Member Info for Madpunter

relevant loan documents, including that certain Collateral Agency Agreement. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 20 of the First Amended Complaint. 21. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 21 of the First Amended Complaint. 22. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 22 of the First Amended Complaint. 23. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 23 of the First Amended Complaint. 24. Defendants admit that Maples has possession and control of all the issued and outstanding shares of Frontera Resources Caucasus Corporation (“FRCC”) and that Outrider Master Fund, L.P. may direct the Collateral Agent pursuant to the Collateral Agency Agreement. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 24 of the First Amended Complaint. 25. Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph 25 of the First Amended Complaint to the extent that the Collateral Agency Agreement and Equitable Mortgage Over Shares, attached to the First Amended Complaint as Exhibits C and D, respectively, contain provisions governing Maples’ powers as Collateral Agent under the Note. Defendants deny the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 25 of the First Amended Complaint. 26. Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph 26 of the First Amended Complaint to the extent that section 9 of the Equitable Mortgage, attached to the First Amended Complaint as Exhibit D, contains provisions authorizing Maples to take certain actions. Such documents, and provisions therein, speak for themselves and do not require admission or denial. Defendants deny the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 26 of the First Amended Complaint. 27. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 27 to the extent that the “Solicitations of Instructions” section of the Collateral Agency Agreement speaks for itself. To the extent that the remainder of the allegations in paragraph 27 require denial, all such allegations are denied. 28. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 28 of the First Amended Complaint. 29. Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to admit or deny whether FRCC’s liquidation will “cause irreparable friction with the Georgian government,” have “damaging impacts on Plaintiffs’ overall ongoing business,” or “cause the host government to pu

INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT AND LIMITED GENERAL DENIAL Without waiving the defenses set forth herein, but insisting and relying upon each of them, and answering that all allegations contained in the First Amended Complaint for which an admission or denial is required are specifically denied unless otherwise admitted herein, Defendants respond to the individually-numbered paragraphs of the First Amended Complaint as follows: UNNUMBERED INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPHS Unnumbered paragraphs one through three of the First Amended Complaint are introductory in nature, include argument and conclusory statements, and/or factual inaccuracies. Accordingly, these introductory paragraphs do not require admission or denial; but, to the extent relevant, Defendants deny all allegations. THE PARTIES 1. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 1 of the First Amended Complaint. 2. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 2 of the First Amended Complaint. 3. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 3 of the First Amended Complaint. 4. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 4 of the First Amended Complaint. 5. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 5 of the First Amended Complaint. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 6. Defendants admit this is a civil action between citizens of different states, but deny the remaining factual allegations contained in paragraph 6 of the First Amended Complaint. 7. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 7 of the First Amended Complaint. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 8. Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 8 of the First Amended Complaint. 9. Defendants admit that Hope is the managing member of Outrider Management. Defendants admit the remaining allegations in paragraph 9 of the First Amended Complaint to the extent that Outrider Management’s website states that Outrider Management “invests in distresse

The following eight posts were posted by Taffy52 yesterday.

Posted by regdik @ 16:17 :-

So we have a drilling, testing and production expert becoming head of country just when BP announce an expansion of off shore drilling (for gas) in AZB. Strange to remove one of your top people to a country where BP have no drilling real-estate. Pipe management/maintenance in Georgia is a step backwards for this well thought of person in BP especially when her skills are in bring well on line for production. I said in earlier posts that the region is front and centre of BP plans. Laying the new pipeline will take a couple of years but drilling a well a few months but planning and drilling a production field a couple of years that is if they had the block to do it in.
Now having an expert who understands the data and can make decisions in territory is a sensible move. Especially if that person is on a fast track development path and a big win in Georgia would do wonders for her future.

Posted by Oopsi @ 14:52 :-

Nothing sinister in the transcript process - standard procedure.

https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/filelibrary/145/GO%2059.pdf

Posted by Madpunter @ 12:38 :-

I assume that the statement 'this transcript may be viewed only at the Clerk's Office public terminal or may be purchased through the Court Reporter until the deadline for the Release of Transcript Restriction after 90 days,' is due to the Jury Trial in August. There may be information in the transcript which they want to keep from jury members until the trial, therefore, anyone who accesses the transcript is traceable.

