Member Info for ZiggyZag

Mad
I suppose
If the letter is sent to the company , with explanations of our intentions if they fail to respond then that puts the next stage and any consequences firmly in their court .
If they fail to engage or just fob us off with a meaningless statement they do so knowing the letter will be forwarded to others .
They far more than us , are in the best position to gauge what potential harm it may do to the company, assuming its still fit for purpose .
After the letter is sent to them their actions will determine our actions , so election timings at this stage is not an issue .

Just re reading my 13.47 post , feel I need to clarify .
Whilst my first 3 or 4 sentences read as if I am against the draft , I am not

.Whilst it presents a character assassination of the Co / officers , its a true reflection of our plight / history .
If we get no response than that would indicate to me games over anyway so would be happy to send parting shot .

Couple of views on draft letter content .

Headline in Govt leaning press ...Western speculators in our country loose their pocket money in FRR as Company deserts them .

I would imagine Mr Joe Public in Georgia reaction to be something along the lines of ...poor little rich folk in UK loosing their gambling money whilst our folk linked to Company loose their jobs.....

Our enemies in Georgia and USA will say ...great just what we need ...

I think it paints Zaza as a lair and cheat and us as fools , taken in by him and now spitting our dummies out .

Having said the above the object is to get the Company to engage with us and negate the need to forward the letter to anyone outside the company .
I would be in favour of sending letter to ZM , SN and LG giving them a clear response date .
If they fail to respond with the knowledge of what will be sent to Georgia then that will tell its own story and we have nothing further to lose by forwarding on .
The draft presented to them will of course be what we will send to reporter if we get no / unsuitable response . So I would add into the draft they see a final para that we had presented it to them and still were ignored .
Re the timings of before after election should we have to involve the press.
Suppose it depends on how long we give them to respond , I was thinking 7 days but 14 may be more reasonable, if they take us seriously they will have to communicate internally / come up with response etc , we want a proper thought out one not a holding one .
If sent today that takes us into October for deadline end ( assuming no response or they leave it till last moment .
Their response if any , will I assume assist us in deciding next action i.e. are we happy with it or not , do we need to respond to them for any clarifications etc or are they so dismissive of us that we involve reporters.
Whatever , I think the question of before or after election cannot be made until we see how they react and we have taken a view .
Finally I think the covering letter we send to them is just as crucial in its wording as the actual “ press release “ it needs to be a good balance of hard & threatening / on their side ( for now)

Mole
B-2-0 knows as much as me re whats going on and I know now’t.

If I am wrong B-2-0 ...put up or shut up

Interesting views ..
Understand the merit of contacting Ambassador’s etc first , but if we still hear nothing from Co then we are left wondering is it because Co still chooses to ignore us or because the...intermediaries...put our letter in their pending tray .
Also if I were SN getting call from Ambassadors/ Senators office saying ...hey look what your shareholders have told us ....Firstly I would be embarrassed that my unprofessional attitude had become known to them. Secondly as a result I would be well peed of with shareholders for taking that route ( even though it was my fault )
Lets go to the horses mouth first and give him the choice of responding or not .
If he fails to respond ( being clear on our proposed next action ) that will tell us alot about our standing .
If he responds , we digest his message and decide to move forward with reporter angle now or hold back pending election or whatever.

Its now two weeks since JJ Carters post saying Zaza had been removed . We have heard nothing since to confirm but If he has gone that might explain blocking .
Having said that we are invested in FRR not Zaza Inc so if true you would expect Co to update us , trouble we have is the fact they have not does not prove Zaza has not gone .

I have said previously maybe we are not part of Co future plans hence no communications from them to us on fear of possible shareholder action .
With them talking to all but us over the last six months I cannot think of any other plausible reason .
I am in favour of contacting Georgian reporter but with a proviso . Once the letter / story is composed send it reg post or whatever ( cost out of translation fund ) to our Reg office in Houston and to SN home address asking for a response to our issues within 7 days . Also inform them the letter will be sent to the active US Senators as well as reporter.

Pyro re your 10.56 , 2nd para

In my experience liquidators never get any where near true value and their first aim is to ensure their fees are covered .
In the early days I assumed that we may be in the pecking order of any payouts but came to understand that once Maples gained control that took FRCC out of FRR group, so we have no standing .
Think this was confirmed many months ago to someone on here TSBS I think, when he contacted FTI for info , think he was told ...your not a shareholder so no info and referred to FRR.

Ears , yes agree our default on payments to Hope caused Maples to take control of FRCC and subsequent liquidation .
Also agree Hope’s actions over previous couple of years in his capacity seem to be highly questionable as to wether he acted in the best interests of the company he was a director of.
Hence the Cali litigation which we are claiming $56 m damages against him I think.
Just don’t see that if we win the Cali court has the power to reverse the consequences of his actions which would include overriding the Caymans Court .
If we really have a case / firm evidence / smoking gun etc we need him across the table to negotiate a release from the liquidation .....or better still .. .... what turns out to be a watertight transfer of the asset recognised both in Georgia & Caymans , leaving him with a worthless FRCC ..
But hey ...a little bit of knowledge is dangerous ..... and I may be way of beam on my understanding of the process.

