Member Info for Madpunter

I agree that the arbitration WAS the key. However, IMHO everything has been agreed in principle except for the extension past 2027, which requires the 5% RA to be returned, which in turn requires the liquidation to complete. Assuming this occurs due to enough funds left in FRCC or it's subsidiaries, then any obstacle to a deal with the SM's, namely the debt to SH/O is also removed.

theprodigy - Especially if they end up meeting Zib's Mr Big lol.

A lot of the previous post's facts are from the book by Nickolai Hubble - How The Euro Dies.

Freescot - IMHO the next meltdown isn't too far away due to Italy and Target2 (taken from the 2nd link below).

Italy owes 460 million Euros due to Target 2 and in December 2017 they threatened to default unless the Italian Government bonds were bailed out. Dragi, an Italian was head of the ECB and they bought more Italian Government bonds than the ECB rules allowed. The rich in Italy know what is happening and are trying to take their money out of the system resulting in frozen accounts in the Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena S.p.A. But would Italy really default? Prior to the EU there was the ERM which collapsed after Italy defaulted; prior to the ERM there was the Currency Snake which collapsed after Italy defaulted; and prior to the Currency Snake there was the LMU which collapsed after Italy defaulted.
Why should we worry about the possibility of the Euro and the EU collapsing? If the EU collapses within 12 years from Boris's deal we are liable for up to 500 billion Euros. If the Euro collapses, but the EU survives the liability is 37 billion Euros (see first link below ). Yet the EIB will only give us back our initial investment of 3.5 billion Euros even though it is now worth 11.5 billion Euros (we own 16.8% of the EIB). The only way to avoid this is if we end up with no deal or Boris manages to get this liability removed.

Those who aren't familiar with Target2, it is essentially a compulsory loan with no interest and no obligation to pay. This was set up by the economists in the EU to avoid the PIIGS running out of Euros and ending up in the richer countries like Germany. Therefore, when anyone buys something in Italy from Germany for example, the Euros are sent straight back as a compulsory loan (the 3rd link has a more in depth explanation of Target2).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQWkfA2oe4g&app=desktop9

https://www.lse.co.uk/chat/general/general/eu-is-a-pack-of-cards-waiting-to-collapse-due-to-target2-ACEA28A0-3310-4306-AFFD-F37D0D5490CB.html?page=2

https://www.lse.co.uk/chat/general/general/eu-is-a-pack-of-cards-waiting-to-collapse-due-to-target2-ACEA28A0-3310-4306-AFFD-F37D0D5490CB.html

I'm off to bed now, but before I go I would like to thank you once again SR for tripping the trap. IMHO it avoided a trashed sp and a takeover for peanuts. No NOMAD ensured no trading and with all these court case; arbitration; unpaid lawyers and workers; plus the inevitable shorting brigade; the sp would have been so low that shareholders would have accepted any offer.

No it doesn't suggest that FRR have no cash, just no access to their cash.

The stalling works both ways. IMHO FRR was happy to let it continue until they met their production target, allowing enough funds to be left in the operating company to cover all debts. Hence, Zaza knew it would be crunch time this month based upon whether they have calculated correctly what was required.

The Texas case is because SH/O wants shares not $2m and IMHO is why the liquidation was stalling. IMHO FRR want the stalling to stop, hence the introduction of PWC in NY.

The money is paid into FRCC or one of the subsidiaries bank accounts. Hence why the lawyers haven't been paid since FTI took control of FRCC at the end of April and why the workers haven't been paid for 8 months of 2019.

SR - You're omitting information from my post to try and twist things again. The revenue was not for 2019, but for the first 256 days of 2019. Furthermore, the deduction of $12m operating costs as we now know that since the end of April 2019 wages etc weren't paid, therefore the deductions would be around $4m.
Money at the end of 2018 = $1.2m (Zaza interview)
Oil not paid for in 2018 = $16.65m
334 days of oil in 2019 = $37.82m
Total = $55.67m less $4m = $51.67m.

However, using the link below, the oil price for Brent has been nearer to an average of $65/bbl and Block 12 sells at a premium of around $5/bbl, so $65/bbl is more appropriate, which gives an income of $58.9m - $4m = $54.9m. There's also revenue from the gas to add, plus the prospect of opening up the choke to increase the flow rate if required (full bore is around treble the flow rate).

https://oilprice.com/oil-price-charts

Remember the Ukraine interview, Zaza stated that FRR chose to de-list. The only way is for the NOMAD to resign and for the company not to be able to find a replacement within the required time frame. IMHO this required an excuse for the NOMAD to resign, hence the omitted change in the LN's resulting in a trap which you duly obliged to trip. Thank you for saving the company from a trashed sp. and being sold for peanuts.
If any of my oil production calculations do not include 'IMHO' or 'assuming' then point them out and I will correct them as I have not presented them as fact, just my own interpretation based upon the information available.

IMHO the misleading over the loan notes was an unfortunate necessity, as without that the NOMAD would not have resigned, resulting in the de-listing. If FRR was still listed the chance of the share price not being trashed to the point where the company would be bought out for peanuts was nil. Still IMHO the trap required someone on the shorting side to fall for it and whether your a shorter or bitter investor, you were the one who fell for the trap.
Mole didn't query my figures , just the method of sale and hence the use of the GG auctions to back up my figures. . As for those oil production figures, I have backed them with the only information we have and we will soon see if I'm right.

