Ben Richardson, CEO at SulNOx, confident they can cost-effectively decarbonise commercial shipping. Watch the video here.
WHB
Ia’m sure SN probably dose’t want to pay and I suppose the decision to pay or not is his . Would think when the court rules he should pay ,…..subject to any appeal outcome …. I presume he will suffer the consequences by not divvying up ….. having been ordered to do so .
Hi Looed , thanks for clarifying
Hi Looed
Many thanks for your response
Just to clarify , are you indicating you have asked , but did not get a response ?
On the assumption that it is likely to be us , do you feel this case is on their list of litigations that require them to continue to stay dark until completed ?
Looed.
You have said in the past that its not possible access Georgian courts for info on cases taking place there.
Re the court hearings in Georgia that Cymro kindly keeps us informed of …..do you know if the “Frontera Resources US LLC” listed is actually us , or one of the cloned business ?
Whichever I cannot recall any info via your company contact about the nature of these hearings….i.e. real FRR or cloned / what the case is about etc …..or if its on the Co’s list of can’t come out of the dark until completed .
Am I correct in assuming you have asked your contact for info but they have declined to respond on the subject ?
I say that knowing that you would have passed any info from them in response onto this board.
Many apologies if I have missed previous posts dealing with the above .
A week with no posts , so checking if board is still live …..If you see this it is ….if not …..its not
Many will recall we have been here before , twice I think , it was put down as “admin oversight “ at the time by the Co
Under the same heading is these two.
Thought it might be Outrider Management but red herring I think , googling them only returns some religious missionary OMF international
OMF ISSUER
OMF WORLDWIDE
Extract of some of the F’s in just published Caymans Gazette
TAKE NOTICE THAT the Registrar of Companies, having reasonable cause to believe that the undermentioned companies incorporated under the Acts of the Cayman Islands are no longer carrying on business or are not in compliance with Sections 168 and 169, intends to strike the said companies from the Register as of the 31st October 2023, in accordance with the provisions of Section 156 of the Companies
FOXTROT INTERNATIONAL LDC FRBT DIRECTORS LTD
FRBT TRUSTEES LTD.
FRONTBIO, LTD.
FRONTERA RESOURCES CORPORATION
FRONTERA RESOURCES OVERSEAS CORPORATION
FRONTIER HEALTHCARE LTD.
FUENGOLF LTD.
FUK TAI (CAYMAN) INVESTMENT LIMITED
Looed thanks for your latest summary
I am a bit confused so I need to ask what will probably seem stupid questions
You say re the FIC case (I think )
….. Though not exactly a like-for-like situation, we saw in Cayman that Hope was able to end proceedings by withdrawing financial support….
Are you referring to the whole liquidation saga covering Liquidators actions in Caymans and USA via NY bankruptcy courts ?
I cannot recall seeing anything from liquidators / Caymans / NY courts saying case finished
Has the liquidation process come to an end ?
If so what is the final outcome / standing of the the liquidated Co’s , are they now officially closed with the assets that were transferred to FRR US now totally secure in that Co ?
Hi WHB
Totally agree with everything you says about Ya.
However we got into bed with them presumably knowing their methods .
Having challenged them over their actions in Sept 18 RNS the Company in Oct 18 RNS said …..
"I am very pleased with the way the Company has resolved its disagreement with YA. The settlement terms are mutually workable for both the Company and YA. As a result of this settlement, the inconvenient overhang of monthly conversion has been removed which should positively reflect on the Company's share price and market position going forward. The Company is moving on with paying down the remaining balance to YA by way of cash redemption and without recourse to the conversions as was the case in the past."
Yes I know it was ZM ….but it was an official RNS so he was speaking for the Co.
No more has been said publicly by the Co on the debt .
Irrelevant of wether we like Ya or not we owe the money it seems .
My post was not to defend or support YA but to voice my feeling for the matter to be resolved quickly .
This was due to my fear that if prolonged further, with say Ya having to go back to square one , the case ….MAY ….be used by the Co as an excuse to prolong their blackout , even once all others have been settled .
I say that as we don’t have a definitive list of known litigations that in the Co’s view, requires the longstanding blackout to continue or delays any form of return to business normality .
Pyrotec said re YA
…..I think they will get something back if they are patient and let the company get back to doing business, What they are doing is slowing the start back date and so slowing payback date for all. ….
If that is true , then that reinforces my point , particularly his last sentence. Having said that , isn’t it the Co’s actions dodging YA thats slowing us up .
Suppose the big question is ….is it a case of won’t pay …or can’t pay
Should Ya have to start all over again and it was under the circumstances as detailed in the last para of my previous post I would be more than happy.
But part of me wishing YA to win soon ( assuming we owe the money ) is far from having any sympathy with them …..its about after over 4 1/2 years , wishing to reach the end of the overall situation we are in.
Going to be be seen as controversial below I suspect .
Whilst I support the Co’s aim to overcome all its obstacles , one part of me hopes Ya get a swift conclusion in their litigation , after all we do owe the money don’t we ?
Don’t want more years of hide and seek over this issue should they fail .
Unless of course all other stars align over the next few months allowing the Co to come out of the dark re comms and getting back to the task of exploiting their holdings ( whatever they are currently / going to be ) and realising some value for shareholders , with dodging Ya then becoming a side issue to a properly functioning company .
Looed
My preference as I am sure most would agree would be for a website that was used professionally by the Co to amongst other things promote / inform about it business and communicate with its shareholders ….but obviously we are not there at this point .
