Frontera Resources Corp Live Discussion

Live Discuss Polls Ratings

EyesonHawk2 16 Jan 2019

Speculation! Yes…!

the_old_trout 16 Jan 2019

Nomad? Just to confirm that I had a similar exchange of communications to Aubree today and might be wrong, but got the impression that Zaza was in London sorting things out. I’m also assuming that SN and Levan (the master litigator)will have arrived in the Caymans fully prepared for tomorrow’s action. Not expecting any immediate outcome from that, but it could well set some parameters for an out of court settlement and focus minds on achieving that. Tot

PoPHeaD 16 Jan 2019

Speculation! Was it Pyro followed by Mole Eyeson? Think it might be

EyesonHawk2 16 Jan 2019

Speculation! Mole followed by Pyrotech: "Is this about interest During 2016 the Company elected to pay the quarterly interest payments in kind and issued approximately $1.8 million in additional convertible notes in accordance with the terms of the note purchase agreements. On October 19, 2016, the Company and the holders of the largest outstanding group of the 2016 Notes, Outrider Master Fund, LP and Outrider Management, LLC (collectively “Outrider”) agreed to exchange the 2016 Notes for new secured unconvertible notes maturing on August 1, 2020. On December 20, 2016, in accordance with this agreement, Frontera International Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary, issued new secured unconvertible notes maturing on August 1, 2020 to Outrider. This was followed by the issuance of new notes on the same terms to other holders of the 2016 Notes. As a result of this exchange, the note holders exchanged $30.1 million of principal in the original notes into new secured notes due August 2020. There was $1.5 million in associated interest Frontera Resources Corporation Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements June 30, 2018 (Unaudited) expense recognized through the end of year 2016 on the 2020 Notes. The 2020 Notes are not convertible into ordinary shares of the Company and bear an interest rate of 10 percent if paid in cash or 12 percent if paid in-kind with additional notes at the Company’s election. Following the issue of the 2020 Notes, the 2016 Notes were re-assigned to the Company and cancelled. During 2017, the Company elected quarterly interest payments in kind and issued approximately $4.0 million in additional unconvertible notes in accordance with the terms of the 2020 Notes. As of June 30, 2018, the fair value of 2020 Notes was approximately $29.4 million." Moleinahole comment to Pyro: "Pyro and yes that is the note in the unaudited 2018 and audited 2017 accounts that is at best incomplete or incompatible with the loan terms as we now understand them. I agree with Star rage I would rather have known about that important piece of detail before I doubled my holding since 2016. With it the intentions were pretty clear that Outrider were trying to effectively get the notes they paid a fraction of face value back during 2017/18 by an accelerated extraction of cash from the business with the back stop opportunity of getting equity or control if FRR couldn’t keep up. They expected FRR to raise a lot more money (from shareholders) to keep up but at the same time having to repay Outrider, YA and vendors while locking in Steve and Zaza into a forced conversion and with a charge on the assets and personal share guarantees in place! The 2017 restructure was and is unsustainable and hence the only way out is to refinance. We passed that point in mid 2018 as that interest fell due This is at the heart of the fiduciary duty dispute (replacement of the onerous debt obligations) and could well also be at the heart of the arbitration (as funding for the work programs is at the heart of the PSA) and very likely why YA attempted to get the preference shares out as quick as possible as well. I don’t doubt we are at the moment aligned with the board. I also wonder who the funder was who locked in in Feb for 6 months and what they knew. The prospective profit share deal also makes more sense as equity or revenue funding models do not fall in the scope of Outriders veto but I think we just got to the point where it cold not continue and the issue had to be brought to a head. Right that’s me done. Fingers crossed for a more positive end to Jan 2019."

