54 days since the Danish High Court unanimously annulled the bankruptcy of Shape Robotics.
Tonight on the livestream, my father Tiberiu was watching. I read the third paragraph of the letter aloud — the one where Teis writes that Sanako Oy went bankrupt at the beginning of 2026 on its own application. My father wrote into the chat in Romanian: hoțul strigă „hoții!” — the thief shouts „thieves!” He was right. That is the headline of this episode and it is the legal posture of the letter. Six allegations. One sentence in paragraph three that, under the right rule of Finnish company law and the right rule of Danish bankruptcy law, convicts the man who signed it.
But before I take you through the letter, you have to understand what happened in the last seventy-two hours. Because today’s letter is not free-standing. It is a counter-punch. And to see the punch you have to see the punch it is countering.
🧭 TL;DR
Since 13 March 2026: The DFSA case file J.nr. 25-026876 has
held, on the same docket, BOTH the
Company's MAR complaint against Teis
as trustee AND the trustee's own
MAR notifications against former
management — filed while he was still
kurator, without disclosing them
as selskabsmeddelelser.
(Source: Shape Robotics preliminary
response to DFSA, 13 March 2026.)
Friday, 24 April 2026: Teis Gullitz-Wormslev (Kromann Reumert),
now acting as liquidator, formally
advances those MAR notifications in
his own name before the DFSA.
The complaint is now his personally,
not the Company's instrument.
Sunday, 27 April (Day 51): DFSA confirms in writing that the
file J.nr. 25-026876 remains live
and active — both directions.
The DFSA is reading everything.
Same day, Day 51: Jørgen Andreas Berg, a Shape Robotics
shareholder, opens a Substack chat
thread and a Google Form to collect
signatures for a SHAREHOLDERS' market
abuse complaint AGAINST Teis.
Within hours: 15+ signatures.
The wave is moving.
Monday, 28 April (today): Teis sends me a six-point management
negligence letter. Built on materials
gathered during the unlawful 59-day
kuratorship that Østre Landsret already
struck down on 5 March 2026. Instructs
me to forward to the Company's D&O
insurer at Topdanmark.
Topdanmark D&O coverage: Does not extend to me personally.
Romanian citizen, resident in Romania.
The claim is aimed directly at me.
The killer paragraph: Letter, point 3, verbatim — "Sanako Oy
went bankrupt at the beginning of 2026
on its own application."
Under Finnish company law, that filing
required SHAREHOLDER authorisation.
The sole shareholder of Sanako Oy was
Shape Robotics A/S.
On 5 February 2026 (the filing date,
per Tivi.fi) the only person legally
able to exercise Shape Robotics A/S's
shareholder rights was the kurator.
The kurator was Teis Gullitz-Wormslev.
His own sentence convicts him.
Today's exhibits: Four Finnish primary documents — Alisa
Bank guarantee, Sanako loan velkakirja,
Finnvera state guarantee, Shape Robotics
parent guarantee — attached, with Visma
Sign certificate IDs. Every euro of the
EUR 4M Finnish facility is tied in
writing to the EUR 32M Bechtle Polska
contract. Allegation #4 dies on contact
with the documents.
Next milestone: 11 May 2026, 09:30 CET
Sø- og Handelsretten reconstruction
hearing on Elena Pasat's petition,
62.1% creditor majority.
The proverb: hoțul strigă „hoții!"
The thief shouts „thieves!"
(My father, livestream chat,
28 April 2026, 17:45 CET.)
🎭 The cast, in one paragraph
Mark-Robert Abraham — me. Founder and former CEO of Shape Robotics A/S, now Phase Education A/S. Romanian citizen, resident in Voluntari, Ilfov, Romania. Topdanmark D&O coverage does not extend to me personally because of that residence — I have explained this to the board many times. Tiberiu Abraham — my father. Watching tonight’s livestream from home. The man who, after I read paragraph three of the letter aloud, wrote the thief shouts „thieves!” into the chat. Jørgen Andreas Berg — a Shape Robotics shareholder. The retail investor who took it upon himself yesterday to open the chat thread, set up the Google Form, and start collecting signatures from other shareholders for a separate market abuse complaint against Teis. The wave he started is what today’s letter is trying to break. Teis Gullitz-Wormslev — partner, Kromann Reumert. Court-appointed kurator of Shape Robotics A/S between 6 January and 5 March 2026. Reappointed as liquidator in the tvangsopløsning on 17 April 2026. Same person. Different door. Author of today’s letter. The man whom the shareholders are now collecting signatures against.
