Recently we had a conversation with an attorney who told us that every day the labor strike goes on, Red Frog is responsible for a day's wages for each and every employee that is on strike per the labor law in Panama.
This would put to rest any ideas I had about why they haven't ended strike. My theory was that, while waiting for the second round of funding, Red Frog was smart in not settling the strike as they would have all these workers sittin around getting paid for doing nothing. Now it seems that this might be the case anyway.
Does anyone have any more information on this issue? I sure would be curious. If this is true, they are getting deeper into debt the longer the strike goes on.
Mick @ Lot 83
Monday, March 31, 2008
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Conference call concerns
The comments published to my Monday article about pending lawsuits are starting to sound reasonable. While I have hung in there with Red Frog management, the time has come to start talking specifics. And several concerns were raised after yesterday's conference call.
1) ROP LAND: It was a brief mention, but concerns some of us with Rights of Possession land. What I heard was, if titling doesn't happen by the time construction is completed on these lots, the owner will be forced to come up with the entire balance of the purchase price. THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. We were promised from the start that the "sweeping" title would be in place before any building would be done on ROP land so that we could get financing. But it did not sound like that after yesterday's call. Not having title would also hurt resale value as well. Red Frog better figure out a way to finance this small portion of their property, otherwise they are going to lose those of us who have been supporting the project!!!
2) FINANCING: Did I hear right? They are going to qualify all buyers AFTER THE FACT? This is a lawsuit waiting to happen. They made these contracts in good faith that buyers would go through with the purchase. Now they are going to make everyone go back and qualify? And what happens... after 4 years... that circumstances change and people won't qualify now? Seems to me they should have done this BEFORE they went into any contract with buyers.
Don't get me wrong, I want this project to succeed, but I also want them to do what they promised us from the beginning. I'm sorry that the government is so slow at the titling process. But they should then give us the option to back out and get our money back, NOT offer us a fractional ownership.
If anyone is contemplating a lawsuit, please contact me by e-mail at mick@SFResidence.com. I am eager to see what people are thinking. Seems to me it might be a tactic to get out of the agreements since a lawsuit or lawsuits would only hurt the possibility of Red Frog getting more funding. It might be easier to pay everyone off who wants out and be done with it.
Mick @ Lot 83
1) ROP LAND: It was a brief mention, but concerns some of us with Rights of Possession land. What I heard was, if titling doesn't happen by the time construction is completed on these lots, the owner will be forced to come up with the entire balance of the purchase price. THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. We were promised from the start that the "sweeping" title would be in place before any building would be done on ROP land so that we could get financing. But it did not sound like that after yesterday's call. Not having title would also hurt resale value as well. Red Frog better figure out a way to finance this small portion of their property, otherwise they are going to lose those of us who have been supporting the project!!!
2) FINANCING: Did I hear right? They are going to qualify all buyers AFTER THE FACT? This is a lawsuit waiting to happen. They made these contracts in good faith that buyers would go through with the purchase. Now they are going to make everyone go back and qualify? And what happens... after 4 years... that circumstances change and people won't qualify now? Seems to me they should have done this BEFORE they went into any contract with buyers.
Don't get me wrong, I want this project to succeed, but I also want them to do what they promised us from the beginning. I'm sorry that the government is so slow at the titling process. But they should then give us the option to back out and get our money back, NOT offer us a fractional ownership.
If anyone is contemplating a lawsuit, please contact me by e-mail at mick@SFResidence.com. I am eager to see what people are thinking. Seems to me it might be a tactic to get out of the agreements since a lawsuit or lawsuits would only hurt the possibility of Red Frog getting more funding. It might be easier to pay everyone off who wants out and be done with it.
Mick @ Lot 83
Monday, March 17, 2008
Conference call Tuesday, 3/18/08
Please be informed that we will be conducting our next Client Conference Call on March 18th at 5:00 pm EST (4:00 pm CST, 3:00 pm MST, 2:00 pm PST).
If you are an owner, e-mail Scott Harris for the call in number and conference ID.
If you are an owner, e-mail Scott Harris for the call in number and conference ID.
Hints of lawsuits permeate the air
I heard through the grapevine that some investors in the US were banding together to draw up a lawsuit. I wrote Scott Harris an e-mail asking him if he could shed some light, and he admitted that he heard something about it. There are several points:
1) Any lawsuit in the US would be moot since there are no assets being held there. All assets are in Panama so the lawsuit would have to start there. And apparently they take longer there than they do in the States.
2) A lawsuit in Panama would turn off any potential investors that might be interested in the project (the only hope we have of getting construction started back up). And then what would happen? Sell off the land? Given the current big project situation in Panama, there is nobody doing them right now, especially with the titling issues we have at Red Frog.
Tomorrow's conference call may or may not talk about this new development, but I thought it should be addressed here.
Mick @ Lot 83
1) Any lawsuit in the US would be moot since there are no assets being held there. All assets are in Panama so the lawsuit would have to start there. And apparently they take longer there than they do in the States.
2) A lawsuit in Panama would turn off any potential investors that might be interested in the project (the only hope we have of getting construction started back up). And then what would happen? Sell off the land? Given the current big project situation in Panama, there is nobody doing them right now, especially with the titling issues we have at Red Frog.
Tomorrow's conference call may or may not talk about this new development, but I thought it should be addressed here.
Mick @ Lot 83
Monday, March 3, 2008
Question about the February 2008 conference call
There was a question about what happened in the February 2008 conference call and the answer is... nothing new to report. Strike is still on, no work is being done and the second round of funding has not happened although they may have found someone who will fund without the entire project being titled... possible bad news for those of us with Rights Of Possession properties.
- Mick @Lot 83
- Mick @Lot 83
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)