Posted by Taffy52 yesterday @ 22:09 :-

Transcript of Proceedings held on 6/6/19, before Judge Richard Seeborg. Court Reporter Jo Ann Bryce, telephone number 510-910-5888, joann_bryce@cand.uscourts.gov. Per General Order No. 59 and Judicial Conference policy, this transcript may be viewed only at the Clerk's Office public terminal or may be purchased through the Court Reporter until the deadline for the Release of Transcript Restriction after 90 days. After that date, it may be obtained through PACER. Any Notice of Intent to Request Redaction, if required, is due no later than 5 business days from date of this filing. (Re 41 Transcript Order ) Release of Transcript Restriction set for 9/9/2019. (Related documents(s) 41 ) (jabS, COURTSTAFF) (Filed on 6/11/ 2019)

Posted by regdik @ 11:32 :-

She has close working links to BH could it be that Field well development might be on the cards somewhere in Georgia.

Posted by BezzyBushFire @ 12:11 :-

Interesting video and articles on Ann. Would seem to be a rising star (see LinkedIn profile).

I like the fact she’s had a history of bringing former wells back into production...

There was a website claiming to have her email and phone details. I think I’ll resist making the obvious call to see whose sand she’s running on in Georgia...!!

Posted by Chris572 @ 10:22 :-

BP has announced their new country manager for Georgia and she was previously a well Completions' Engineering Manager....... starts her new role next month

'Completions' Engineering Manager at BP Ann Davies will take up her duties as the company's country manager for Georgia from July 2019, BP Azerbaijan told Trend '

https://menafn.com/1098530228/BP-names-new-country-managers-for-Turkey-Georgia

Posted by Chris572 @ 07:33 :-

Kolomoisky's lawyer at the head of the AP demands to continue the scandalous competition for the most gas-bearing section in the Black Sea
[08:00 June 12, 2019]

The head of the Presidential Administration urged to continue the competition to conclude production sharing agreements for the Dolphin site on the Black Sea shelf for at least 120 days. This is stated in the letter of the head of the Presidential Administration Andrei Bogdan to the Cabinet of Ministers.
The competition was started on April 12, the deadline for submission of applications was reduced to 60 days by the government, therefore, it will expire on June 12. “Given the scale of the site, which area is more than 9.4 thousand square meters. km, and the complexity of the implementation of such a project, Ukraine needs to attract foreign gas companies with practical experience on the shelf, as well as with appropriate technical and financial support, ”the letter says.
The continuation of the competition will expand the range of international bidding companies and increase the transparency of the evaluation process of their bids, the letter says.
According to a source at the Ministry of Energy, on June 12 at least two foreign companies will apply for the competition. The first is the American firm Frontera Resources. The second is the American investment fund Trident Acquisitions, which is managed by Ilya Ponomarev, who recently became a citizen of Ukraine.
Direct applicants from Ukraine are also possible, at the same time, hardly any of them will have the necessary experience in the implementation of such oil and gas projects on the shelf.
Previously, journalists found that the right to develop and produce hydrocarbons in one of the largest gas-bearing areas in the Black Sea “Dolphin” can get an American company with a dubious reputation. Frontera Resources has dubious projects in Moldova and Georgia, and its financial report for the part of 2017 and 2018 indicates that the company is unprofitable.
Market participants stated that the government artificially limits applicants for gas production in the offshore section.

Posted by bugsy-b @ 20:23 :-

" J.P. Morgan organized an investor trip to Georgia in May and met with government officials, corporates and banks to discuss performance of Georgian bond-issuers and their further prospects"...

