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.
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.
Catz, sorry to go to you as the spokesperson, but I have dropped off this board since the settlement was announced and we received new shares and interest in old company equevelent to the settlement note holders.
The chatter that I'm reading implies that the new company is someway capable of being a recipient of the assets of the old company. I'm unsure how this would be possible, since the since the purpose was to leave assets with the estate.
What am I missing here that people believe that the new company has hidden assets other than the initial funds given by the court?
From my understanding of BK, it would highly improbable that assets of the estate would be turned over left with the new company.
Please correct me if I'm wrong. But, the settlement allowed for shares in the new company and remaining interest of what remains in the old estate after the debts are paid?
Thanks for helping. I know this is probably well tread ground, but since I was here back in the beginning, I don't feel too out of place asking a few questions.
Thanks again.
p.s. Big fan of Cats. They don't need anybody really.
Thanks. They've been locked and the ticker name gone since the phone call.
Catz, sorry to put you on the spot as the resident expert, but some of us were able to vote by telephone to their broker, such as ETrade. Do you know if it was necessary to mail your ballot also? I believe that it was discussed that it wasn't nescessary. Now it is preying on my mind that both were necessary. Thanks for your tid bit of knowledge if you happen to remember. You were so informed regarding the voting. Thanks again.
I wonder how many shares are being wiped out by not voting or failure to vote in a correct manner.
It was a wonderful move to jettison all the shareholders who did not vote or vote properly.
Think of all the shareholders that never followed the matter. Think of all the ones that errored in voting.
I wonder how shallow the final pool of correctly voted shares there will be.
In the past I remember someone stating the number of shares being actively traded. This was determining the price of the shares. This amount was miniscule compared to the totallity of shares outstanding.
Think of all those shareholders who walked away from their shares. All those shareholders who received bk packages from the brokers and promptly threw them away. Think of the ones who attempted to vote then did it in the wrong manner.
I believe that there were over a billion common shares. I wonder how many of those shareholders knew to vote save their shares and then voted in the correct manner.
How many correctly voted shareholders will be left standing in the end?
It was a very clever bk plan by the SNH. The EC committee did try to warn people the best they could. They even were able to obtain an extension for people to change their votes.
This all could be said for preferreds too.
Its very much like Agatha Christie's book Ten Little Indians.
Thanks Real. It is amazing to me that so many people on this board keep screaming about corruption in this case and still scream at the same time that there isn't any money to pay down to commons.
Really? If the hedgies are willing to commit IT and perjury and STILL trade, buy, while the matter is before an open court action just goes to show how much money is really there.
Hasn't anyone really put together how much those hedgies want the company left over at the litigation? The hedgies know that the holding company is going to be coming out of BK gushing with cash. Why do you think they want it so bad? There isn't a carcuss, there is very thick and juice piece left after. Enough to four hedge found scrambling around every law to get a hold of it. Susman knows how much this is going to be worth when its all over.
Everyone who really knows what's behind the curtains, knows what's going to left over. And, the left overs are enough for four glutiness hedgies. People don't you think that there isn't enough to make equity shockingly happy if the wrest control away of the holding company, WMI, in the end? The Hedgies do.
I'm just glad I have the opportunity to find out, since I bought front row tickets a long time ago.
My only concern is that the Hedgies are going to pick a PMK with head full of cotton who had no personal involvement but is merely aware of the Hedgies "Policies and Procedures."
I wouldn't be surprised if Rosen informed all parties including the court that the court requests were going to be done as an "Addendum" or "Exibit" to the DS. And, that he is currently working on the "complicated" and "speclutative" numbers as we speak. And, that his office needs a vast amount of time to consider such speclutative considerations.
Shareholder Meeting? I've been wondering this whole time if Susman's goal is to get the valuation level to the amount that Preferred are declared a specific dollar amount. Not some hazy etheral possible amount but a declared amount. I believe then that the Susman as a counsel for his client would have a seat at the table to discuss and review their stated amount. I've wondered for some time if this is Susman's back door way of having a shareholder meeting? Should say the preferreds be declared a monetary amount, would the Susman have the right to go before the court and state that the Preferreds as a receiving party is having problems with debtor and want to declare their rights to have a shareholder meeting? We know that the court dewl tracked the issue do to the fact that equity was at the time in no way in the money and there was no reason to high jack the bk into a non issue. But, if the Preferreds a declared specific dollar amount, is it then a non issue? Wouldn't it be a reasonable issue to bring before the court? Could this be another reason no one want equity in anyway definablly in the money? If there is even one true dollar allocated to a preferred member would it not trigger rights for shareholder meetings and valuation? Is this why debtor and so many other members are clinging so hard to the 160 million valuation? How much would it upset the apple cart if a specific dollar amount went to equity? Is this why Susman is quieter than we believe they should be? They don't want to blow that shot? Is the goal: Get Preferred a specific dollar amount, then get the shareholder meeting?
