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.
Monthly Operating Report (4/2019)
Cash and Cash Equivalents were $76.540 million.
Total Assets were $71.703 million including a $6 million contra account for Investments in Subsidiaries. This would indicate negative equity in those subs. However, the account shares a footnote with Pre-Petition Liabilities - Unsecured Debt.
Net Loss in April was $293,932.
Monthly Operating Report (3/2019)
Cash and Cash Equivalents were $76.731 million.
Total Assets were $71.915 million including a $6 million contra account for Investments in Subsidiaries. This would indicate negative equity in those subs. However, the account shares a footnote with Pre-Petition Liabilities - Unsecured Debt.
Net Loss in January in December was $202,687.
Monthly Operating Report (2/2019)
Cash and Cash Equivalents were $77.042 million.
Total Assets were $72.245 million including a $6 million contra account for Investments in Subsidiaries. This would indicate negative equity in those subs. However, the account shares a footnote with Pre-Petition Liabilities - Unsecured Debt.
Net Loss in January in December was $178.833.
Monthly Operating Report (1/2019)
Cash and Cash Equivalents were $77.233 million.
Total Assets were $72.426 million including a $6 million contra account for Investments in Subsidiaries. This would indicate negative equity in those subs. However, the account shares a footnote with Pre-Petition Liabilities - Unsecured Debt.
Net Loss in January in December was $157,319.
New highwater mark set on 2/25/19.
A $50,000 principal amount trade crossed at 36 (36.04 when including commission).
Monthly Operating Report (12/2018)
Cash and Cash Equivalents were $77.562 million.
Total Assets were $72.742 million including a $6 million contra account for Investments in Subsidiaries. This would indicate negative equity in those subs. However, the account shares a footnote with Pre-Petition Liabilities - Unsecured Debt.
Net Income in December was $507,902.
Non-Operating Income was $812,915 made up of Other Non-Operating Income from the ADCO Trust Parties Settlement related to Thornburg Mortgage Securities Trust 2007-3 claims.
Monthly Operating Report (11/2018)
Cash and Cash Equivalents were $77.875 million.
Total Assets were $72.315 million including a $6 million contra account for Investments in Subsidiaries. This would indicate negative equity in those subs. However, the account shares a footnote with Pre-Petition Liabilities - Unsecured Debt.
Net Income in November was $967.087 million.
Non-Operating Income was $973.950 million made up $23.5 million of Other Non-Operating Income and $950.450 million of Gain of Extinguishment of Debt from the RBS Settlement.
Legal fees in the amount of $6.4625 million were paid to Special Litigation Counsel Susman Godfrey and SSG&S
New highs of 35.5. Sure helping weather the overall market pain at the moment.
Order Granting Motion to Seal Exhibits to Trustee's Reply Brief in Support of Trustee's Motion to Compel Production of Documents Defendants Withheld Under the Community-of-Interest or Joint Client Doctrines (10/30/18)
Source: PACER [Docket 526]
Order Granting Trustee's Motion for Approval of Settlement and Compromise of Controversy Between the Trustee and the RBS Defendants (10/26/18)
Source: PACER [Docket 524]
Monthly Operating Report (9/2018)
Cash and Cash Equivalents were $60.747 million.
Total Assets were $55.903 million including a $6 million contra account for Investments in Subsidiaries. This would indicate negative equity in those subs. However, the account shares a footnote with Pre-Petition Liabilities - Unsecured Debt.
Notice of Appearance and Request for Notice Filed by Broadbill Partners II, LP. (10/23/18)
Shane G. Ramsey and Valerie P. Morrison, of Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP, are counsel of record.
Source: Epiq [Docket 2754]
New highwater mark set on 10/25/18.
A $110,000 principal amount trade crossed at 33 (33.25 when including commission).
Motion to Approve Stipulation/Settlement Between the Trustee and ADCO Trust Parties (10/18/18)
The settlement resolves the allocation of proceeds from certain claims pursued by the Trustee and the ADCO Trust Parties arising from the securitization of mortgage loans in Thornburg Mortgage Securities Trust 2007-3 (the “2007-3 Trust”). Beginning in the latter part of 2013, the Parties made demand on Countrywide Home Loans Inc. for repurchase of certain mortgage loans, for inspection of mortgage loans files for certain other loans, and for mediation of disputes related to such loans.