Big money sniffing around Georgia now... And straight into the gas side of things..

https://www.gogc.ge/en/article/we-think-georgian-oil-and-gas-corporation-is-the-strongest-credit-in-georgia-indicates-jp-morgan-after-visiting-georgia-for-credit-research-update/450

Posted by spreadbetwolf @ 14:34 :-

email from IG regarding my long spread bet position

Changing valuation of Frontera Resources

Dear Sir

At 3pm on Monday 17 June, we will be changing the valuation on Frontera Resources to zero. This is to reflect an action taken by our broker, based on independent advice.

This means you will no longer be charged overnight funding on your position. However, we will need to close and reopen positions at zero for the funding change to be effective.

As a result of this, the loss against any long positions on your account will increase. To avoid other positions being closed or your account running into a debit balance, you may need to fund your account.

We're here to help

If you have any questions about this or need assistance with your account, you can find answers in our help and support area or IG Community. Alternatively, our highly trained client services team is available by phone or email 24 hours a day from 8am Saturday to 10pm Friday.

Kind regards

IG

Posted by OneDayRodney1 @ 11:57 :-

Apologies for the delay but I now have the details on the 'IG paying out on shorts' headline.

Basically anyone with a long or short position with IG is charged overnight interest on their position. When a stock is suspended or delists this continues. All IG stocks are held with a custodian (HSBC). HSBC have decided to stop charging the overnight charge on FRR and so IG are stopping doing the same to their holders of open positions. To achieve this the positions will be booked out at zero and the funds moved to a proceeds account. This will not be accessible to customers. If the stock relists the appropriate monies will be credited/debited to this proceeds account and the resultant profit or demand given to the customer. If there is a dividend paid it does not affect any of this. So, those with open positions are not being affected at all in effect other than they will stop being charged the daily interest charge.
Shorters have therefore been paying a daily interest charge to IG for almost six months ... I don't recall them boasting about that on ADVFN ... :).

Posted by theprodigy @ 13:22 :-

nsight to the foresight and reason Steve Nicandros is very highly respected and considered an industry expert. Watch these 3 links and then think to what we are currently seeing play out and im sure you will have a far greater understanding of the obstacles we have faced and appreciation of where Steve Nicandros has positioned and taken us. Zaza has been part of this process and will be the man standing atop the podium when frontera receive their medal. For me the medal should jointly be hanging around SNs neck.

Worth the full hour watch to get full understanding but SN talks around the 21 minute mark for about 8 minutes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVTtQ2DMBQw

Again worth the full hour but Sn is on around the 50 minutes mark for about ten minutes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxyTtfa3tho&feature=youtu.be

Then take the comments from congress directing the President to ensure the protection of US assets in Georgia
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/4563?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22H.R.4563%22%5D%7D&r=1

So to summarise my thoughts- SN has worked tirelessly on the ground and behind the scenes to position frontera in the best tactical, operational and political positions to capitalise on our assets and investments.

All in my opinion. Not intended as investment advice but just a bit of recent history for anyone who doesnt know.

ATB

Posted by Chris572 @ 13:08 :-

this is from the GerogiaToday website back 2015 and its starting to sound like its pretty accurate after seeing the interest from majors in Georgia . fingers crossed eh

The recent nontrivial discovery by Frontera will almost certainly confirm that this field is in the top 10 largest gas fields on the planet. Some American experts say that it is likely to be confirmed at around 100 trillion cubic feet recoverable and will therefore rank as the 6th largest, just behind Russia’s giant Shtokman field, while Azerbaijan’s Shah Deniz field is currently ranked 18th largest at 42 tcf (Trillion Cubic Feet).

The Shah Deniz field is currently the key reserve for the Southern Gas Corridor project, an initiative of the European Commission for gas supply from Caspian and Middle Eastern regions to Europe. Conveniently, the designated pipeline route of the Southern Gas Corridor travels across this new field in Georgia using existing infrastructure; relatively, the status of Georgia as a transit country will quickly be redefined as ‘key supplier.’

