Mr Cooper Group Inc (COOP)

[JusticeWillWin]

The whole secret is in the $40.2 bln. asset-related equity adjustments of the "Inception Balance Sheet" from 2008 (run date 2009) IMO!



These (negative) $40.2 bln. of the internal inception balance sheet are the only reason that the FDIC had "only" the $1.942 (which increased to currently $2.7 bln. due to the $800 mln. tax refunds) on the "public" balance sheets. These (negative) $40.2 bln. cause the (negative) $11.8 bln. that the FDIC shows on the public balance sheets every time since 2008 (https://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/wamu.html click on Balance Sheet Summary)
WITHOUT these (negative) $40.2 bln. the current FDIC balance would be much much higher!

I've copied footnote 8 to the document's first page and it states it could be for "unrecorded assets". Are "assets" in trusts/offbalance assets are unrecorded assets? Didn't they pass to JPMC and the FDIC knew it already in 2008? I don't know...

IMO NOBODY could explain what these (negative) $40.2 exactly consist of. What justifies an "adjustment" of $40.2 bln.?

It COULD NOT be a reduction of the loans to fair market value, because JPMC also wrote down the loans by $30 bln. IMO EITHER the FDIC can do a reduction OR JPMC can do it AFTER the purchase, but NOT BOTH (BEFORE the purchase, and once again AFTER the purchase.)

So IMO the whole secret is in the $40.2 bln. asset-related equity adjustments.

BTW: Is it a coincidence that the recuction of the real estate mortgages ($191 bln.) be these asset-related equity adjustmens ($40.2 bln.) results exactly in the "mysterious" $151 bln.???

Can somebody help?

@Tanja: Do your newest perceptions/numbers/theories somehow align with this inception balance sheet/the (negative) $40.2 bln.???

clawmann's post:

I think the fundamental issue here is this: how reliable is the balance sheet information that has been published.

Read this, the FDIC's information quality guidelines:

https://www.fdic.gov/about/policies/index.html

The FDIC cannot just publish data that it knows is materially misleading.

So, yes, I think the $2.75 billion, while it is unaudited and so it might be off a bit here and there, it is pretty darn reliable for our purposes.

If anyone thinks the FDIC is misrepresenting the state of affairs, there is a complaint procedure outlined at the bottom of the linked page.