The Trustee and the ADCO Trust Parties have agreed upon the amount of the Net Recovery and the Trustee’s share thereof, which is $812,915.06. Within five business days of entry of a final order granting this Motion, the ADCO Trust Parties shall remit that amount to the Trustee.
Responses due by 11/8/2018
Source: PACER [Docket 2753]
Hi Enterprising Investor,
We should hear today from the RBS case (settlement for $23.5M) filed in September, shouldn't we?
Thanks in advance for your reply.
Monthly Operating Report (8/2018)
Cash and Cash Equivalents were $60.953 million.
Total Assets were $56.13 million including a $6 million contra account for Investments in Subsidiaries. This would indicate negative equity in those subs. However, the account shares a footnote with Pre-Petition Liabilities - Unsecured Debt.
Trading activity has returned, pushing the price back over $30:
http://finra-markets.morningstar.com/BondCenter/BondTradeActivitySearchResult.jsp?ticker=C170460&enddate=11%2F30%2F2017&startdate=11%2F30%2F2016
Motion to Approve Stipulation/Settlement and Compromise of Controversy Between the Trustee and the RBS Defendants. Notice Served on 9/28/2018. Filed by Joel I. Sher, Chapter 11 Trustee. Responses due by 10/19/2018 (9/28/18)
RBS will pay $23.5 million and give up Proofs of Claim in the amount of $828.9 million.
Source: PACER [Docket 516]
New highwater mark set on 8/07/18.
A $420,000 principal amount trade crossed at 30 (30.25 when including commission).
One year ago today, the notes traded at 16.
Long since 5/19/2009 when I paid 5.
Evidentiary Hearing Held (related document(s)441 ** DEACTIVATED ** Motion to Compel Interrogatory Responses From The Trustee filed by Defendant UBS AG (as successor to UBS Securities LLC), 442 Line Exhibits J, K, L, M and N to Declaration of Paige Barr Tinkham filed by Defendant UBS AG (as successor to UBS Securities LLC), 444 Amended Declaration Of Paige Barr Tinkham In Support Of USB AG's Memorandum Of Law In Support Of Its Motion To Compel Interrogatory Responses From Trustee. Filed by Paige E Barr, 451 Response filed by Plaintiff Joel I. Sher, Chapter 11 Trustee, 453 Restricted Document for Motion to Seal filed by Plaintiff Joel I. Sher, Chapter 11 Trustee, 455 Memorandum of Law filed by Defendant UBS AG (as successor to UBS Securities LLC), 464 Line - Joinder of the Non-UBS Defendants to UBS AG's Motion to Compel Interrogatory Responses from the Trustee Filed by Todd Michael Brooks (7/23/18)
441 Under Advisement: UBS claims that the Trustee’s interrogatory responses are deficient and must be supplemented. UBS and the Trustee have conferred on the deficient responses for over a year, and the Trustee has failed to provide complete responses to Interrogatories 4, 6, 8, and 11. The interrogatories are narrowly tailored to elicit the bases for the Trustee’s central allegations in the Complaints. The Trustee should be ordered to fully respond to the interrogatories so that UBS may develop their defenses to the Trustee’s claims.
UBS respectfully requests that this Court enter an order compelling the Trustee to supplement his responses to Interrogatories 4, 6, 8, and 11.
Next Omnibus Date for Hearing 9/21/18 at 10:00.
Source: PACER [Docket 500]
New highwater mark set on 7/23/18.
A $30,000 principal amount trade crossed at 29.971 (30.021 when including commission).
No new developments.
Just looked and see a $27.5 trade w/ settlement of 4/17. That's over 50% move up YTD. Hard to imagine such price action happens in isolation with no update on behind the scenes.
A $1MM+ principal amount trade crossed at 25 on 4/05/18.
One day earlier, a $50,000 principal amount trade crossed at 25.315.
A $1MM principal amount trade crossed at 24 on 3/27/18.
Yes.
There would be no other reason for the trustee to file all of the lawsuits over the past eight if the recoveries would flow right back to those who wronged the company.
So do you think that in every case where bondholders win the lawsuit, or defendants settle they will have to waive their claims? Just trying to think if there is any scenario where they would be entitled to receive a share of the claims along with or ahead of the senior unsecured
Most of those dollars are claim amounts submitted by the same banks being sued.
The banks claims will eventually be cleaned up in the plan.
How to think about prepetition unsecured claims (roughly $3bn of defendants deficiency claims)? In other words, how can one be sure that they don't outrank or are found to be pari with senior unsecured?