Energy experts believe that even though the South Kakheti Gas Complex is still in relatively early stages of development, possible high-caliber global interest is likely to guarantee that this strategic asset will be very quickly developed.

http://georgiatoday.ge/news/1636/God%E2%80%99s-Gift-Revealed%3A-Georgia-Could-Become-a-Key-European-Energy-Supplier

Posted by Ivyspivey @ 13:12 and 13:13 :-

Old link from 2015 before I was a SH here

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/news/transcripts/ukraine-s-economic-reform-insights-from-the-newly-minted-minister-of-finance-3

I knew they worked closely with AC but did nit realise they worked as part of a formal partnership

From 2015 link

I am particularly delighted to announce that today the Atlantic Council is launching a new partnership with Frontera Resources, a Houston-based energy firm operating in emerging markets. This partnership will help us expand our work on Ukraine throughout Europe’s East, particularly to include Georgia and Moldova. Steve Nicandros, Frontera’s chairman and CEO, is with us here today. Thank you, Steve, so very much for your support.

Posted by Earsbern @ 20:40 :-

Just to recap some of yesterday's events - FRR's meeting with the judge was yesterday morning - sometime after 11 a.m.
Taffy's resultant post on this BB was at 2100 - about 1300 Cali time.
So in 2 hours the meeting was completed and FRR's response (a transcript of a PDF for a motion) was received and noted by the judge's office. That seems incredibly quick by legal standards (especially as FRR had 7 days to reply!).

The obvious inference to be drawn from this speed is that FRR were not only unsurprised by the judge's reaction, but were already fully prepared for it and didn't waste any time in putting their planned response into action. Just for info, here's Yahoo's definition of a US civil court motion -

Motion:
a formal request made to a judge for an order or judgment. Motions are made in court all the time for many purposes: to continue (postpone) a trial to a later date, to get a modification of an order, for temporary child support, for a judgment, for dismissal of the opposing party's case, for a rehearing, for sanctions (payment of the moving party's costs or attorney's fees), or for dozens of other purposes. Most motions require a written petition, a written brief of legal reasons for granting the motion (often called "points and authorities"), written notice to the attorney for the opposing party and a hearing before a judge.

So what does FRR's motion contain? You pays your money, you takes your choice. Reading all that's been written today, my guess (and boy, is it a guess) is that FRR are asking for a stop or a stay in the case (while they move on to the next stage of the solvency declaration, etc., as planned). The Cali court has served it's purpose?

Posted by BezzyBushFire @ 09:19 and the first sentence was also posted by Goit @08:59 and sonnyclimes @ 09:00 :-

The whole passage in this respect states:

"110. Defendants represented at oral argument that the directors have submitted a declaration of solvency to the voluntary liquidators. This does not deprive the liquidators’ of their authority to continue with the liquidation, however, as they may still apply to the Cayman Islands court for the court to supervise the liquidation if they believe either: (1) the company is or is likely to become insolvent; or (2) court supervision is necessary to facilitate a more effective, economic, or expeditious liquidation in the interests of the contributories and creditors."

As such, we need to hope that the liquidators don't make assertions under points 1 & 2 above that may cause harm. I'd like to think that with us leaving the 5% in the pot, this should satisfy that. However, if the suggestion is that the 5% will revert to the GG, wouldn't that be an issue?

It does feel like this has been a very expensive stalling tactic to ultimately unseat Hope from the board and to further operations on site until such time that we can secure a suitable loan and settle the obligation. Hopefully the said loan clears both Hope & YA and we can move on with our future business partners.

Whilst the court outcome hasn't been what we'd hoped for. We've been provided with another little snipet (above) that confirms we're still alive and kicking.

GLA LTHs.