Woe, talk up lawyering up. Imagine how fast these guys told them to shut up and start having every piece of document connected with this reviewed by counsel so they can see how much of it they can determine to attorney - client privildged?
Tell a lie often enough it becomes the truth. They were basically yelling in this pleading for the judge not to allow this matter to go in the direction that it's heading.
This is hilarious. We don't need a hearing on this court. We don't want to start delving into all the subs that were wrongfully transferred. This would only lend credence to that pesky poster Diamond who's been reminding everyone for two years about all the value in those subs. Let's not open that can of worms in open court. We don't want the judge to talk with other people about it. Hilarious.
Speclutive thought: Since this is going into 2011 whether or not the other parties like it, there are quite a few new things to consider. Perhaps, these new things that were once believed to be forever undetectable to the outside world and are now detectable, could they now be causing a rankle between the other parties? It's an interesting thought to consider. NOLs, Carrybacks, things once thought never to have to be discussed will now have to be listed in full and discussed. They may or may not be causing problems between parties. Parties positions, liabilities, greed, exposure all might have changed. Don, you may be right about expiring since the parties might not be able to agree. AIMO
That's right. They can sit by and watch as the court removes this case from the hands of Rosen and places it another party.
The power BK Court nearly Trumps everybody. I think the FDIC lost recently lost when they asserted that deserved funds from BK estate that was seized? Or, did the judge overstep their boundries and everybody just humored the judge for making laws of there own?
And, do you think that our Judge is going to recoil in fear over JPM and FDIC pouting if she feels they are wrong?
Just a subtle reminder to the court that WMI is undervaluing and hiding assets as asserted in the confirmation hearing. And, the fact they have already begun trying to retrieve those assets they labeled as previously non existant. Saying millions when it's really billions. Basically calling WMI as liars at the hearing. They got their point across.
Since our good judge has done everything possible to push settlement that includes equity, I wouldn't be surprised if she holds her ruling on the POR until after the Hoffman hearing. I think this would be an effort to cause hold outs to settle or debt to amend POR to include equity. AIMO.
Thanks for brining this up. IMO, Noteholders aren't in the know with the rest of the big dogs. IMO, the big players knew that "at best" the examiner might come up with something to show other activities that would be usefull tools for Susman. They were willing to gamble it. This will/would have create/d more or less value for possible settlement.
IMO, Susman has always wanted the examiner to get certain information. I believe that I've stated on this this board back when Susman brought the motion for the examiner. The examiner motion was just one tool that he was looking to use in the litigation. He has more than that. Obviously, as we have seen with his last minute presentation to the court that created the need for the examiner. Who knows what he has left. He could have more information that makes the examiners report look bad.
We've seen Susman reverse the direction of the case several times. I don't believe that anyone has been able to call Susman's actions dead on. So far, Susman has gotten what he wanted. Maybe he just got what he needed again.
I know that we're all groaning here, but maybe somebody on the other side is groaning too. There might be something in there that Susman plans to exploite or maybe he just wanted to see if the examiner could find more dirt for him so he could get more money out of settlement.
Maybe none of this matters to Susman's office. Maybe he has something else that is more damaging than the examiner stating that the settlement is fair. Because in truth that's all he said. "This settlement is fair." But Susman might have information for other misdeeds.
We don't know everything. Maybe he got what he needed with this report. What unequivicable statements were made by the examiner that would no longer have to be argued for months in open court? Maybe the statement about WAMU not being in financial trouble in 2008? Is that all that he was looking for? Because he would no longer have to debate that issue, it's over.
Who knows.
But, I know this. Susman is known for being a good lawyer. And, a good lawyer tells a client when to stop and take the money. Susman isn't going to let his client lose money. If they could have settled in July or possibly lose everything, he would have told them to take it.