A $55,000 principal amount trade crossed at 24 on 1/22/18.
Thanks for waking me up!
Being honest, I haven't paid attention to pricing on a daily basis. I rely more on the value shown in my Fido account. However, it has been stuck at 20 for some time now. My bad.
You are right. These things don't move on nothing. I think we all can rely on higher prices being an indicator that something is up
The parties are still slugging it out through filings. I still do not see any trial scheduling. It has to be 2018 event?
The facts of this case are no different than those that preceded it. The only thing that differs is the amount of damages being sought - $1.3 billion.
New highs popping up lately, hunting for the mid- $20's.
http://finra-markets.morningstar.com/BondCenter/BondTradeActivitySearchResult.jsp?ticker=C170460&startdate=01%2F19%2F2017&enddate=01%2F19%2F2018
These things don't move on nothing, any news EI? Or maybe a general feeling of higher probability of a settlement (or sooner or combination of both).
A $250,000 principal amount trade yesterday.
The $419,000 buy on 11/28/17 was created by combining the $230,000 and $189,000 sales.
I really wish I knew why smaller principal amount trades get such poor pricing? I know someone else that would like to capitalize on it.
Flurry of activity after Thanksgiving has pushed values of these back to highs, look at the volume:
http://finra-markets.morningstar.com/BondCenter/BondTradeActivitySearchResult.jsp?ticker=C170460&startdate=11%2F30%2F2016&enddate=11%2F30%2F2017
Trial will most likely be a 2018 event.
The last word I received from the OCC counsel was that the discovery had not started.
Needless to say, increased activity with rising prices could indicate someone with better intel.
Which reminds me that I wanted to see if creditors got billed and for how much!
ZD was my broker, too.
However, I have not used them since buying some Lehman senior zero coupon bonds. I closed my account when ZD switched from NFS to IB, consolidating to Fido.
I know the commission changed from the low flat fee to a percentage. ZD might be the only game in town.
Do you remember if orders were day only? I know someone else who is trying to buy a position. I truly expected that last was the fill, but learned it was not. I think he said the spread was 18 bid and maybe 22 on the ask. I explained that bond trading requires far more patience than buying a stock between the spread.
It's out of $1000 actually. $19.50 = $190.50 of $1000 value bonds.
I can tell you I bought mine at Zion's Direct and then transferred to my consolidated account at Interactive Brokers.
It's out of $1000 actually. $19.50 = $190.50 of $1000 value bonds.
I can tell you I bought mine at Zion's Direct and then transferred to my consolidated account at Interactive Brokers.
little help to make sure I have this.
If I wanted to spend $10k worth to buy some of these bonds and they last traded at 19.50 I would want to purchase approximately 50k or $500k worth of bonds?
Meaning is the last trade at 19.50 out of $100 or 19.50 out of $1,000. I believe its out of $1,000.
I use Fido and Ameritrade and Fido has it listed but they will not trade it for me. Any suggestions?
Truly hope that Susman Godfrey gets the opportunity to submit a final bill well in excess of what has been paid to date for legal fees.
A $1.3 billion judgement with 9 percent post-judgement interest tacked on would make me smile.
WR Grace took twelves years.
Is this the longest running bankruptcy proceeding in US history? Sure seems like it. Lawyers are making a killing.
Is the only place to read these documents on Pacer? They are not on the EPIC site are they?
I hate navigating that thing.
MP was trying to come to the rescue. I thought they invested in the entire issue.
Thanks EI.
I guess I will be going through the filings over the next couple of weeks. Much of my investable cash has been tied up in other investments (Syncora) and Point Blank. I've been trimming in Syncora as I am overweight and looking for something interesting.
Who is MattlinPatterson? I guess I will have to read up. Do they hold the Sr. Subordinated Notes or are those trading anywhere.
Like you said the next 200M goes to Sr. Note holders. Then it should go to Sr. Sub noteholders. The first 2 were settled at 25%. The RBC after interest was more than 100% if I read that correct. Even a return of 25% makes the senior noteholders whole and I assume based on how these are trading there is minimal interest in the Sr. Sub notes if they are available at all.
I need to clarify some information in the litigation table that would make calculations based on percentages of the claim amount somewhat erroneous. It would also be my fault.
The claim amounts represent the amounts sought in the initial filing. The Court eliminated some counts in earlier cases, which reduced claim amounts in subsequent cases. For example, the original claim for JPM was $1.9 billion, but was reduced down to $1.3 billion.