📨 What the DFSA file actually contains — and why it matters
The DFSA case file J.nr. 25-026876 has never been a one-way street. Since 13 March 2026 — the date of the Company’s preliminary response to the regulator — the file has held two parallel records: the Company’s MAR complaint against Teis as former trustee, documenting zero Cision disclosures in 59 days and DKK 199 million in subsidiary write-downs without independent valuation; and the trustee’s own MAR notifications against the Company’s former management, filed while he was still kurator and never disclosed as selskabsmeddelelser to the market.
🔴 Read that again. The man who published zero market disclosures for 59 days as trustee of a listed company simultaneously filed notifications against management at the very regulator he was ignoring his own obligations toward — and did not disclose those notifications either. The Viktor email of 13 March 2026 specifically requested the DFSA provide the Company with: “(a) Full copy of any MAR-related complaint/notification filed by the trustee or Kromann Reumert; (b) Identification of the circumstances and possible violations referenced; (c) Date of receipt; (d) Status of any investigation.”
What changed on Friday, 24 April 2026 is that Teis — now reappointed as liquidator — formally advanced those notifications in his own name. The instrument shifted: it is no longer a filing made in the Company’s name during a trustee administration that was subsequently annulled. It is a personal filing by Advokat Teis Gullitz-Wormslev. The direction and the case reference (J.nr. 25-026876) remain the same. The author’s standing has changed.
On Sunday 27 April — yesterday, Day 51 — the DFSA confirmed in writing that the file remains live and active. That confirmation is what the 4,800 retail shareholders of Phase Education needed to see: the regulator is reading both sides of the docket. The DFSA is not his instrument. The DFSA is doing its job. And it will read Jørgen’s shareholder petition under the same obligation.
✊ The shareholder wave — Jørgen and the fifteen
Within a few hours of Day 51 going live, Jørgen Andreas Berg — a retail shareholder of Shape Robotics, now Phase Education — opened a Substack chat thread and a Google Form. The chat thread was titled, simply, Shareholders’ Petition — Sign Here. The Form had five fields: name, country, share count (approximate), email, and a free-text box for any additional context. Jørgen pinned the Form link at the top of the chat.
Then he started collecting signatures.
By the end of the night, fifteen shareholders had signed. By the time I woke up this morning, more had joined. The wave is moving in real time. The plan is straightforward: the petition will be filed at the Danish Financial Supervisory Authority and at Copenhagen Police — under the same statutory hooks the Company already used in March (MAR Articles 17 and 22–23, Capital Markets Act § 247 on disclosure obligations, and where applicable Retsplejeloven § 535 on serious economic crime). The shareholders are not asking the Company’s blessing. They are not waiting for the Company’s blessing. They have standing in their own right as the holders of the securities whose price was destroyed during the 59-day silent kuratorship. They are exercising it.
That standing matters. Because under MAR Article 22, every Member State competent authority has the obligation to investigate market abuse allegations regardless of the complainant’s identity or the complainant’s procedural fortunes. A shareholder petition cannot be withdrawn by the company’s liquidator. A shareholder petition is filed by the shareholders, in their own names, with their own signatures. It belongs to them. The DFSA has to read it. The police have to receive it. And neither can be cancelled by anyone other than the signers themselves.
Teis understood this within twenty-four hours.
That is why today’s letter exists.
📑 The letter that arrived this morning
It is on Kromann Reumert letterhead. Dated 28 April 2026. Signed by Advokat Teis Gullitz-Wormslev. Sagsnummer 5011457/KKR/BBEC. It opens with the disclosure that the liquidator has been examining the Company’s affairs “during the liquidation proceedings and during the previous bankruptcy proceedings“ — the same bankruptcy that was unanimously annulled, ex tunc, by Østre Landsret on 5 March 2026. The letter then sets out six numbered themes of alleged management negligence, characterises a number of transactions as having been made “without sufficient or sound basis of decision making,” asserts that Sanako Oy was “insolvent at the time of the [June 2025 share] exchange,” and instructs me to forward the claim to the Company’s D&O insurer at Topdanmark.
🔴 Read the opening admission carefully.
The liquidator is using materials he gathered while operating an unlawful trusteeship that has since been struck down by the High Court. The mandate under which those materials were obtained does not exist. It never existed. Østre Landsret declared it null ex tunc. And yet the materials survive into the next proceeding, the moment the same person is reappointed under a new title. That is the procedural shape of today’s letter. It is the same shape as the bankruptcy decree of 6 January 2026, which Østre Landsret annulled three judges to zero on 5 March 2026 because the petition had never been lawfully served. The pattern repeats. The man stays the same. The court will see it.
