NAFA

Does anybody know what is going to happen with furs in cold storage.

I sent them an email last week or the week before asking that same question and if they were going to return received no response.

Who??

Maybe warm storage now, they probably didn't pay the electric bill.

Dose anyone know a lawyer or law firm that's done class action law suits ? It seem like they willing committed FRAUD !!!!!!!! Should be some kinda of recourse we can take !!

maybe see if Paul will put a sticky up top for you guys and gals that have fur up there to get together and discuss options.this whole part of it has me baffled.

Dealers that have goods in their own lots will at some point get their goods back, so I’ve been told. Not sure when that will be. There is paper work that has to be done and there is a monitor (either court appointed or bank appointed) that has to approve anything leaving the building. Many of the NAFA employees were terminated on October 31, 2019: so there is a bare bones staff taking care of everything.

As far as intersorted goods are concerned - the part lots where most trappers fur is - those goods will not be returned. At some point they will be sold. Not sure when that will be, how they will be sold and when/if the shippers will get paid.

A class action law suit sounds like a good idea in theory but I’m not sure it is practical. You would need to find a law firm that is versed in Canadian law. They would probably want a retainer up front before they even started working on the case. I’m not sure the shippers with fur at NAFA would be willing to or able to come up with money for the retainer.

I’m thinking about starting my own auction. Gonna call it JAFA.

Maybe NAFA should change it to NADA

Bet the President of NAFA has set himself up pretty good financial on the customer's $. I would look into including him personally if you guys took legal action. Just a thought

After all you guys are all family so he shouldn't have an issue helping family.

It was:

NOT

ANY

FUNDS

AVAILABLE


BOHICA !!!!!

w

You want to sue a bankrupt company?

Good luck in that adventure!

Maybe NAFA will have to sell your fur to pay the lawyer to fight your lawsuit.

Maybe Canada Goose should buy NAFA.. They could both go down the tubes together

The horse is dead.

That's an idiotic statement.
Canada Goose has been supporting trappers and the wild fur industry for many years now when a lot of other manufacturers have abandoned wild fur.

the times they are a changin.

So what about the furs NAFA said sold that they sent rubbery checks on ?? Where did that money GO ??? NAFA took shipping and there % out and im left with nothing ??? So NAFA gets paid for STEALING, and writing bad checks ..... NOT RIGHT, seems criminal !!!!

Anyone remember the new tracking system NAFA was talking about a year or so back?? They told us it would save the industry kinda like the AIHTS was going to do.

I hate to say it, but I think guys with furs there are pretty much up a creek. You probably won’t see a dime after the bank is paid. The bank will take over the notes for the mink ranchers loans and could call the notes immediately which could throw a lot of ranchers into bankruptcy court too. Nafa will be forced to sell all assets and give that money directly to the bank until their debt is paid in full. After that, IF there’s any money left over, you might get your fur money.

NAFA going under had nothing to do with the so called tracking system.

Didnt say it did, but it didnt save the industry or increase their markets like they said it would either. Anyone old enough to remember all the claims made back when the AIHTS was shoved down our throat will understand my point.

Bob - I think you might be wrong (or at least I hope you are). The unsold furs at NAFA do not belong to NAFA. They belong to the people that shipped them to NAFA. I don’t think that legally the money they will sell for can be used to pay the banks. Those pelts are not a NAFA asset.

At some point those pelts will be sold and in theory the money should be paid to the shippers. If/when that happens, who knows.

I know that dealers that have goods there will be able to eventually get their furs back. Assuming that they own the goods free and clear and didn’t taken advances from NAFA.

The entire process is going to be long and drawn out. There is a “monitor “ that must approve everything that is leaving the building.

And being the checks were sent through US Mail how is that not mail fraud?

Apparently some of you guys don’t understand what bankruptcy means. It means the banks are first in line then the rest of you. Nothing criminal here. Just the ceasing of existence of a international business.

And when the banks get done there isn’t much left. We went through this with a grain elevator and it wasn’t pretty. We lost well into the 5 figures with the grain elevator.

And six years later, haven’t seen a dime of it yet.

According to the NAFA press releases, they are not in bankruptcy and they are not in receivership. They are in a period of reorganization under the supervision of some Canadian firm that handles this sort of situation.

I’m not sure what the differences are between bankruptcy and reorganization but I am under the impression there is still hope, however slim it might be, that shippers maybe will see some money on the bad checks and the fur still at NAFA.

Just my interpretation of the situation,

This is very true. NAFA orchestrated the most effective wild fur promotion by far. NAFA promoted the ethical use of fur at the London College of fashion, the Shanghai International College of fashion, the Fashion Institute of Design at Sanda University, Donghua University's school of fashion and design just to name a very few, all while liberal fashion "instructors" from the west are continuously working to "teach" fashion students that "responsible fashion" means keeping fur out of the fashion scene. Sell your fur to someone that at least helps to participate with this in some small way now that NAFA is gone, if you don't trappers and trapping will go the way of the dinosaurs.

I didnt have any fur at NAFA but my son-in-law and daughter had over 120 marten. They got an email saying their fur would be shipped back to them once the dust settles. Guess time will tell.

I notice you dropped the " wild " here?

Looks like a bunch of folks are about to get short end of the stick!

Just reading between lines here in TMAN with what's been posted. But NAFA looks to have just have abandoned wild fur (or at least enough shippers to pay for their bank issues?) due to (lack of market, poor management, or fraud).

My 6th sense is telling !e everyone with bounced checks are out of luck. Maybe more than that?

Every good contract has a way out of it!

I've seen companies shut down and literally keep the pensions people paid into for 20 years!

Devil is in the details.

I think it's all a very calculated way of cutting losses while staying a float financially.

Your the loss! Your fur being sold with bounced check is how they stay a floating!

Dirt, it's all "fur" promotion. Who's going to take the reins now?

Promoting the use of ranch mink is not promoting the use of wild fur. If you are promoting the use of sheared ranch mink, you are doing the opposite of promoting the use of beaver.

You should update your website ( It does not work for me or is incomplete) and do some of your own promotion.

"I'm a product description. I'm a great place to add more details about your product such as sizing, material, care instructions and cleaning instructions."

Actually, in their last press release nafa says they entered some creditor protection act. In which it says is almost the same thing as chapter 11 bankruptcy in the U.S.

That's why I used the word bankruptcy.

They will rise from the ashes like a phoenix.
Phoenix furs-has a nice ring to it.

The Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act (commonly referred to as the "CCAA" or the "CC, double A") is a Federal Act that allows financially troubled corporations the opportunity to restructure their affairs. By allowing the company to restructure its financial affairs, through a formal Plan of Arrangement, the CCAA presents an opportunity for the company to avoid bankruptcy and allows the creditors to receive some form of payment for amounts owing to them by the company.

The CCAA is restricted to larger corporations, as a corporation must have amounts owing to creditors in excess of $5 million to be eligible to use the Act. Corporations that do not reach this $5 million threshold can utilize the Division I Proposal under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act. The CCAA also allows a company, if it so chooses, to address its shareholders in addition to its creditors. Typically, when the shareholders of the company are impacted by the Plan of Arrangement, they are often given the opportunity to vote on the Plan.

The process begins in the Court system when the company applies to the Court for protection under the CCAA. The Court will issue an Order giving the company 30 days of protection (often referred to as the "Stay") from its creditors to allow for the preparation of the Plan of Arrangement. The Court can extend the Stay against the creditors upon further application to the Court by the company. Typically, the Court will continue the protection beyond the initial 30-day period if the company can demonstrate that it is likely that it will file a Plan of Arrangement and an extension of the Stay is not prejudicial to the creditors, as a whole. There is no time limit on how long the Stay can be extended. During the Stay period, the company will often continue operating, although it may commence restructuring activities at any time.

A Monitor is an independent third party who is appointed by the Court to monitor the company's ongoing operations and assist with the filing and voting on the Plan of Arrangement. The Monitor's duties include monitoring the business, reporting to the Court on any major events that might impact the viability of the company, assisting the company in the preparation of the Plan of Arrangement, notifying the creditors (and shareholders) of any meetings and tabulating the votes at these meetings. The Monitor prepares a report on the Plan of Arrangement that is usually included in the mailing of the Plan.

The Plan of Arrangement is the proposal that the company is presenting to its creditors on how it intends to deal with debt it owes at the time of the initial filing with the Court. There are no restrictions on what the Plan can entail. It is not uncommon to see offers to pay a percentage on the dollar of debt, either as a lump sum or over a period of time. Plans can include an offer of shares of the company in exchange for the debt outstanding or a combination of cash and shares. The debtor can identify a particular creditor or group of creditors as "unaffected." Unaffected creditors are included in the Plan and are not to be paid in the normal course. One of the benefits of the CCAA is that it allows for this flexibility when trying to put together a Plan.

In order to be able to vote on the Plan and receive any distribution under it, a creditor must file a Proof of Claim with the Monitor. The Proof of Claim sets out what is owed to the creditor and is reviewed by the Monitor and the company. Any discrepancies between the creditor's Proof of Claim and the company's records are investigated by the company. The Plan will outline the procedures for dealing with disputed claims.

Ultimately, the company files its Plan of Arrangement and forwards it to the creditors/shareholders. A meeting of the creditors (and shareholders, if applicable) is called to vote on the Plan. For the Plan to be binding on each class of creditors, a majority of the proven creditors in that class, by number, together with 2/3 of the proven creditors in that class, by dollar value, must approve of the Plan presented to them. If a class of creditors approves the Plan, it is binding on all creditors within the class, subject to the Court's approval of the Plan. If all of the classes of creditors (and shareholders, if applicable) approve the Plan, the Court must then approve the Plan as a final step. Upon Court approval, the company continues forward as outlined under the Plan until it has satisfied the requirements under the Plan.