EyesonHawk2 16 Jan 2019

Speculation! Moleinahole on LSE has made a welcome appearance tonight: "A quick post. Decided to stop posting and reading generally as the situation is obviously very serious and have little to add. Have a more complicated family life at the moment as well. Delist! The suspension enabled my broker to remove my FRR shares as collateral on my account meaning I have had to react to the suspension even before any possible delist! Puddy you recollection is correct. My concern was current liabilities in the accounts. The current liabilities historically were made up of interest accrued not paid, salary accrued not paid and vendor debt. The half year accounts do not split the figure like full year. Equally I knew from the accounts there was no interest on the notes in H1. So I suspected at half year interest (loan note to be paid in cash), plus vendor debts and possibly executive deferred salary. At the time we did not know why the loan note interest had reverted to a cash basis at a higher rate. The loan notes terms were amended twice since Jan 2017. Its possible the version in Steve affidavit is not the latest. Not knowing about the revised note terms was a significant missing piece of information and was why we could not understand why Outrider were seeking security enforcement and why people incorrectly linked it to the YA as a cross default. Whoever prepared the accounts, signed them and audited them (PWC) be it RNS and 2017/ 2018 full years has not shown the correct information. Either Nomad and/or auditors should have checked them. The exec should not have signed off the accounts. Someone lower down would have prepared them possibly on a cut and paste basis so an error may have started with the original RNS being abridged or amended later. But a puzzle remains why Interest in kind was paid in 2017 H2 accounts. But the H1 2018 was accrued to pay in cash. Hence there remains a discrepancy between the note terms and the company accounts. The actual default appears to be the H1 2018 interest which at that time could not be paid as we had cash of @$600k. I suspect PWC didn’t spot the notes change - but they would have spotted it in Q1 2019 for the full year 2018 audit where the current liabilities should be a huge red flag unless resolved in H2 2018. Knowing terms now the 1 year lock in for Steve and Zaza and the expiry of the YA preference shares and their limit up to June 2018 make a lot more sense. The plan intended revenue by end H1 2018. UD2 would have done that but came up short. Dulwich - yes they had a call to Houston so left early in Oct. The timing of the meet, holding it while we were seeking to find flow rates and the NDA names while the real issue was Outrider is now history. I’m now of the view the restructure was designed to be punitive to Outriders advantage and exit of YA. I remain hopeful that the New York fund can to be used to prise Outrider out of the way. Funds in place with new Nomad is what is needed. Beyond that weak accounting and weak non exec needs addressing."

duknweev 16 Jan 2019

Nomad? I’d be surprised if you couldn’t resist the temptation to make snide comments. Are you qualified to comment on Zaza’s competence? Have you worked in corporate business? Are you medically qualified? If not then you’re hardly entitled to make those comments and simply confirm further what an ignorant person you are.

booster11 16 Jan 2019

Nomad? I’d be surprised if they weren’t working hard to secure another Nomad, after losing Cairn due to Zaza’s own incompetence and ego.

Devex 16 Jan 2019

Nomad? Simple - they have to multi-task. The Court Case (or OOCS) is of course hugely important, but the timelines here will not be fully controllable. The Nomad appointment is important in terms of market credibility - and I would suggest that there will be various interested and important parties other than PIs who would expected the shares in this company to be both tradeable and valued on a listed market. I would expect BH to be in this group, any new lender and of course key vendors with a credit line to FRR.

tmhhammers 16 Jan 2019

Nomad? Nomad is slightly irrelevant if they lose the court case so i’d rather they were ‘‘busy’’ working on the CC than the nomad, and btw it’s a completely box standard response what else would they say?

EyesonHawk2 16 Jan 2019

Nomad? Is Aubree21 reliably informed usually? F…No way of knowing! As you and JT say we’ll wait for that all important RNS, but there is nothing to say that people are talking and getting one line answers from YJ! eyeson…maybe just clutching at straws!

jaytee41 16 Jan 2019

Nomad? Agree - wait for the RNS and hopefully, if a new NOMAD is replaced by the 24th, then the stock can still be suspended until the legal case is done and dusted

Fillpot 16 Jan 2019

Nomad? Eyeson Taking everything with a pinch of salt until we get the all important RNS Is Aubree21 reliably informed usually?

EyesonHawk2 16 Jan 2019

Nomad? Just posted by Aubree21 on LSE…take is as read cannot confirm validity but good speculative news! “Prompt reply from YJ. FRR are busy in discussions with a replacement NOMAD. News and update when we have it. Best.”

mMax1 15 Jan 2019

Thinking ahead Just joined. Thanks Eyeson.

Fillpot 15 Jan 2019

Thinking ahead thefozzer It’s nice to see you’re feeling a bit more positive here