Teis did not write this letter on Monday morning by accident. He wrote it because over the weekend he watched a shareholder named Jørgen open a chat thread and collect fifteen signatures and counting. The shareholder petition cannot be withdrawn by him. The signers do not work for him. The signers are not his clients. The signers are the people whose holdings he wrote down to zero on 26 January 2026, while he was kurator, in 20 days, with no independent valuation. They have a memory. They have standing. They are organising. So instead of attacking the petition — which he cannot — he attacks me. The CEO. The face. The sole person whose D&O insurance he knows does not cover, because he has the file. He is hoping that if he can intimidate me, the wave of fifteen signatures will hesitate. Twenty will become eighteen. Eighteen will become twelve. The petition will lose momentum. The DFSA will receive a smaller file. The police will receive a softer letter.
That is the calculation behind today’s letter.
It will not work. And the reason it will not work is in paragraph three of the letter itself.
📋 The six allegations — and the one that prosecutes its own author
I read all six on tonight’s livestream. They will all be answered in court on 11 May, and then, line by line, before Advokatnævnet, before SØIK if the police escalate, and before the Romanian courts where I am personally domiciled and where my counsel is already preparing the second tranche of the Finans defamation action. But for the readers of this Substack, here is the spine, with the one piece that needs to be understood today.
Allegation #1 — “Liquidity shortages and accounting conditions”
Teis writes that the Company has been “insolvent for a long period of time, including prior to the filing of bankruptcy petitions against the Company in the autumn of 2025.” The publicly recorded financial profile of Shape Robotics in autumn 2025 says the opposite. Audited 2024 revenue of DKK 302 million was up 76% year-on-year (Cision announcement no. 03-25, 3 April 2025). The H1 2025 interim report, published 28 August 2025, recorded the first positive operating profit in company history. On 3 November 2025, Shape Robotics signed a EUR 32 million Sale Purchase Framework Agreement with Bechtle direct Polska Sp. z o.o., with revenue recognition stated to commence “this month” (Cision c4260763). None of that is the profile of long-term insolvency. It is the profile of a company that was in the middle of the strongest commercial period in its history when a market-manipulation cascade — for which the DFSA itself issued a formal reprimand against Lars Topholm of Carnegie Investment Bank on 7 April 2026 (Cision c4331763) — collapsed the share price 87% in two weeks. The cascade originated outside the Company. The DFSA has confirmed this on the regulatory record. The letter does not mention the reprimand.
Allegation #2 — “Significant and on the present basis unusual transactions… with companies and persons associated with [the CEO]”
The transactions referenced are with the Romanian operating ecosystem. Romania generates 87.5% of group revenue. The transactions were audited by Beierholm. They were disclosed in the annual report under the IFRS related-parties standard. They were approved year after year by the board the liquidator now sits across the table from. They are also the basis on which the Company filed for reconstruction, which is on the docket at Sø- og Handelsretten for 11 May 2026 — and which the same liquidator opposed two weeks ago (see Day 47 — The Reconstruction the Liquidator Refused). The position is internally inconsistent: the very transactions the letter calls suspicious are the engine of the reconstruction the liquidator is trying to block. He cannot have it both ways. The court will see it.
Allegation #3 — Sanako Oy. This is the centre of gravity.
This is the paragraph my father reacted to on the livestream. Read it carefully:
⚖️ From the liquidator’s letter, point 3 (verbatim):
“We are investigating the circumstances surrounding the company’s acquisition of the Finnish subsidiary Sanako on June 25 , which has [been] completed through a share swap. At the time of the transaction, Sanako Oy was valued at approximately 8.6 million euros. It is our preliminary assessment that the company may in fact have been insolvent at the time of the exchange and that the price of the shares in the company may thus have been highly misleading… Sanako Oy went bankrupt at the beginning of 2026 on its own application. It is our opinion that the liquidity from Sanako Oy was used to cover the liquidity deficit in the remaining Shape Robotics group after its acquisition in June 2025.”