Posted by Taffy52 @ 08:24 and 08:25 :-

Court order
Moreover, the voluntary liquidators have the option under Cayman Islands law to apply to the Cayman Islands court to fix the rate and amount of their compensation and expenses, if they are dissatisfied with the company’s decision. I

The motion fares no better under the remaining Winter factors. First, Plaintiffs fail to demonstrate they are likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of the requested injunctive relief. As discussed above, even if an injunction were issued against the current Defendants, that would do nothing to stop the liquidation. The balance of the equities similarly do not favor Plaintiffs. As noted in the prior TRO order, it is a cause of considerable concern that while the Complaint in this case appears to have been filed before the Cayman Islands action was resolved, Plaintiffs failed to disclose the existence of that pending action. (Order at 4:12-14.) Indeed, the Cayman Islands court saw fit to discharge the preliminary injunction in that action based on its finding that Plaintiffs’ case had “no real prospects of success and/or fails to raise a serious question to be tried.” (Dkt. 23-10, Cornwell Decl., Ex. G at ¶ 47(b).) Plaintiffs’ argument that they thought the Cayman Islands action was irrelevant to this case and that if Defendants disagreed they would so inform the Court, (Mot. at 12 n.1), is disingenuous. Plaintiffs had the obligation under Local Rule 3-13 to disclose material facts to the Court and sought the issuance of temporary injunctive relief with no notice to Defendants. In addition to their failure to disclose, Plaintiffs’ failure to take responsibility for the required disclosure gives further evidence of their unclean hands and lack of entitlement to the balance of the equities.4 Finally, neither party provides arguments regarding the public interest prong, but it is clear that the public has little interest in injunctive relief that cannot stop the liquidation. Indeed, public interest appears to weigh the other way: protecting the right of secured creditors to collect their collateral. IV. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction is denied.

Posted by Taffy52 @ 08:23 :-

Court order
longer control the liquidation of FRCC. Under Cayman Islands law, once voluntary liquidators are appointed to wind up the company’s affairs and distribute its assets, all the powers of the directors cease, except so far as that expressly reserved to them by a resolution passed at a corporate general meeting or the voluntary liquidator sanctions such ongoing director authority. Companies Law § 119(5) (2018 Revision) (Cayman Is.); Companies Law Winding Up Rules, Order 13, Rule 3 (2018) (Cayman Is.). The voluntary liquidators are the ones who exercise broad powers to direct the company’s business as necessary for its liquidation. Companies Law Winding Up Rules, Order 13, Rule 3 (2018) (Cayman Is.) (citing Companies Law Schedule III (2018 Revision) (Cayman Is.)).2 Plaintiffs do not allege any facts or provide evidence to suggest that the directors have any power to affect the liquidation of FRCC. Moreover, the only individual director being sued here, Defendant Hope, has resigned from his board position.3 Again, granting injunctive relief would not prevent the liquidation of FRCC and so Plaintiffs’ motion fails on this additional ground. See Dream Palace v. Cty. of Maricopa, 384 F.3d 990, 999-1000 (9th Cir. 2004) (noting a case becomes moot when the issues presented no longer constitute a live controversy). 2 The voluntary liquidators must apply to the Cayman Islands court for an order that the liquidation continue under court supervision, unless the directors have signed a declaration of solvency within 28 days of the commencement of the liquidation. Companies Law § 124(1) (2018 Revision) (Cayman Is.). Once the liquidation is supervised by the court, it may appoint an official liquidator who has the same broad powers as described for voluntary liquidators. Companies Law §§ 105(1), 110. Defendants represented at oral argument that the directors have submitted a declaration of solvency to the voluntary liquidators. This does not deprive the liquidators’ of their authority to continue with the liquidation, however, as they may still apply to the Cayman Islands court for the court to supervise the liquidation if they believe either: (1) the company is or is likely to become insolvent; or (2) court supervision is necessary to facilitate a more effective, economic, or expeditious liquidation in the interests of the contributories and creditors. Companies Law § 131 (2018 Revision) (Cayman Is.). 3 Plaintiffs make the tenuous argument that Hope and the other Defendants retain control over the voluntary liquidators by controlling their compensation for the liquidation. First, Hope is no longer a member of the board, and the rate and amount of the voluntary liquidators’ compensation is fixed and payment is authorized by resolution of the company. Companies Law § 130(2) (2018 Revision) (Cayman Is.). Moreover, the voluntary liquidators have the option under Cayman Islands law to apply to the Cayma