InvestorsHub Logo
Post# of 178
Next 10
Followers 129
Posts 5085
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 04/10/2008

Re: Newtogame post# 139

Thursday, 05/08/2014 2:23:25 PM

Thursday, May 08, 2014 2:23:25 PM

Post# of 178
Hey New

Show me where FCNCA is listed a creditor. I'm not saying it's not true...but show me. Provide the doc. I want to see how they're listed and the details.

But for right now New its important for you to forget all the conspiracy theories and baseless opinions that have been swirling around on Ihub for the past 3 years...and just allow some verifiable explanations to present themselves.

I've explained The Loss Sharing Agreement (LSA) connection before...but aside from the main purpose of an LSA they also do something else in that they form a temporary union between the bank that had their assets seized (UWBK) - the bank that acquired those assets (FCNCA) - and the agent that brought them together (FDIC)...and that LSA exclusivley tethers these 3 entities together for up to 10 years.

With or without an LSA the FDI Act of 1950 means the FDIC will be UWBK's judge and jury. It should be no surprise that the FDIC is in complete control of not only the recievership of the Bank but the BK process of the holding company end to end as well. The FDIC had legal authority here long before United Western was ever a bank... and the fact that the FDIC is driving this bus should not be looked upon as 'strange' or 'uncommon' or 'illegal' as many have asserted on Ihub...it's actually the law that they fill that role. The FDIC is a United States government corporation.

When UWBK decided to file BK...that meant FCNCA would be there too. If there was no LSA FCNCA could care less what UWBK does or where they go but the LSA keeps them bound together - hence why FCNCA requested to receive court notices involving UWBK. If they were trying to hide their interest in this case (to conceal what some think is proof of guilt) they wouldn't have publically requested to be notified when court docs came out...they could have privately read the docs the same way you and I do.

You simply cannot 'read between the lines' here New and assign a hidden meaning to it all just on the basis you see "linkage" between these 3 parties. The linkage you see SHOULD be there... its normal. What isn't normal is the lack of linkage supporting a settlement or a STIP or CSSA or whatever.

Not one shred of evidence supports a windfall for common equity holders from any source what-so-ever. No smoke...no fire.

FCNCA said in its last 10-K:

BancShares and various subsidiaries have been named as defendants in legal actions arising from their normal business activities in which damages in various amounts are claimed. BancShares is also exposed to litigation risk relating to the prior business activities of banks from which assets were acquired and liabilities assumed in the various FDIC-assisted transactions. Although the amount of any ultimate liability with respect to such matters cannot be determined, in the opinion of management, any such liability will not have a material effect on BancShares’ consolidated financial statements.

<page 101>

https://www.firstcitizens.com/pdfs/bancshares/2013-annual-report.pdf

P.s. The UWB deficit stands at $266MM...which means the FDIC has a claim for that much and possibly more before thsi is over. Every penny recovered from any source will go to the FDIC up to $266MM dollars. That's alot of pennies...no?





Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal
with a big appetite at one end ....and no sense
of responsibility at the other.

~~Ronald Reagan

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.