📄 Full liquidator’s letter (English translation, 4 pages PDF): https://ppl-ai-file-upload.s3.amazonaws.com/web/direct-files/attachments/71689698/d56a0202-0086-4904-9588-a19e5a64ddc5/Translation-Mark-Robert-Abraham-Shape-Robotics-AS-under-tvangsoplosning.pdf
The italicised, bolded sentence is the one that prosecutes its own author. Read it slowly. “On its own application” means a voluntary bankruptcy filing by Sanako Oy itself.
Three proof points follow.
📌 Proof one — the date.
The Finnish technology newspaper Tivi.fi (Suvi Korhonen, 12 February 2026, headline “Huippukannattava perinteikäs it-talo pyöritti 2 miljoonan bisnestä – Nyt se on konkurssissa” — “Highly profitable, traditional IT house running a EUR 2 million business — now in bankruptcy”) reports the filing date as 5 February 2026 at Turun käräjäoikeus. The Finnish credit register Suomen Asiakastieto records two entities now: Sanako Oy (Y-tunnus 1729128-9), 2024 EBIT margin 50.6%, equity ratio 72%, growth +18.8%; and Sanako Oy konkurssipesä (Y-tunnus 3598630-8), the bankruptcy estate, registered in 2026.
📌 Proof two — the Finnish corporate-law rule.
Under the Finnish Limited Liability Companies Act (Osakeyhtiölaki 624/2006), Chapter 1 §§ 5–8, the voluntary bankruptcy of a wholly-owned Oy is a corporate act of the highest order: it terminates the subsidiary’s separate juridical existence and falls outside the ordinary scope of management authority. It requires shareholder authorisation. The sole shareholder of Sanako Oy was Shape Robotics A/S.
📌 Proof three — who held the parent’s shareholder rights on 5 February 2026.
Under Konkurslov § 110, the Danish trustee represents the bankrupt estate “in any respect,” including the exercise of shareholder rights held by the parent. Between 6 January 2026 and 5 March 2026, the only person legally able to exercise Shape Robotics A/S’s shareholder rights over Sanako Oy was the kurator. The kurator was Teis Gullitz-Wormslev.
Reduced to its operative logic, the conclusion is automatic:
kurator(t)=Teis∀ t∈[6 Jan 2026, 5 Mar 2026]kurator(t)=Teis∀t∈[6 Jan 2026,5 Mar 2026]
filingSanako=5 Feb 2026 ∈ [6 Jan 2026, 5 Mar 2026]filingSanako=5 Feb 2026∈[6 Jan 2026,5 Mar 2026]
∴ authority(filingSanako) = kurator(5 Feb 2026) = Teis∴authority(filingSanako)=kurator(5 Feb 2026)=Teis
Either he authorised the filing — in which case the negligence the letter assigns me is, in fact, his — or he failed to prevent a Finnish-side filing made without his authorisation, which would itself be a § 110 failure to safeguard the estate’s most material asset. There is no third option. The very sentence he uses to accuse me convicts him. The DFSA file J.nr. 25-026876 will receive this episode tomorrow. So will Advokatnævnet. So will the police, under criminal complaint reference 0100-83986-10362-26.
The companion fact: the Company’s own valuation of Sanako at acquisition was EUR 8,632,574, established by an independent valuer under § 160 of the Danish Companies Act, registered at Erhvervsstyrelsen on 4 June 2025, admitted to trading on Nasdaq Copenhagen on 11 June 2025, and confirmed by an IFRS 3 purchase price allocation prepared by kAdvisory of Warsaw on 28 July 2025. The trustee then wrote that EUR 8.6 million subsidiary down to DKK 0 in Creditor Information no. 2 of 26 January 2026 — while he was kurator, in 20 days, with no independent valuation. The independent valuation was real. The write-down was the trustee’s act. The Sanako bankruptcy filing was the trustee’s act. The negligence the letter now wants to assign me is the negligence of the very acts he himself performed.
Allegation #4 — “Borrowing of Sanako in November 2025… EUR 4 million from Alisa, Veritas Pension and Finnvera”
The liquidator wants to examine this. So do I — gladly. I attach the four primary documents at the end of this episode for the public record. They are signed via Visma Sign with verifiable certificate IDs. They show three independent counterparties: Alisa Pankki Oyj (Finnish bank), Veritas Pension Insurance Company Ltd. (Finnish pension institution), and Finnvera Plc (the Finnish State export credit agency). They show that the Finnvera Guarantee no. 1063834 of 7 November 2025 is tied in writing — in Finnish, by the explicit name of the Polish counterparty — to “Allekirjoitettu sopimus Sanako Oy:n ja Bechtle direct Polska S.P z o.o.:n välillä rahoitettavaan tilaukseen liittyen” — “Signed contract between Sanako Oy and Bechtle direct Polska Sp. z o.o. relating to the order to be financed.” They show that the Alisa loan agreement no. 10632751 of 18 November 2025 records the loan purpose in the loan instrument itself: “Velallisen Puolasta saaman tilauksen toimittamiseksi” — “For the delivery of the Borrower’s order received from Poland.” They show that the parent company guarantee of 19 November 2025 was granted to all three Finnish counterparties for an aggregate maximum of EUR 4,000,000, with a Security Pooling Agreement among the lenders.
