Exactly. The longer Centrifuge doesn’t take full control on this with transparent actions the harder it will be for “small or retail investors” trusting our platform. I am not sure if this is in the interest of the community leaving this end lose as such. Currently it makes that impression.
1 Like
Hi Christian,
Thanks for engaging with the DAO on this matter.
To clarify Lucas’ post, there are 2 different things which are being mixed up and conflated: a legal review of 1754 issuance by a DAO-appointed counsel (your proposal) and a legal assessment of the rights of the 1754 creditors by counsel to the creditor committee.
CNF’s view is that the first proposition will not lead to specific actions on behalf of the creditors. As stated by Lucas: a DAO-appointed counsel doesn’t have any rights or ability to change anything about the current situation.
Your statement that a legal review that would determine what rights and remedies the creditors may (or may not) have based on specific facts and circumstances is indeed useful but this needs to be undertaken by the creditors and their appointed counsel.
As I am sure you appreciate, maintaining attorney-client privilege is critical especially as counsel’s advice will necessarily cover litigation strategy. Privilege is tied to the client and its engagement with counsel.
For this second type of legal review, it is premature at this time. The creditor committee is not yet formed, has not yet met nor appointed legal counsel. It may be that the committee decides on this step in due course, but it has not occurred as of this time.
More generally, I wonder whether NLL could contribute to the community in a forward-looking way such as helping the Credit Group with reviews of pools prior to launch? I am sure the DAO would value such input.
4 Likes
The problem, as articulated by Lucas, was clearly understood. CNF, either independently or in collaboration with other creditors, should take proactive measures in their own interest and for the benefit of Centrifuge’s platform when it comes to CNF. It is imperative that someone takes the lead, and CNF seems to be the appropriate candidate.
However, I’m uncertain about the timeline of the issue—did it originate in November 2022? If so, why has there been such a lengthy delay? Maybe I am overlooking a crucial detail?
We need to be aware that smaller investors feel scared by such an event which might be “daily business” for professional investors. At the end of the day, I assume CNF as well as the community has learned a lot by this situation and now we need to “clean up our house” properly.
1 Like
As a creditor of both Branch series 1 and series 3, I would like to join this committee and get more pressure behind this. This should have been done much earlier in my opinion. I do not mind contributing to legal action at all, I just want to make sure the right actions are being taken. Time can be very important in these matters.
Some clarifications that would be helpful:
Why is Fabien not responding anymore?? Not here, not by mail, and not on telegram. Will he be part of the committee? Or is he also a party that can be litigated by the committee?
Do we need to worry / be proactive about Branch Series 3. Since that is also managed by the same issuer, Davoa? Or is there no issue with the issuer itself and no issue with the counterparty to Branch Series 3?
Is there any ongoing litigation or is everything dependent on this committee initiating active litigation against Sherwood?
Has anyone talked directly to Sherwood? Anyone outside of Fabien/Davoa? Who seems to have gone missing in action suddenly and, at least optically, hasn’t seemed very effective so far. Do we know anything about Sherwood’s finances?
This post is to provide an update and respond to questions.
The 1754 Factory Series 1 (Bling) creditor committee has now been formed. An initial meeting will be in the next few days to discuss next steps and legal representation. CNF will provide an update to token holders at that time. If you are a Bling DROP token holder and would like to join the creditor committee, please let us know. Fabien is not part of this committee.
Separately we wanted to share that CNF has initiated a lawsuit against Davoa. While this has no impact on 1754 Factory LLC we wanted to share this for transparency. Separate and apart from 1754 Factory LLC, Davoa Capital LP has unpaid debt to CNF in the amount of $895,049. CNF has now initiated a lawsuit in Delaware Superior Court for breach of the terms of this debt. As 1754 Factory LLC is a special purpose vehicle this litigation will not affect its assets.
6 Likes
Any creditor that hasn’t contacted me directly, please contact me through dm if you want to join our group.
Regarding Branch Series 3 (1754 Factory), what is the total value of Senior DROP redemptions waiting to be served, IE, for which redemptions have been executed?
Insane how my messages kept getting deleted, as if Centrifuge’s moderators dont want people to know that we are getting rugged by one of their first few pools lmao
Eight months ago, I raised my concerns with 1754 factory and Branch 3. At that time, members from the centrifuge team asked me not to spread fud and be respectful, it turns out that I was right. It’s utterly disgusting how they demand respect after robbing you.
And it’s sickening to see how they’re deleting stuff, as if they’re trying to prevent people from finding out that this pool is dead lol
There are forum rules and every user of the forum has to respect them. Thanks for your understanding and cooperation
Everyone can express his/her opinion and of course concerns as well but it has to be within the defined rules
1 Like
Nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade.
1754 pools were one of the earliest pools here and the centrifuge team was pushing them at the start for liquidity and visibility. Now that it’s ‘rugged’ or whatever you’re trying to sugarcoat with, Centrifuge is appearing to deflect these responsibilities away.
And moderators are deleting messages from people who are voicing out their concerns by pretending that they are violating forum rules? lmao
1 Like
Does the recoverable value of these assets fully cover the investments of senior tranche investors? In this regard, are there differences in terms of Branches 1, 2 and 3? And what is the expected timeline for realization of these assets?
Everyone in the community can - and should - raise his/her concerns and the forum is the right place to do it but the forum rules need to be followed. It was not the intention to suppress your opinion
2 Likes
We have no information on the market value of the assets of 1754 Factory LLC. I would expect that this is something that would be determined by an independent party likely as part of a court proceeding. The timeline for recovery would also be determined by such independent party.
Eli, thank you for your prompt reply.
For further clarity, will all senior tranche investors in the 1754 Factory pool (Branch Series 1-3) now have to wait till the outcome of legal proceedings to learn whether they’ll be able to recover their investments including what portion, if any, thereof? In other words, no further redemptions will be fulfilled for this pool?
I really do not know. I cannot predict the future. I would note that the Branch assets have a maturity of 3 years with the first assets due in June 2024. There are other assets reflected in the pool that appear to be unrelated to Branch.
I noticed on Tinlake that the first asset matures on June 2023.
Why u deleted my messages? What u fear for?