If Susman did tell a shareholder "this is a long way from being over," he might have been referring to exactly this. I've seen enough litigation to know that even when it appears that someone is winning they surprisingly up and cry uncle.
What a crock, we can't stall for nothing. This is on a dual track you tool Lauria. If the examiner doesn't give the court enough to recommend the shareholders' meeting and vote, it will never likely happen. This reporter should be shot for not knowing what's going on in the case and not asking follow up questions that would have have made this fool stutter.
Well, if this is the noteholders group that eventually plead no confidence against their own counsel in open court, meaning Weil ultimately, I'm not surprised that Rosen decided to do a mediation to grease the squeaky wheel with some more money instead of dealing with the humiliation of dealing with filings by the noteholders/actions group dragging Weil through the mud claiming that they are too incompetent to continue with the case. It could cause a snowball effect of other parties in the SRA who want to turn on Weil. The last thing Weil wants is a whole court room of parties pointing the finger at them saying that they should never haved had this case because they are an icompetent firm. It's better to nip it on the bud now by agreeing to give more money to them if Rosen can win against the examiner and the court. AIMO
Thanks for the focus Fish. Since the shareholders meeting appears to be the biggest fight coming and focus of quite a few of the parties. I think that a lot of people are going to misundertand that right now that is what seems to be change for all parties in the action coming out of the examiner's report. Noteholders and others prevy to information such as the recent depos and discovery motions by examiner's have a good idea of what the report will say since I'm sure that they all were named on the discovery motions and admit or denies. Let's hope at minimum that the shareholder's is approved stat. I know that we'd all prefer a scathing blistering attack against Weil, JPM and FDIC but if we get a tiped report but with enough bite to proceed with shareholders due to assets that's good enough for me. It leads to ultimate outcome. AIMO.
First was the request to the court to be heard before the appointment of any Trustee to manage the estate. Next, the request to intervene in any approved shareholders meetings. Looks like Noteholders suspect where this case is headed. Full litigation with the EC fighting nearly everyone off. Noteholder is the first to openly state that the examiner report is likely going to come back damaging enough to allow some of these possibilites for a new track of litigation.
People need to prepare themselves for the fact that we are not looking at a quick settlement but all out litigation with a tooth and nail fight against the EC to proceed with BOD and any examiner. This will take months with lots of back and forth wins and losses in court.
Noteholders are trying to get a head start since this case has jumped the tracks for them. Their once assured payout appears to be melting away into a drawn out litigation where Susman takes more and more control. AIMO.
Lawrence, thanks for the post. I believe that it is hard for everyone to remember that we are not the only party of interest in the court. The judge has to consider all sides and the future of the case. She does not want this case on her docket for the next ten years. So, she has consistantly taken the duel track approach. She will not let this case be bogged down waiting for anything. She has shown herself to be an intelligent enough person to reverse direction on the case if new information arises the requires such. She wants effiecency. Also, I believe that if she keeps this case moving there is a higher probably of all sides crying uncle and settling. AIMO.
Thanks Uzual. I thought that this had been discussed before that their remedy had to come from JPMC or FDIC. But, I definitely could be wrong. Thanks for being in the know.
They are WMB. They should be seeking remedy through JPM or FDIC and not through the estate. But, since JPM, via Rosen, has been using the estate as ATM to pay off debts of JPM, the noteholders thought that they ride in take what they should have to struggle hard(never to see) to get from the FDIC and JPM out of the hands of the shareholders. AIMO.
It means that Rosen and crew are being thrown further back in the bus. By what we saw in the recent billing statements, the recent depos, and the truth that everyone has known for these last two years, the previous parties in power are planning for the trustee to have found and proved what we believed the whole time.
Therefore, the shareholders are to have a meeting and a trustee is to be appointed to administor the estate. The noteholders just want a chance to try to convince the judge why this isn't fair to them. AIMO.