This is contract-specific export financing, vetted by an EU Member State’s export credit agency under the EU State aid framework, tied by name to a real Polish public-procurement contract under Poland’s Krajowy Plan Odbudowy programme, and disclosed to the Danish market in Cision announcement c4275825 of 2 December 2025 — six weeks before the bankruptcy decree. It was the most transparent, most vetted, most state-backed financing structure in Shape Robotics’ history. The only reason it failed is that the subsidiary it was designed to fund — Sanako Oy — entered voluntary bankruptcy on 5 February 2026, on the kurator’s watch, before delivery to Bechtle Polska could begin.
Allegation #4 dies on contact with the four exhibits attached to this post.
Allegation #5 — “Factoring agreement with UniCredit Bank in Romania… UniCredit raising a claim of [over] 160 million [DKK]”
UniCredit raised a parent-guarantee claim because the unlawful Danish bankruptcy of 6 January 2026 — annulled by Østre Landsret on 5 March 2026 as not lawfully served — triggered cross-default clauses in the Romanian factoring agreement. The Romanian operating company was paying the factoring on schedule. The bankruptcy in Denmark was the cross-default trigger. The trusteeship is now the liquidation. The chain runs from his own act to the claim he now characterises as evidence of my negligence. He created the cross-default. The cross-default created the parent-guarantee claim. The parent-guarantee claim is now in his letter as a basis to come after me personally. The architecture is circular. The court will see it.
Allegation #6 — “Whether the Company’s disclosure to the market… have been sufficient”
This is the point at which the letter becomes, unintentionally, honest.
🔴 The man who published zero selskabsmeddelelser through Cision in 59 days as kurator of a Main Market-listed company is now examining the disclosure conduct of the management he replaced.
🟢 Between 2024 and 6 January 2026, Shape Robotics published over thirty Cision announcements covering the Sanako acquisition, the Vietnam EUR 3.8M order, the Polish EUR 30M+ pipeline, the EUR 32M Bechtle framework, the EUR 4M Alisa/Veritas/Finnvera financing, the IRIS equity line, and every other material development. After 6 January 2026, under the kurator, Cision shows nothing.
The 4,800 retail shareholders of Shape Robotics know the difference. So does the DFSA. So does the market. So, eventually, will the courts.
⚖️ Konkurslov § 110 — what it actually says
For readers who have followed this investigation since Day 1, the doctrinal foundation is worth quoting in full. Konkurslov § 110, the operative provision of Danish bankruptcy law on trustee duties, reads in part:
“Kurator skal ved udførelsen af sit hverv varetage boets interesser og herunder sikre boets aktiver og foretage de fornødne skridt til værn mod uberettigede dispositioner over aktiverne samt repræsentere boet i enhver henseende.”
Translation: The kurator shall, in the performance of his duties, safeguard the interests of the estate, including securing the estate’s assets, taking the necessary steps to protect against unauthorised dispositions of the assets, and representing the estate in every respect.
Shape Robotics A/S’s shareholder rights in Sanako Oy were assets of the estate. The duty to secure the estate’s assets and to represent the estate in every respect extended to those rights. A voluntary bankruptcy filing by Sanako Oy on 5 February 2026 was a disposition of those rights. It either happened with the kurator’s authorisation, or it happened in his face without his intervention. Either way, the trail of duty leads back to the man whose letter today asks me to account for the consequences.
The cross-border layer makes the trap tighter, not looser. Regulation (EU) 2015/848 on insolvency proceedings does not apply to Denmark — Recital 33, by virtue of Denmark’s opt-out under Protocol 22 to the TFEU. A Danish kurator therefore has no automatic cross-border jurisdiction over a Finnish subsidiary. He holds only the parent’s shareholder rights as an asset of the Danish estate, and he exercises them under § 110. There is no other route. The route ran through him. The filing happened on his watch. The letter he wrote today is the evidence.