One example is the case against RBC Capital Markets LLC. The initial claim was $35 Million. I have no idea what the revised claim was. However, judgment was entered in the amount of $26,259,118 plus prejudgment interest at the rate of nine 9% from 8/14/07 through the date of judgment (the total amount of the Judgment with pre-judgment interest totaled $45,256,330.87, inclusive of $18,997,212.87 in interest). I believe this was the full amount sought.
Purchased bonds via ZionsDirect. The commission was a flat rate. ZD moved clearing from NFS (Fidelity) to IB. I went ahead and moved all my positions over to Fidelity. ZD had incredibly low margin rates - a loss. Consolidation produced a larger collateral value. I have not looked back at ZD.
JPM and the others will most likely lose if the case goes to trial. The facts of this case mirrors all those before it. The only thing different is the dollar amount of $1.3 billion. I suspect this case was filed last for a reason. Those ahead of it were trial balloons. No pun intended.
Holders of Senior Notes are first in line when it comes to the waterfall. Holders already received assets from the distribution of ADFITECH (and the reason why my basis is less than $0).
One of the issues plaguing the JPM case is the never-ending struggle for the defendants to get information about MatlinPatterson's role in the reorg and litigation process. The defendants wanted to know who held the Senior Subordinated Notes on four specific dates. The judge told them that the trustee only had to release a holders list for two dates: (1) after initial offering and (2) at the filing date. The defendants are not allowed to see transfer activity, if any.
The reason why I bring this up is there is a transcript available that shed lights on why the defendants want access to information on MP. It also answers your $3.3 billion question. Simply, MP will not have some large windfall, even if the Court rules for the plaintiff in the full amount of $1.3 billion because the first $266 million flows to Senior Notes. The recovery would change dramatically if the Court once again ruled that prejudgement interest would be 9% versus the FJR based on the time element at play.Then again, the contingent legal fees will chew up a big chunk of award.
Based on the what I read in the transcript, the defendants really want to move forward in getting this case resolved. One of the defendants actually admitted that it is unable to provide pricing data on specific dates. Whoops! When I read that, it reminded me of craziness of MBS pricing in the film The Big Short.
EI - I own none of this but I've started to dig around again.
Based on what I see the bond prices are valued at a small discount to the current payout level. $23-24 vs $18 (last price posted on here)
I have a few questions:
1. where were you able to trade these? Fidelity will let me trade other bonds but not this one.
2. In looking at this do you have any idea of the JPM case. It appears from a perusal of several documents that discovery is still ongoing and nothing toward a settlement of any type vs the other smaller cases. I wonder if the size of it is the problem. I'm not skilled enough to know if these are different type of securities, tranches etc.
Any thoughts on this from your side re timeline, estimated recovery?
(I've been using 10% as my base estimate, with 0% as a bear case, and 20% as my bull case which may be too conservative) which actually fills the Senior Notes.
3. In the MOR, such as 2529, there is $3.3B in pre-petition liabilities (see note 3). Won't they simply take anything earned from the other cases & JPM and distribute them to these guys first leaving nothing left to bondholders or am I misinterpreting this line.
The trustee will most likely file a plan of liquidation.
Holders of Senior Notes would receive cash up the claim amount for the class.
Followers
|
12
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
386
|
Created
|
09/15/11
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators |
Sr Subordinated Note holders have a claim of $1.3 billion, while Jr Subordinated Note claims are $213.8 million.
All claim amounts listed above do not take into account any post-petition interest payable from the filing date forward.
Court - Case Numbers- Defendant(s)
USBC Maryland | Docket Date | USDC Maryland | Defendant(s) | Damages | Recovery |
10-00137 | 3/2/2010 | 10-01895 | SAF Financial et al | $22 Million | Settled for $6.5 Million |
11-00329 | 4/28/2011 | 11-01982 | Barclays Capital Inc | $94 Million | Settled for $23 Million |
11-00337 | 4/29/2011 | 11-03192 | Countrywide Home Loans | / | Settled for $3.1 Million |
11-00338 | 4/30/2011 | 11-02796 | Goldman Sachs | $71 Million | Undisclosed |
4/30/2011 | 11-01998 | RBC Capital Markets LLC | $35 Million | Settled $31.125 Million | |
11-00340 | 4/30/2011 | JP Morgan Chase et al | $1.3 Billion | RBS Settled for $23.5M |
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |