is making moves.
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.
I don't think there is anything wrong with UMAW's post. We don't know each other beyond the username we've selected and we're all financially tied to the outcome of this hearing and ultimately, this case. A chain is only as good as its weakest link - and perception is everything.
I hope so. I would sleep better at night knowing the EC is ready to negotiate.
Well, book value prior to seizure was $26B - and theoretically, WMI shouldn't be settling for anything under $52B (2x book). I don't know much more about the valuation here as there are so many factors involved. Bopfan has posted some great stuff on this.
Can we get an accurate estimate of who is attending the hearing on Thursday?
Can we get an accurate estimate of who is attending the hearing on Thursday?
Can we get an accurate estimate of who is attending the hearing on Thursday?
I'd like to know whether the EC - through and by its attorneys - is up to date on any/all valuation questions so that in the event that a settlement offer is made, it will be in a position to accurately assess whether that offer will be greater than or equal to the fair value we should be receiving.
Discussion pieces - courtesy of Fish:
I've been saying my prayers, Doc. Lets hope Judge Walrath comes through for us.
SJ was already briefed and argued. I think we're due for a decision any day now but I don't know if there is an applicable local or federal rule that places a time constraint on Judge Walrath's time to issue a decision on the matter. I don't think there is but I could be wrong. If someone disagrees, please cite the applicable rule and I will take a look when I have a moment. My gut is telling me that she wants to deny the FDIC's motion to modify the automatic stay before she issues SJ - which she will likely do from the bench. The SJ could come at any time thereafter.
There is no reason for Judge Walrath to take her time in deciding WMI's Motion to Disband the Equity Committee. I think she will rule on that from the bench - and she will deny WMI's motion.
I should also add that if she denies the FDIC's motion to modify the automatic stay, grants WMI's motion for summary judgment, denies WMI's motion to disband the EC and grants WMI's motion for extended/3rd-party discovery under rule 2004, this weekend will be the most exciting weekend yet. I don't think I would sleep an ounce out of sheer anticipation of a potential settlement.
This was an excellent post and I especially loved your analogy, which I referenced below.
You took one for the team, XOM. Thanks.
No one is saying it'll happen in five days, but we are all in accord on a massive leap in PPS after settlement. Favorable rulings on this weeks omnibus will bring us significantly closer to settlement, if not to the settlement itself.
Interesting find.
Good morning Dragynn!
I noticed and was very pleased to see that number. The payout to commons is going to be ridiculous when these cases are settled, IMO.
I'm honestly not sure.
Its certainly possible, but if the point is ever to arise in a courtroom before Judge Walrath it would be best to have it briefed beforehand - especially if an entire subsection of the EC's objection is being devoted to the valuation of WAMU stock. Its all about covering your bases.
I am very pleased with the EC's objection to WMI's motion to disband but I'm surprised that in all of its analysis of equity market price it did not once mention any of the manipulation and shorting of WAMU stock.
I agree with your opinion, Mordicai.
No. This has been discussed time and time again. There will be no distinction between pre and post for settlement purposes.
If anything, post-seizure investors (not flippers and/or MMs) should be called patriots because we're investing into the expectation that our system will bring corruption to light and allow justice to prevail.
It wouldn't hurt to retire early or build a deep financial foundation on that expectation either.
Glass-Steagall should never have been repealed.
IMO, the repeal is what set the shaky foundation for the recent collapse of the economy and perpetuated the greed that Wall Street bankers are known for.
JPM should have settled this months ago when its stock was approaching $50. These frivolous delays are going to catch up with them - and the FDIC.
That really explains the anti-EC sentiment displayed by Rosen. I thought WMI was arguing insolvency to substantiate preclusion of the EC but given the conflict you brought to light I can't help but wonder whether Weil was really negotiating to satisfy both its interests - WMI and JPM - at the expense of shareholders like ourselves. If that is the case then the rabbit hole just got deeper and I would also like to see ethical charges filed with the court and the ABA against Weil and Rosen.
Yes, that's a good point too. The bonuses were ridiculous. Also, if you notice, the average employee compensation increased approximately $20,000 in the past year alone.
I think she misunderstood the financials. JPM didn't "miss" analysts' expectations - it exceeded them - and probably in large part due to the continued benefits from its acquisition of WMB.
The reason it "tanked" is because JPM did not pay out a dividend - which indicated to many analysts that JPM expects to see more losses from mortgage loan defaults in the future. Anyone with knowledge on JPM's exposure these days - particularly to WMI as a result of its acquisition of WMB for a mere $1.88B - knows that JPM is holding on to all of its cash because a settlement is going to cost quite a bit.
Agreed. I don't think Weil & Co. even cares about the formation of the EC so long as it preserves WMI's image of insolvency for the purposes of its claims against the FDIC/JPM.
No, the equity committee has time to file answering papers in opposition to WMI's motion to disband, then WMI and any parties joining in WMI's motion to disband will have about a week to file reply papers in further support of the motion. I don't know when Judge Walrath will hear oral argument on the motion but based on her track record of issuing decisions, it's difficult to forsee whether she will issue a decision from the bench. I think she will as this is a very straightforward motion.
WMI doesn't need a court order to get documents from Moody's via subpoena if they already reached a voluntary stipulation with Moody's to get the documents they need.
I'm heading to class now. I'll be back online later tonight to see what else is brewing.
Anytime, JHD!
Correct. See post #137369.
Ok, I just printed the document out and I think the caption is a little misleading as this is only a partial withdrawal applying only Moody's, "on the grounds that the Debtors and Moody's have reached a voluntary agreement. The remainder of the motion is not withdrawn and remains on the calendar for the Ombibus hearing scheduled for January 28, 2010."
Moody's already produced documents. Thus, the original motion does not apply to them as they have reached a voluntary agreement for the exchange of information with WMI.
You're kidding, right?
I need to jump on the docket to read this but I won't be home from class until 10:15PM EST. I can't think of any logical reason as to why WMI would withdraw its Motion for 3rd-party discovery other than the possibility that the parties are approaching a settlement.
Discovery is the single most valuable tool in WMI's armada for putting together its case against JPM/FDIC. Withdrawing this motion tells me that WMI isn't expecting this to go to trial - which means that a settlement must be somewhere in the horizon.
I knew we were close (IMO before Q2-2010) but I wasn't expecting this move.
Mordicai, would you care to chime in on this?
Well said. Tolkien would be proud.
Same here, Fish!
December 1st to be exact. No wonder we get along so well.
Thanks for the link!
I wouldn't go so far as to say this is the smoking gun, but I would expect this to go towards the loads of evidence that WMI is using to build and prove its case against JPM/FDIC.
Thanks, Doc!
I'm not sure what post you're referring to - post back with the correct number or a URL and I'll try to take a look.
I second that motion. Can I be Mordicai's legal apprentice?