🗓️ The pattern, dated
I want to step back and ask you to see the pattern.
In December 2025 a market-manipulation cascade originated by a Carnegie analyst’s undisclosed shareholding — for which the DFSA issued a formal reprimand on 7 April 2026 (Cision c4331763) — collapsed the share price 87%. Trading was suspended on 19 December 2025.
On 6 January 2026 a creditor’s bankruptcy petition produced a decree, served not on the management but on the private digital address of a chairman who had resigned a month earlier. Trustee appointed: Teis Gullitz-Wormslev. The DocuSign envelope of the 28 November 2025 settlement with Danske Bank already designated him as “KURATOR” — 39 days before his official appointment (Cision c4327806).
On 22 January 2026 the trustee cancelled — without notice to the market or shareholders — the EGM scheduled for that date. The EGM was meant to authorise the IRIS equity line.
On 26 January 2026 Creditor Information no. 2 was issued: DKK 199 million in subsidiaries written to zero. No independent valuations.
On 5 February 2026 Sanako Oy filed for bankruptcy on its own application at Turun käräjäoikeus. No notice to Shape Robotics’ management. Mr. Gullitz-Wormslev, the Company has confirmed, was copied on the Finnish administrator’s communications from the start.
On 5 March 2026 Østre Landsret unanimously annulled the bankruptcy. Three judges. Case K 3337/25-F. The decree had never been lawfully served.
From 10 March 2026 onward the Company demanded the return of its records. The trustee returned nothing for over forty days.
On 7 April 2026 the DFSA issued its formal reprimand against Lars Topholm. The market-manipulation origin of the cascade was confirmed on the regulatory record.
On 14 April 2026 the EGM at 41.2% capital represented passed every resolution. The Company was renamed Phase Education A/S. Aurel Nețin was elected Chairman. Mandates to pursue D&O claims against the former board (90.6%) and against Carnegie (90.6%).
On 15 April 2026 Erhvervsstyrelsen filed for compulsory dissolution of the Company three hours before the EGM convened.
On 17 April 2026 Mr. Gullitz-Wormslev was reappointed — this time as liquidator in the tvangsopløsning. Same person. Different door.
On 22 April 2026 (Day 48) the liquidator withdrew the Company’s MAR complaint against the trustee from the DFSA file — without consulting management. The withdrawal was communicated to me by email only, by Viktor Stidsen Katic at the DFSA.
On Friday 24 April 2026 the liquidator, now acting in his personal capacity, formally advanced his earlier MAR notifications against the Company’s former management before the DFSA. Same case file (J.nr. 25-026876). New standing. New threat.
On Sunday 27 April 2026 (Day 51) the DFSA confirmed in writing that file J.nr. 25-026876 remains live and active — in both directions.
On the same day Sunday, 27 April 2026, Jørgen Andreas Berg opened the Substack chat thread and the Google Form. Within hours, fifteen shareholders had signed a petition — their own, not the Company’s — demanding the DFSA and the Copenhagen Police investigate the trustee for market abuse during the 59-day silent kuratorship.
Today, Monday 28 April 2026 (Day 52), the same liquidator who advanced his MAR notifications on Friday and was confronted yesterday by an organising shareholder wave sends me a personal management negligence letter built on materials he gathered while operating an unlawful trusteeship that the High Court had already annulled.
That is the pattern. Each step works because the previous step worked. The pattern has a shape, and the shape has a name in every language. Hoțul strigă „hoții!”
📊 The scoreboard after 54 days
Bankruptcy unanimously annulled ✓
(Østre Landsret, K 3337/25-F, 5 March 2026)
Board elected at EGM ✓
(14 April 2026, 41.2% capital represented)
Company renamed Phase Education A/S ✓
EUR 16M committed ✓
(IRIS Capital LOI + Alumni Capital convertible)
DFSA reprimand against Carnegie analyst issued ✓
(7 April 2026, Cision c4331763)
Criminal complaint filed ✓
(ref. 0100-83986-10362-26)
Reconstruction hearing docketed ✓
(11 May 2026, Sø- og Handelsretten,
62.1% creditor majority via Elena Pasat)
Romanian defamation suit filed ✓
(Tribunalul Ilfov, EUR 13.85M;
second tranche EUR 45M in preparation)
Shareholder petition opened by Jørgen ✓
(Substack chat + Google Form, 15+ signatures
and growing as of 28 April 2026)
Four Finnish loan and guarantee documents now public ✓
(this episode)
Liquidator's negligence letter answered the same day ✓
(this episode)
🤲 For the 4,800
To the 4,800 retail shareholders of Phase Education A/S who have stayed with this company through the 87% collapse, the unlawful suspension, the silent trusteeship, the unanimous annulment, the dissolution attempt, the EGM, the reconstruction filing, the rename, the liquidator’s escalating DFSA manoeuvres, and now this personal negligence letter:
The letter that arrived this morning is a counter-punch, not new evidence. It is the same materials the trustee held in silence for 59 days, repackaged as a personal claim against me, dropped on my desk one day after fifteen of you started signing your own petition against him. It is timed. It is built on a voided file. And in its third paragraph, in a single Finnish-corporate-law sentence, it convicts its own author.