Not understanding what the HJMW meant. I, like many others, freaked out when our good judge stated that WMI had been examined to death. But, she was correct. WMI and its banking and lending policies had been examined to death even by the congress. But, actions of other parties had not. I believe that at that point, if there had been an examiner appointed, he would have only been able to examine WMI banking and lending policies all over again. Since, nobody had brought to her quantifiable proof of wrong doing by another entity, just allegations. She had nothing to set the parameters. So, there was no need to go over all that again. Hence, “examined to death.” I, we, failed to listen to what she was really saying. She needed cause of action against other parties to examine what we wanted. I think that she threw out a life line to EC, TPS, etc, warning them by stating, “examined to death”, that if you want to properly search this under what you’ve alleged, you better bring me something to go after those other entities, because right now, I have nothing to issue orders to an examiner to go digging into those other parties but alleged misdoing. Although, we believe and knew it to be true, this is a court of law and she can’t go by “theories.” In court, you are not allowed to go on a fishing expedition. You can’t say “Here’s why I think they did something wrong but I have no proof. But, if you give me complete access to all the records of every company that I want, I’m sure that I can drag something out of there.” Every court in America would run amuck with people searching every company records for “possible cause.” Cases would last forever. Our judge has always stated that she felt there was causable action against JPM. She just needed something hardcore to set the parameters of the examiner. I believe that she’s always been on the side of the EC, she has actually helped and warned EC on what to bring her so she could actually do what they wanted. I think that she’s been guiding them. I think that she was asking them to help her to help them. I think her examined to death comment was a help and warning that don’t request this examination without giving me something to show cause against the entities that you want to examine. AIMO.
And, we know what Jamie Dimon meant when he stated in a recent article that JPM would defeat all allegations. His counsel must be telling him that this is coming and try to prepare for the mud if the newspapers pull their heads out start writing the true history on this debacle. AIMO.
Seriously? Nothing about how after this one slip up of WMI in producing that one piece of document, they are now entitled to all communication that includes any communication to a third party?
So, basically that one document was a means to an end you tool. They completely won that hearing. What they wanted was a short cut on discovery. And with that ruling from the judge on what was discoverable, they got it.
Now, if any of the documents that they have been seeking through discovery is tied to a third that WMI was communicating with they finally got it in tantum without having to labouriously fight over every document and bring those arguements to court. She's already ruled it's not protected. Sounds like a win here.
I just hope Rosen was stupid enough to send all of the GSA information to third parties. It will be rather easy to piece together what's blacked out and what's missing in any email train. Ha. AIMO.
Looks like TPS was taking the judge seriously at the last hearing stating that "other parties will be following your lead" in November. TPS saying of public record for all plaintiff parties to follow them and oh by the way they got the information about the GS so if so any other plaintiffs want a copy just ask the judge to give it to you. There is going to be a hell of a lot of parties asking the court if they can get a copy of this document. Pay backs are a painfull. IMO
Of course all parties are cooperating at this point. They've only produced documents that were already in the data room that the other parties had access to. True, they've produced other documentation but probably nothing earth shattering or painfull. I'm sure the first depositions/discussions with employees were with the individuals already given up by WMI, JPM and others. Nothing painfull and people with no true information. As the examiner digs deeper and expands his requests and depositions then we'll probably see some delays and hairy discussion about "priviledge" that has to be discussed with the court. And, we may never be prevy to those communications with the court to settle those disputes. I do find it interesting that JPM is now moving to have themself dismissed from this action. All of sudden with the examiner digging, they realize that they are not truly a party to this action and have no claims against them in this case? AIMO
Sticky Please. It's going to a long couple of months. This needs to be posted to clarify to everyone of exactly the situation and scope of the examiner. This will keep miscomunication and distortions to a minimum if it's posted. Thanks.
Thanks Catz. I agree with you. But, the slightest hint that the opposing party has the right to object to anything is going to freak people out. Susman would have approved this final version since they created the original with the creditors.
Thank you. This is standard attorney client priviledge issues. Also, all parties are not without the legal rights to object to a request that they feel not on scope. Those objections will be brought before the judge who will decide. The document clearly states that documents can be disclosed in a non public manner. The EC drafted the intention. If there was a problem, there would be another hearing.
