Member Info for OneDayRodney1

Contra: you clearly haven't read the report, presumably as you haven't been able to get hold of it. What you say is not what is happening and will not happen.

Contra: they're trying to reverse the liquidation. If successful then all shareholdings, including all of ours and Zaza's (unless there's a mechanism such that he had to forfeit them), will remain in FRC as they were before the liquidation. If unsuccessful then FRC is liquidated along with our shareholdings and the asset is gone too.

If the funding had been accessible then it would have surely been accessed before the liquidation deadline (to save loss of control and considerable additional cost), so it suggests it is doubtful it will come now... bwtfdik

****nal: this is a clever way of trying to get a feel for the content of the report, so credit to you for your ingenuity.

however, having seen the recommendations i can only assume that there are a couple of folks on here who have messed up your exercise.

Lifeishard: not intended as a dig at FSHG. They put in a huge amount of effort to firstly form and then try to set up a dialogue. I was a bit disappointed at their disinterest in the suggestion and perhaps that was unintentionally reflected in the tone in my post.

Erazzel: you're correct in that the Liquidator fees dealing with the emails will be significant especially if the have Directors dealing with them, like happened with mine. If we were to survive this then these exorbitant Liquidator fees will have to be paid first. So it's a shame that FSHG didn't agree to try to take the burden off the Liquidators, although I accept they may not have been successful if they had.

Tsbs/Monti. I'm sorry but I have been told to not say anything so I won't. I'm sure someone will get it soon and be more open, but anyone hoping to get it via FSHG won't as they have informed me that they "are not interested in getting involved in this".

Ian12: they will be able to trace where the leak came from through lse. I would also add that one can't anonymously share the report as they emboss your personal email address all over it.

You will recall that I did reach out to FSHG with a suggestion that they contact the Liquidator direct to obtain the report for their already verified shareholder members. That was first thing Saturday. I haven't received any response/acknowledgement from them.

Tsbs: We all know the facts: we are shareholders in a Company that is currently being liquidated. As part of that process the Liquidators produced a first statement which included that they had discovered no liquid assets and that there were creditor claims. These are the facts.

As part of that process they've now produced a Liquidators' report. I have been told not to say anything about what's in that report.

Good morning Lifeishard. Apologies I missed Avi8r's post. However, I did reach out to FSHG via a friend on Whatsapp first thing yesterday. I was concerned at the Liquidator cost in having to verify shareholdings before sharing the report, especially as my email was dealt with at Director level(!), which will be expensive. So I suggested that FSHG approach the Liquidator direct and suggest that they could distribute the report to their, already verified, member base, and in so doing save a big chunk of Liquidator costs. I haven't heard anything back from FSHG yet.

Ziggy: I didn't receive the minutes of the meeting, I received the Liquidators' report which should have been prepared and presented at the meeting, but wasn't finalised until after the meeting.

I accept the sniping point. Being a longstanding stalwart of this Board you will understand that I didn't start that particular round of sniping and was the recipient, but in respect of yours, and I am sure many others, views I will now let that issue lie.

Toatie: apologies I have been out for the day. Thank you for answering the question Bezzy; all the best.

NJames: I have seen nothing that says the Liquidators took issue with the content... or that it caused the Company to lose credibility?! Do please share if you have any evidence of such. I'm sure you wouldn't make such remarks without evidence would you?

Good evening all

The Liquidators' first report to creditors has just been published, and as a shareholder who requested it, I have a copy.

However, I have been informed that the report is confidential and I cannot "quote, copy, distribute, or disclose" its contents.

So I can't say anything further, except that any shareholder is entitled to obtain it from the Liquidators.

Note to Monti Burns, NJames and a few others: in your World you probably don't understand why I am not prepared to reveal the contents on here as the Liquidators would never be looking on here right ....?

Cazbraz: I hope you're keeping well.

I have a share certificate for the element of my holding that was chucked out of my ISA when they delisted and I sent this to Deloitte. The bulk of my shareholding remains in a nominee account which I guess may not appear directly in my name on the register. I will keep posting anything I do receive on here, despite the sniping it engenders from some, as I believe that this is a forum to help us shareholders find out what is going on with our investments.

Talking of which: Monti - yes my info was from Deloitte. They haven't confirmed specifically that the scheduled meeting went ahead but the implication is that it did.

Just to provide an update on how slow things progress with such matters:

The communication issued by Deloitte to shareholders on 16 January states

"Liquidators’ reporting obligations

The Liquidators are required to prepare a first report to creditors of the conduct of the liquidation and present that report at the first meeting of creditors."

This did not happen. They're still working on the report and expect it to be completed next week.

Avi8r: off topic but it was kind of you to write so caringly to Sdyas.

Having watched 20 days in Mariupol yesterday evening, my respect for veterans like yourself has further increased, as obviously you have witnessed first hand the sort of things that were shown in that documentary.

Monti: as will become clear in time, and as Ricardo has already observed, it won't be reason 2. But otherwise the two potential reasons you suggest are possibilities. These things often seem to take much longer than one would expect, but given the understandable current levels of concern as the Company our shares are in is being liquidated, it would be considerate of the former Directors to provide us with an update via Looed soonest.

Oh dear, someone was on the lash yesterday evening ...which is fine, but it is not acceptable to make accusations against Looed given what he has done for the readers of this board.

I thought that given his credentials have been verified and the source of his information independently confirmed that such stupid accusations would be behind us, but sadly not.

Looed - please ignore the (clearly) drunken rant.

Given we are in a bit of a void at the moment it might be interesting to establish what folks might be expecting to happen on 14 March.

The latest Company message kindly shared by Looed said: "We are working closely with Deloitte to return the company to the pre-windup status quo for the benefit of all stakeholders, and we are advancing a joint formal plan in this regard."

On the 28th Looed posted: "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."

So, if Looed is correct, then we should learn if the ex-Directors are indeed doing what they told us they are...

It would also be interesting to know when we might hear what happened in the meeting. Presumably as shareholders we have a right to know pdq...