To Jørgen and the fifteen and counting: keep going. Your signatures are not cancellable by anyone. The DFSA must read your petition under MAR Article 22. The police must receive it under Retsplejeloven § 535. Neither of them works for the liquidator, however much he may wish otherwise. The wave you started on Sunday is the most consequential thing that has happened in this case since the High Court ruling of 5 March. It is what today’s letter is trying to break. It is also the thing today’s letter cannot break.
To my father, Tiberiu, who watched the livestream tonight and put it perfectly in three words of Romanian: thank you for the headline. Hoțul strigă „hoții!” It is the legal posture of the letter and it is the headline of this episode. The Substack archive is now seeded with the proverb. I expect it to outlive every single one of the six allegations.
🎯 What I am not saying
I am not saying that there were no failures of corporate governance in Shape Robotics’ history. The EGM of 14 April 2026 voted by 90.6% to pursue D&O claims against the former board and by 90.6% to pursue claims against Carnegie Investment Bank. Those mandates exist. The reconstruction filing of 11 May 2026 will adjudicate them.
I am not saying that today’s letter cannot be litigated. Topdanmark D&O coverage does not extend to me personally because I am a Romanian citizen resident in Romania, so any civil exposure on this letter would be litigated, if at all, before Romanian courts under the Brussels I bis Regulation (Regulation (EU) 1215/2012). I am here. I am visible. I am 100% transparent.
What I am saying is that the letter itself, as drafted and signed today, contains the seed of its own undoing in its third paragraph. That is a documentary fact. It will be in the file at Sø- og Handelsretten on 11 May 2026. It will be in the file at Advokatnævnet. It will be in the file at the Copenhagen Police under reference 0100-83986-10362-26. It will be in the file at Tribunalul Ilfov as evidence of the coordinated retaliatory campaign. It will be in this archive, on substack.wildceo.live, for the rest of time.
🔜 What happens next
Tomorrow, 29 April 2026. Today’s letter, the four Finnish primary documents, this episode, and a transcript of tonight’s livestream are filed with the DFSA under existing case J.nr. 25-026876, copied to Advokatnævnet (Disciplinary Board of the Danish Bar) and to the Copenhagen Police under criminal complaint reference 0100-83986-10362-26.
Through the week. Jørgen continues collecting signatures. The shareholder petition will be filed on Monday 4 May 2026 at the DFSA and at Copenhagen Police. If you are a Shape Robotics / Phase Education shareholder and you want to sign, the Substack chat thread is the place to go.
11 May 2026, 09:30 CET. Reconstruction hearing at Sø- og Handelsretten. The reconstruction is built on the very transactions today’s letter characterises as suspicious — which is to say, the legitimacy of those transactions is now squarely before the court that will decide whether to keep this Company alive.
Mid-May 2026. Romanian counsel SCPA Pârgaru, Neacșu și Asociații files the second tranche of the defamation action (EUR 45 million) at Tribunalul Ilfov. Today’s letter is added to the dossier as evidence of the coordinated campaign that began with the Finans articles in December 2025.
Continuing. GAME OVER continues, daily. Day 53 tomorrow.
📎 The four Finnish exhibits
Filed with this episode and verifiable via direct Visma Sign certificate links:
📑 Exhibit 1. Alisa Bank On Demand Guarantee Undertaking, 11 September 2025. Shape Robotics A/S guarantor for EUR 700,000 of Sanako Oy receivables financing. Visma Sign certificate
4609d232-e96c-4be9-a352-29e8b0cccae1.📑 Exhibit 2. Alisa Pankki Velkakirja, Loan Agreement no. 10632751, 18 November 2025. EUR 2,000,000 to Sanako Oy. Stated purpose, in Finnish: “For the delivery of the Borrower’s order received from Poland.” Visma Sign certificate
0f455f60-cfb5-4e25-866e-387965986a15.📑 Exhibit 3. Finnvera Guarantee no. 1063834, 7 November 2025. 80% guarantee (EUR 1.6M) of the Alisa loan, tied by name in writing to “signed contract between Sanako Oy and Bechtle direct Polska Sp. z o.o.” Visma Sign certificate
f268d071-1a68-4374-8965-a0737abcdbbc.📑 Exhibit 4. Shape Robotics A/S Parent Company Guarantee, 19 November 2025. EUR 4,000,000 aggregate to Alisa Bank, Veritas Pension Insurance, and Finnvera, with Security Pooling Agreement among the three lenders. Visma Sign certificate
76b84a6e-858b-4ddc-80b2-08c92e48d1e0.
Cross-referenced filings on Cision/Nasdaq Copenhagen: c4214859 (Polish framework, 24 September 2025), c4260763 (EUR 32M Bechtle Polska, 3 November 2025), c4275825 (EUR 4M Alisa/Veritas/Finnvera financing structure disclosure, 2 December 2025), c4321208 (no bankruptcy petition lawfully served, 13 March 2026), c4326119 (bridge financing, 24 March 2026), c4327806 (resolution terms for EIFO and Danske Bank, including the 28 November 2025 DocuSign envelope), c4331763 (DFSA reprimand against Lars Topholm, 7 April 2026).
External sources: Tivi.fi (Suvi Korhonen, 12 February 2026); Suomen Asiakastieto Oy; Konkurslov § 110; Osakeyhtiölaki 624/2006, Chapter 1 §§ 5–8; Konkurssilaki 120/2004; Regulation (EU) 2015/848, Recital 33; Regulation (EU) 1215/2012 (Brussels I bis); Shape Robotics A/S preliminary response to DFSA, 13 March 2026, J.nr. 25-026876.
📚 The full investigation
Day 51: The Email That Confirms It | Day 50: Zero Practice | Day 49: The Pre-Appointed | Day 48: The Email Viktor Sent Only to Me | Day 47: The Reconstruction the Liquidator Refused | Day 46: A Question of Procedure | Day 41: The Six Claims | Day 39: The Genoptagelse | Day 38: The Resurrection | Day 35: This Is Not Negligence. This Is a Modus Operandi. | Day 1: The Trustee, The Bank, and 3.7 Million Crowns That Belong to Us
🔭 For Teis Gullitz-Wormslev and Kromann Reumert
If any sentence in this article is factually inaccurate, please write to me at mark@shaperobotics.com. I will publish a correction in the next edition with the same prominence as the original claim.
I have taken care to stay strictly within the four corners of the documents referenced — the DFSA correspondence in case J.nr. 25-026876, the court rulings of 17 April 2026 and 5 March 2026, Company Announcement No. 10-26 of 7 April 2026, the four Finnish primary documents attached, the Tivi.fi reporting of 12 February 2026, the Suomen Asiakastieto register entries, and the public filings already published in this series. Nothing here is speculation. Everything here can be verified from the linked and attached materials.
🔔 Subscribe
Subscribe to GAME OVER for real-time updates as the reconstruction hearing of 11 May 2026 approaches and as Jørgen’s shareholder petition makes its way to the DFSA and the police. Every filing. Every email. Every receipt. No paywall on the truth. Day 53 tomorrow.
🔚 Q.E.D.
The man who held the documents wrote a letter saying the documents prove me negligent. The same letter, in the third paragraph, says the Finnish subsidiary filed for bankruptcy on its own application — during the exact 59 days when the only person legally able to authorise that application was him.
✊ Quod erat demonstrandum.
The thief shouts “thieves!”
Shape Robotics A/S (now operating as Phase Education A/S)
CVR: DK38322656 | Nasdaq Copenhagen: SHAPE | ISIN: DK0061273125
Investor Relations: Mark-Robert Abraham, Founder and CEO
E: mark.robert.abraham@gmail.com | T: +40 749 288 688 | W: wildceo.live | substack.wildceo.live
Mark-Robert Abraham is the Founder and former CEO of Shape Robotics A/S (now Phase Education A/S). This publication documents an ongoing legal dispute involving the Company. Nothing in this publication constitutes legal or financial advice. All statements are made in good faith on the basis of publicly available information, primary documents, and direct experience. The author reserves all legal rights.