Nothing wrong with being negative. It causes people to think. Yes, from the information that we as DD people have been able to find the full value of the estate has not been recognized and violations to the estate. Susman's office appreantly feels the same. The assertion is only based on what was previously/publicly known. Now, it remains to been seen what is known by FDIC, JPM, and WMI as additional assets and information. As our judge stated, she'd hoped that a cooperative discovery would have yielded the information needed by the EQ to alieve their fears that assets were not maximized and there was corporate interference. The judge was disappointed by this lack of effort by all parties. Given the additional information asserted by Susman, the need for the examiner to yield the information seems the only resolution. Also, by Susman's efforts, the judge has put the removal of the WMI board on the parralel track as the discovery by the examiner. If the examiner provides information confirming Susman's believe that WMI failed/colluded, the board will be removed and a new one installed. Thereby completely undoing the settlement and thereby maximizing the estate in the benefit of the shareholders. Amazingly, Susman has created the powers/focus of the examiner in his request. Even more amazingly, the Judge is in agreement with Susman regarding them. Susman got everything he wanted to fight a better battle in the future. Center, the full weight of the examiner to extract documents without the annoying bickering. The judge has already told FDIC that she wants their obvious objection immediately so she can squash it. We now have to decide as shareholders if Susman is an idiot attorney who is pursuing a worthless/penniless case that will yield no reward and the UST is completely blind/psychotic in their assertion that there is value for shareholders and there should be an examination of this estate and proceeding. So, now we pick teams. So whose team are we going to choose? I'm going with team Susman. I don't believe that he is going to pick a dead dog case that will yield him no return. He's one of the top ten attorneys in the U.S. He didn't get there by picking cases that were losers. So far, he's made everyone change their stance on this case. We just to have to place our bets on our DD, our belief that there is more increminating evidence, and our belief that Susman and UST (and the judge) agrees with us. Let's see who wins. AIMO
Already did. Also, mentioned that the demeanor of article professed suggested graciousness on the part of WMI instead of an attempt to direct the investigation and tone of capitulation. Also, mentioned the slanted tone of the article.
You bet. I don't think Rosen is the target tomorrow. Whatever Susman files under seal tomorrow will probably take down someone else who thinks Susman's got nothing on them. Who's the victim? JPM? FDIC? Another entity that can drag them down? Rosen is down and out. He's waived the white flag and been kicked to the curb by his cronies at FDIC and JPM. Someone else is on the chopping block. By FDIC's filing, they don't want to be hit twice tomorrow. They filed preimtive strike to get the court to unleash the hounds on the party that's already fallen. All the huffing and puffing by the FDIC about their powers and we're above the law attitude are transparent. They're saying not me next. Rosen was caught off guard last week and had the arrogance to show. Subsequently, he was caught in act malficince against the entire parties of the estate just to protect a few. He was furious because he was humiliated. Who else thinks they're immune? Not a peep out of JPM. Will they squeal tomorrow after Susman filing? What has Susman got to show the court? Whose attorney coming out looking shaken? AIMO
Unless I missed them discussing a rewind in a previous filing, EC must have brought up a rewind in chambers last week in coordination with the examiner and the shareholders meeting: Page 6, paragraph 12. AIMO
Settlement Release Agreement
Saving face at this point by the Rosen clan. There will be posturing and spewing during the death throws but it's winding down. It's just important not to get caught up in the hysterics of the last minutes scurry at the court that has to be done. AIMO.
I don't believe that the litigation is what might be perceived by the filings. Despite the settlement that is being done, the business of the court has to be done and the EC and adversarials have to be prepared for any contingency. That is why we are still seeing filings. It doesn't mean that this isn't going to settle it just means in hostile litigation, you don't stop acting like it, all be it a little less aggressive, until the last entity signs the SRA. I don't believe that the examiner or board meeting will happen but it must be pursued until the last copy of the executed SRA by all parties is sent to everyone. There might be more delays as parties attempt to wrap up lingering issues but I don't believe that we will see full blown litigation. I believe those days are over. AIMO.
The shareholder meeting and the examiner may have been one of the many things presented and addressed in chambers. This filing is mild continuence of issues before the court that will have to be filed under seal again should need arise if the case is not resolved by the necessary dates. The issues do not want to lose their relovence before the court. The filing is not aggressive enough to suggest that there as anything other than that. The SRA is going to mamoth with a large number of parties involved with all having to swear to non-disclosure. There are going to be enumerable lawyers scrubbing it. But regardless of the pending settlement, you still continue with the matters before the court. The court doesn't want to lose time if talks break down into squabbling again. This filing means & sets out specificly, for the first time, JPM, WMI and FDIC are the central charaters in consideration of the SRA. Oh happy day. It may take some more time and some more filing of pending matters that can't be ignored, but dam. AIMO.