No I don’t propose a library of court documents
I do propose that the Co uses the website to inform us of developments that have been put in the public domain , certainly re concluded litigation.
For example ….Informing shareholders of their recent success in court against ZZ in Texas or their settlement of proceedings with Hope in Cali .
Whilst putting Co’s commentary on the finalisation of a case would be welcome I know that would asking to much presently .
You and others spend time / money digging out this info , the Co must be aware of that and I see no reason why they cannot communicate the examples above to shareholders as they occur .
Some may say its no great work in uncovering this info once links / alerts etc with sources paid or unpaid have been set …I don’t know ….but whichever it would be easier all round if we could rely on the company to inform us ……at the point when the info is placed in the public domain .
Apologise if I was less than clear in the last para of previous post .
Its the opposite of your take on it .
I am suggesting that ZM and other protagonists, via their own involvement and / or info gained from their networks would already be aware of developments as in my examples above , so the Co sharing that info via its website to shareholders would be of minimal , if any , value to them .
The efforts put in by yourself and others is of great value to other members on this board .
Alongside that that its clearly accepted by the Co that this board is a way of communicating to shareholders , currently via yourself and Jim .
You have to ask though ….what about the shareholders NOT on this board .
How many of them have any idea of ZM antics or indeed that he is out .
Do they know some sort of settlement has been reached with Hope …or even ….that the Co still survive’s .
I don’t think the world of FRR shareholders starts and finishes on this LSE chat board , however that appears to be the view of the Co.
Looed re your comment to WHB earlier today of ….
For all the talk about formal comms I don't know what people expect in terms of detail……
Probably all the facts we have gathered gathered over the last 41/2 years have been gained out of documents once placed in the public domain.
Cali , Texas NY and Caymans courts , Gazettes etc , all unearthed by the efforts of yourself and others . Funds also supplied by shareholders to assist in that cause.
I suppose what I would appreciate in terms of what detail of comms could be given is for the company to inform us about the “ in public domain” docs , as they are placed , with website being the obvious place to inform us .
Save a lot of work all round
Or do they assume ZZ won’t be following Hope / Ya / FTI / Mourant cases etc ….and vice versa …..via Court doc placing alongside their networks of contacts within the “saga “ community
Re Madagascar oil …..copy below into google search ….
[2023] SC (Bda) 13 Civ. 17 February 2023
….click on same in results and you will see fairly recent Court Doc from Bermuda courts
Has distinct shades of Deja vu ….Outrider …..$36 m Facility A loan , a company called Green ( not the same we know ) …along with a case Judge Krawley oversaw whilst on Bermuda bench is referenced in president .
Not relevant to us as such but Interesting read nonetheless as insight into Outrider tactics when trying to recover money owed .
Looed …..could I ask ….why you are asking ?
Abkaz
What a complete muppet you come across as in your statement clearly eluding to Looed.
Many on here appreciate the work he and others do in bringing news, messages and general info ……what have you brought other than snide comments ?
BTW if you want to back up part of your statement, perhaps you could provide the details of any of the “endless deals “ Looed has “ promised “
Looed , Jim thanks for sharing your messages….appreciated by all I am sure .
Looed in your summary of the message you received you wrote… (but not all of it, some is inconsequential)….Just to clarify , is that your view , or was that in the text of the message ?received .
Possible sale of Russian Assets as outlined in 3rd July RNS
…..The Board remains of the view that any buyer is likely to be found in BRICS countries. …..
They know who they are selling to.
……This process has now run on substantially longer than the Company's management team had anticipated…..
Stating the obvious that whilst negotiating/ finalising / waiting for DFS / etc , that until shortly before 24/02/22 , like the rest of the world they did not anticipate / expect Ukraine invasion to happen and the resulting impact on the process .
…..We acknowledge shareholder frustration regarding the duration of the sale process, ……
Sale process …..in the process of selling ….. NOT still looking for someone to buy , but now ready to finalise / awaiting Russian authority to conclude the sale agreement to known buyer/s .
…….however, we also note recent precedent transactions which have successfully completed despite the geopolitical situation. …..
Due to the war / sanctions / counter sanctions / Presidential decree’s etc there are / have been many new obstacles for companies to overcome , different issues for different company’s, but they can and are being overcome ,
…….Further updates will be made as appropriate although there is currently low visibility as to when this might be…..
Low visibility does NOT mean they do NOT yet have a buyer/s ready to sign . They are selling , have buyer/s ready and waiting to finalise the transaction/s.
However they await green light from Russian authorities in order to conclude , but neither they or the buyer/s have any control over that process so cannot elude to a possible timescale , hence the “ low visibility “ comment .
……As ever, there can be no guarantee that Eurasia will enter into binding agreements regarding the sale process…..
Standard statement
Just my view of that para in RNS further reinforced by the comments in July 3rd RNS re Monchetundra DFS that said .
…..It is expected that counterparties will have their own plans for future development, and it is important to leave such options open…….
Not potential purchasers , but left options open to …..Counterparties …..the other party/s to the contract.
Scuba …..You inferred it was high against other Co’s listed on CH over the last 20 yrs . My knowledge of if thats high or low is nil as I don’t have the data of ALL the other Co’s .
I assume you did …..in order to make the statement of …. pretty high numbers according to companies house . So where are your numbers taken from that enabled you to made your statement of EUA in that measurement , against the millions of Co that have been listed on CH over the last 20 years ?