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.
Thanks Clawman for that clarification!
on page 34 of the examiners monthly application it says
And catz here are the best parts of this article:
gotcha Thanks as usual!
Hey Catz did you see the IRS document on KCCLLC...its on the Y! BOARD now. I'm reading through it some type of settlement
doc...your thoughts when you have a chance....
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229100813000000000004.pdf
ABIG, atleast wait till the preliminary report that way we all have a much clearer picture. I agree with all sides and would envision that waiting to we have some clarity on where the examiner is looking and/or has found so we can best target where they could focus if they missed an area we know is prudent and important. Otherwise we are just being redundant or going in blindly.
Just my two cents, but as we are all entitled to, you will do as you want. Just my advice in the best interest of us ALLLL!
Umaw if you are going to send that email/letter you may want to tell them to also look into documents iron mountain, Att and other storage facilities that may house backups of these documents. Just my two cents!
But think you may want to not write to examiner but EC, but then again I'm sure they know this and are way ahead of us by leaps and bounds.
Back to lurking!
What's the ticker symbol for the American Funds Growth fund, if you know?! By any chance is it RGAEX?!
Thanks.
Thanks Stinky are these all the mutual funds or just those that you know of...I appreciate it!
Odd question, but does anyone know what mutual fund in the US WAMUQ, WAMPQ or WAMUKQ is a holding of?
Thanks.
Gotcha CATZ....
Well it should be her only case lol...JK
Yes definitely going to the Sept. 7th hearing that's when the examiner's prelim report is due and a whole host of other items that were pushed off will be taken up!
Why such a late hearing if there is so much to be covered on the 7th...Now that is really odd and perplexing. Not likely that they could get through all the items on the 7th plus the examiners preliminary report before 5:00 p.m. yet alone 6...
Hmmm something tells me this may be a hint or clue, but I won't read to much into this now...but still very odd to me!
And if there is a run leading up to this court hearing, it wouldn't give MM much time to tank it unless they knew before hand the outcome of the hearing, which is somewhat unlikely. But I guess its good as it would give us the after hours to digest the information from the 7th and if its bad for equity sell what we have first thing in the a.m. on the 8th.
Sigh looks like it will be a long night in DE for me on the 7th I doubt we get out earlier than 8 pm. SIGH
CATZ in your honest opinion what advantages would they have extending the P&A and not the GSA...since they signed on to it why not want the two expiration dates to mirror each-other?!
Ilene yo sexy _ _ _ thanks for being there today. Ill most likely be at the Sept. 7th hearing and will come up the night before for dinner if your around and available.
Thanks a bunchhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh HUN... :).
K, back to lurking!
then the judge takes a jab...
Nice Jab judge...LOL
Right judge denied those discovery dispositions Debtors wanted to do on EC said that they would not help with anything and the stipulation EC stated that they would not use any personal money for proxy should suffice to end the issue in which the dispositions were being taken for in the first place.
Nope they have not....may get there after TPS guy is done...FYI I'm not at the hearing, I'm listening in and texting Ilene, but nothing of excitement has come up yet. Just all seems procedural thus far.
now, now, now not everyone is privy to this board or to the inner workings of this case. The fact that he spoke up for himself, family and father enough was more than enough than what he needed to do to voice his opinion. He did not blow it...if you felt you could have done better you should have called in and spoke yourself.
I'm not trying to pick a fight just saying at least he had the courage to speak and that in my eyes is no way blowing it!
a shareholder on the phone!
"Mrs. McQueen asked if the judge could look in her crystal ball and see if shareholders will get anything..." nice question in my eyes. :) Back to lurking!
Oh I was nit planning on attending as I figured this hearng onTuesday would be more procedural and short! I was planning on listening in though and tweeting texts from Ilene if she would be attending though I'm not sure as we have not discussed nor have I asked her, but will do tomorrow!
reading through the work plan now very carefully and I don't see why the judge would not grant subpeona power...JH lays out very nicely why it is needed and seems to not be playing any games or wanting any delays and this would be the best way to deter that type of behavior. LOL I especially like this part
Is it John Millman w/Sterling National Bank
LOL now that would be something lol!