Earsbern , thanks for response .

Hear what you are saying but not sure it will impact on FTI’s mission

Whist Hope past actions have to put it mildly caused us many problems the Cali action has no bearing on the legality of where the asset of B12 licience should reside.

The liquidator FTI already HAVE the rights to any assets of FRCC .

The question they are now investigating with the backing of US courts is what ARE the lawful assets of FRCC and should any assets that were taken out just prior to liquidation be returned under insolvency laws to FRCC.
This includes B12 licence , being at the time of removal , the main asset of value .

Re that investigation I would suggest the outcome of the Cali case where as you say we are suing Hope re his fiduciary duties etc has no bearing on what assets should / should not , reside in FRCC .
That question will ultimately be decided by the Cayman Grand Court based on FTI findings .

If we win all in Cali presumably we will get substantial damages but can’t see how that Court can impact liquidation process, what ever stage it is at by then .

Clearly though there is a link between the two cases as if we win our battle in Georgia a deal may be done with Hope pre Cali trial which may result in the Caymans court granting us a Syist ( I think its called ) where FRCC is taken out of liquidation and handed back to the control of our men .
Fingers still firmly crossed .

Earsbern re your post last night 20.32 where you say
..... The court case in California, to effectively decide whether or not OMF has any such legal claim.....
Can you explain what you mean by that

Looed re your 9.05 you say

...For me, if Georgia was a side-show then why is Zaza focusing all his attention there? Why not in the USA fighting? We are told to ignore they very place where we know Zaza is. Not saying US isn't of importance - but it cant be all that current-critical if Zaza is focused on Georgia....

I would say the action in USA / Caymans IS critical .

Whatever the outcome in Georgia thats where the future of the asset remaining in the FRR entity ( should it be retained within the contract with Georgian’s ) will be lost / won .

Re Zaza not fighting in USA , its not all down to one executive and presume the Company is fighting the process.

Zaza remaining in Georgia may simply mean for the moment he is out of reach of FTI discovery process taking place , which if nothing else may frustrate their endeavours / gain time within the process , for whatever reason .

Thanks Oopsi
Majority of what he writes is already known to us but seeing in one article the story of FRR journey to where they appear to be today is not comfortable reading for any investor.

Think the only thing we have not seen before is the comment related to the actions of Sens. Ted Cruz and John Cornyn, Texas Republicans, , which he says .... Has outraged people in Georgia, including the American community..... Georgians yes , but have we we seen this ref to Americans before .
It seems a very recent article and so interesting no reference or confirmation to reports that Zaza has been removed / left .
I am not on twitter , perhaps someone who is could ask him .

Rainbow , you are entitled to your opinion and your positivity is admirable,.
You focus all the time on Zaza ‘s silence and have given all sorts of reasons over the past months to justify that including repeating to day about his personal safety .
. Giving the game away , tipping off Hope , Georgians etc are all reasons you have given to accept silence ....from Zaza, but what about the Company . The entity of FRR is more than one man , it has a company structure and the company has obligations to its shareholders why for example do they choose to ignore simple and reasonable requests from some shareholders such as info on share certificates , how does that type of refusal fit into your excuse making and acceptance that they ( because Zaza is part of they ) have our interests at heart ?

ODR, re your 22.03 last night .
I queried a removal of one of my posts a few months ago with admin. They said mine was fine but when a post is deemed against the rules they remove that one and surrounding ones ( mine ) even if they are inline with guidelines .Presume the removal from member info is a process that catches up piecemeal .

Mole , I think your post is spot on .
The .....sock it to em Zaza....posters fail to take on board the impact the FTI action can / will have on the Co .
FTI have been lurking in the background and no doubt grinding away in USA whilst the headlines have been made in Georgia .
It pains me to say it but I just cannot see how the asset removal will be deemed as not to in breech of insolvency laws .
Too close to insolvency .....seems a slam dunk .
Fair value ....I’m sure 100’s of millions was not paid , so unless what we have is actually worth a pittance , another slam dunk .
The aroma of coffee has been emitting from the stove since FTI filed last year and the only thing that will mask the smell is a deal with Hope , but I doubt that will happen .

Damn button ....Can’t recall any abuse in the posts , so presume rumour / fact with out proof is classed as disruptive . Onthat basis wonder any posts on any board exist .

Contacted admin here re reason for removal of posts from last night and response was they were “ disruptive & abusive “

Ladies and gentlemen , now where was I

If Zaza does communicate with us again , what he will say in his first sentence ?

CF .. agree it seems in the companies eyes the shareholders , are not a priority , we are not even on the to do list .