 312 bbls/d in Q2 2018 to 256 bbls/d in Q3 2020 may be correct.