Whenever there's any positive information the bb gets clogged with posts by SR followed by the usual blame levied against the BoD. There was a Cuckoo in the nest which required extreme measures to remove. Find me another share with a BoD that has refrained from drawing salaries; heavily invested with their own money; loaned money to the company and then bought back the loan notes at rates very favourable to share holders; and placed personal guarantees that could result in them losing their own property. All this has taken place with an invasion of Georgia; a drop in the PoO resulting in funding difficulties for O and G exploration; a regional political tussle over energy markets; tough geology to crack (the Permian in Texas took over 20 years); an orchestrated shorting attack on the share price aided by leaked information by TW et al; plus numerous court cases and arbitration. Yet some still think the BoD are at fault and should give us more information. I've re-posted my 09:07 post below before it's lost in the dross.

Ziggy - No PWC weren't clearly being told to expect a summons and PWC could have and possibly were contacted in the Caymen's. Also, PWC may not know anything about the transfer of Block 12 from FRCC, as FRR could tell them that until the arbitration is concluded, they aren't allowed to divulge the details. Furthermore, PWC could have given Notice of Appearance and requested all the case paperwork at any time after the case started in NY on the 25th October 2019, so why wait until now (Harris County gave Notice of Appearance in the first week of November)? IMHO FTI have been stalling to allow the Texas case to progress for SH/O to try and get shares off ZM and SN. Any stalling has also helped FRR, as it has given more time for oil and gas revenue to accumulate, hence no early Notice of Appearance by PWC. The media information has indicated that the end of this month is the crucial time and that many FRR employees have lost their jobs (plus confirmation by Linkedin profiles). Recent media suggests that the remaining workers lost their jobs last month. We know from past information that oil sales could take up to 45 days for remuneration, therefore any oil and gas produced after the end of November would be unlikely to effect events. However, the salaries owed for employees still working after the end of November could still be added to the debt burden, hence the terminations. IMHO FRR has waited until all the monies from production have been paid before PWC has joined the fray, prompting the end of any perceived stalling by FTI, hence the Recognition Hearing.

Ziggy - No PWC weren't clearly being told to expect a summons and PWC could have and possibly were contacted in the Caymen's. Also, PWC may not know anything about the transfer of Block 12 from FRCC, as FRR could tell them that until the arbitration is concluded, they aren't allowed to divulge the details. Furthermore, PWC could have given Notice of Appearance and requested all the case paperwork at any time after the case started in NY on the 25th October 2019, so why wait until now (Harris County gave Notice of Appearance in the first week of November)? IMHO FTI have been stalling to allow the Texas case to progress for SH/O to try and get shares off ZM and SN. Any stalling has also helped FRR, as it has given more time for oil and gas revenue to accumulate, hence no early Notice of Appearance by PWC. The media information has indicated that the end of this month is the crucial time and that many FRR employees have lost their jobs (plus confirmation by Linkedin profiles). Recent media suggests that the remaining workers lost their jobs last month. We know from past information that oil sales could take up to 45 days for remuneration, therefore any oil and gas produced after the end of November would be unlikely to effect events. However, the salaries owed for employees still working after the end of November could still be added to the debt burden, hence the terminations. IMHO FRR has waited until all the monies from production have been paid before PWC has joined the fray, prompting the end of any perceived stalling by FTI, hence the Recognition Hearing.

ODR - If there's a summons it would be listed in Pacer and Taffy and Earsbern would have posted about it.

ODR - Just to clarify, your interpretation is that PWC have hired a lawyer in case FTI want to ask them questions and have informed the court so that any papers can be sent to their lawyer's and not to PWC.

ODR - The definition shows that the 'Entry of Appearance' is a request for all documents, therefore with PWC's lawyer's 'Notice of Appearance', PWC are requesting all documents. They haven't been summoned and are a 'non-party' in the case.

The Entry of Appearance tells the circuit clerk’s office to make sure that the attorney receives notice of all documents filed with court by either side in that particular case and it also lets the clerk know that any decisions made by the judge in the case need to be sent to the attorney who filed the Entry of Appearance (copied from the link below).

https://www.columbiafamilylawgroup.com/blog/2019/august/what-is-an-entry-of-appearance-and-waiver-of-ser/

Posted by B-2-0 on the 12th November :-
Shorters are an organisation
I don't usually post anything outside of fundamental research and obtained knowledge. So will continue to do so, I am aware very aware that the shorters have in their employ an organisation of posters who infiltrate various media forums - this is very well known and has not gone in noticed. All I can say is remain focused on the events taking place and the fundamentals B20

ODR - I assume you missed my post from earlier today, now that SR is back arguing about the repayments again, so I've copied the post below. You need to look up 'Entry of Appearance' to understand that when this happens a lawyer can request all documents in a case from both sides. The wording 'given and served upon' does not imply a summons or request on the new lawyer, it's just the legal speak of how the information requested is delivered. There's another example in the link below, from a lawyer representing a creditor in the case.

https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0117/ML011700475.pdf

Ziggy - PWC lawyer's have given a 'Notice of Appearance' and a 'Request for ECF Service of Documents' which ensures they 'receives notice of all documents filed with court by either side in that particular case' (copied from the legal definition below). PWC are non-party in the case, but IMHO as they are auditors for Frontera are entitled to know what has happened with FRCC since FTI have taken control. If FTI want information from PWC they will have to go through their lawyers and give 21 days notice under Rule 2002 (see second link).

The Entry of Appearance tells the circuit clerk’s office to make sure that the attorney receives notice of all documents filed with court by either side in that particular case and it also lets the clerk know that any decisions made by the judge in the case need to be sent to the attorney who filed the Entry of Appearance (copied from the link below).

https://www.columbiafamilylawgroup.com/blog/2019/august/what-is-an-entry-of-appearance-and-waiver-of-ser/
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frbp/rule_2002

FTI was already recognised by the court by granting Chapter 15, therefore, IMHO the recognition hearing has been prompted by the appearance of PWC.

Oopsi- Thanks for the swift reply. While your here what is your view on my interpretation of the 'Entry of Appearance'?