If a class of creditors or the Court does not approve the Plan, the company does not automatically go into bankruptcy, but the Stay is lifted. However, once the Stay has been lifted, the pressures that caused the company to initially file for CCAA protection from its creditors will likely return and, accordingly, it is quite likely that the company will be placed into receivership or bankruptcy.

You need to submit a proof of claim with the monitor so you can be added to this 3 page list.

current list of creditors

There are some interesting names on this list.

That is an impressive list!!

I imagine if you include the names that are owed less than $1,000.00 the list would be much longer. Plus all the people that haven’t filed.

Some day Beaver will shine again!

That Cat guy Pappas is owed over a million bucks.
Petska and Weibke also owed money.
Guess they all sell fur at nafa.

That adds up to lots of millions of dollars w/o the smaller creditors. What we don't know is how many of those that are producers have been covered or absorbed by SAGA at this time. I see about 25 from WI which would stand to reason as WI is the leading ranch mink producing state in the USA.

Bryce

I did not see the bank on the list?

It appears from the filing they owe CIBC in excess of $30 million and unsecured debtors in excess of $25 million.

SAGA ARRANGEMENT
12.
As part of the Saga Arrangement, S
aga and the Applicants have b
een contacting a number
of European mink farmers to transition Kit loans from the Appli
cants to Saga. This process
involves personnel from each of Saga and the Applicants visitin
g each farmer to obtain
their consent to transfer their Kit loans to Saga. Such farmer
s are located in Poland, Latvia,
the Netherlands and Romania, among other European nations.

That's peanuts,they sell over 200 million a year. 25% of that comes back to the company in fees to buyers and sellers.

"The Applicants own certain real property located in Poland and
the United States. Arising
from discussions with the Syndicate, the Amended and Restated I
nitial Order authorizes
and directs the Applicants to list and offer for sale such real
property assets as soon as
reasonably practicable"

Yes Boco they may gross $50 million.

That would cover their liabilitys and costs no problem if people that owed them money paid up.

This might have been addressed but I missed it if it was.......

I did not see the WFSC on the list and not sure just how the WFSC operated under the NAFA blanket. So my questions is...does anyone know how the WFSC funds fit into the scheme of things as they stand today? The WFSC dues were a multi-year contract, some of which will not be fulfilled. Refunds should be due to each member for the unfulfilled portion.

Who owes NAFA money?

I'll admit that NAFA auto-renewed my membership to the WFSC without my permission

in January 2019 so I'm on the hook for $100.00 for a 5 year membership.

So I'll go on record as owing them money.

I have not been able to access my account for over a year so I'm not paying up.

w

....yeah...lol

Not necessarily. I know Pappas uses them as an outlet for cats but I bet the money owed to weibkes is brokerage fees.

Just a question. Seeing as how a lot of the fur from the U S is in storage in Wisconsin is't there a legal remedy through U S courts to keep it from being sent to Canada and having it returned to it's owners in the U S?

I'm a bit confused. NAFA pays brokerage fees? What is wiebkes selling for NAFA?

I understand, if I say, hire Wissmiss to buy me a cheap lot of Lg beaver for $15 a piece including all the nonsense fees, I would have to pay her a brokerage fee.

Add Wolf to that list and make it 3 of those bouncing babies. Never thought I would see the day that NAFA went upside down. I still have some fur that I will probably never see.
Does any one know who to contact now about this little minor problem we have. I am sure they know who they owe money to. Maybe if all of us wild fur council members and all the bigger dealers they have, kinda, put out to dry, would kind of put us into ownership of the company, free of all debt to us.
I believe Jason buys fur at NAFA, and he might get some kind of a price break after he spends so many dollars buying fur there. Probably gets some kind of commission rebate like the one I used to get. I got mine for every so many dollars worth of fur I would sell there. This was in addition to my 9 percent I paid. Also didn,t have to pay drumming fees and got rid of my cities fees in addition to that. Lots of different ways to make money at NAFA.
Understand, I don't know that is what kind of deal Jason has, but I was just giving you some idea of my thoughts on the subject. I know nothing at all about that company.

Dirt - many of the bidders in the auction room are buying on commission for end users. In other words, they are middlemen (brokers). They usually operate on a commission. Generally it is 3% - that is sort of the industry standard, though the actual amount is negotiated by the 2 parties.

When the broker makes a purchase for his customer, he usually has NAFA invoice his customer. He tells NAFA what commission to add on. That commission is collected by NAFA from the customer and is then paid to the broker, usually around prompt date. Some brokers leave their commissions on account at NAFA to be used in the future if they (the broker) makes a purchase for themselves. Sort of like money in the bank (bad analogy I know).

That is most likely why NAFA owes Weibke money.

Some brokers have NAFA send them a commission check. I was told that some brokers had not been paid their commissions from the May/June sale, let alone the August sale.

Make sense?

Yes. Thank you!

A lawyer

Be good to go in together on it!

Al Jazeera $173k?

advertizing Marty.

Everyone diversifies, I'm just surprised the Muslim News Network is into mink ranching.


And they think pigs are dirty animals.