If I knew it was happening in two weeks and nothig could change the course of the case Yes...
However, if we are to believe that there is much more left in this case (months and examiner report) I would not be leaving or walking away be so involved in such a big case. Because no matter how much your predecessor is briefed by you or how thorough your exit memo is there are things about this case that can transpire that can click for you to have an ahha moment based on what seemed to be insignificant information at the time or a comment that now makes sense that no one else talking over would otherwise know. Often times these moments are the things that make or break cases!
So I just don't get it, plus he could have waited to do what he is doing and pursue this new career after the case...he would not be losing anything by waiting unless this is the primetime to start your practice.
What time you plan on calling tomorrow?! TTYL
So much conjecture and speculation...though even if you are changing jobs, typically you stay on with your big project until they are done or in some type of consultation capacity. It doesn't make sense that he would just walk away to start his own practice and have nothing more to do with the case. Its not like he was offered a once in a lifetime opportunity at a job in as Treasury secretary or something (just for proving the point. He is essentially leaving on his own will to start a private practice he could have done after the case...timing is just so bizzare is this the prime season for opening a practice. Yes there are others involved in the case, but he has been so involved.
I just don't know what to think anymore. LOL Maybe it was good for him to leave at the start of the examiner appointment because it was a new chapter that will tak on its own new path he did not need to be apart of...just food for thought...:)
Vodoo been in this stock for so long and on the board lurking for just as long...with all the BS and the dreaded March 12 hearing I'm starting to think just like you...
Why?! Because this is the only thing that seems to freaking make sense...this logic atleast. I mean any other time when we think were dead on with our conjecture were way off. Maybe because this is not what we want and not our conjecture its actually right.
Sigh IDK, I may have WAMU FEVER!...back to lurking for me....
then she could have had another judge sign for her as this is very important to her and she pushed appointment up by a whole week as if to say one needs to be appointed ASAP...just doesn't make sense, but I will not speculate!
but wouldn't that taint his role or create sometype of COI?
Windfall just now getting this soo sorry, but I assume the name has already been dropped. Just going through the messages from today. NOW
hey leave jest alone...lol! :)
That was fun!
oh yeah, I guess the FDIC's new power would undermine that theory and any efforts by JPM to let them completely liable!
Oh you sure can Strike...LOl
As far as your previous comment about FDIC being on the hook, I think you are sooo correct, which may explain in part why JPM was so quiet...because in thier eyes they did nothing wrong except pay below fair value. But hell is someone offered me a Lexus LFA for 20,000 you damn right I'd jump on it in a heartbeat. LOL
However, the FDIC may have a chance to get them to pony up if they know and have proof to threaten to turn over that they help conspire...but then would the FDIC expose themselves to bring the FDIC down too. I know if I was JPM and this were true I would call their bluff and see if they would incriminate themselves to bring me down...this is why I think the FDIC lawyers were so vocal...its all starting to make sense, now!
Call me crazy, but I somehow think the OTS is the wild card in all of this they have nothing to lose, revenge is sweet and karma's a B!+ch!!!
Oh I know exactly what happen and even saw his(FDIC) mumbling as nelson and the UCC were talking about the form (...I was at the hearing too(I was sitting right behind him and wanted to create a matching scar on the back of his neck). I glanced back several times at the JPM lawyer sitting in the second row to my left right behind strike eagle. And needless to say she was slouched and quiet the whole time typing away on her BB!
I even tweeted about how quiet and nervous she seemed and some of her faces while numbers were being tossed out...should have snapped a picture and posted it. Next time I will...lol
go listen to that clip closely...there was no briefing ever filed that refers to what Justin mentions when he says the 30 billion as presented in is briefing. Plus listen to the FDIC's response when he says when confronted about the 30 billion...
Nelson only mentions the 30 billion once...and immediately after he did the FDIC layer gets up to speak, I mean immediately, then the judge issues her ruling. No one confronts J. Nelson about his damn 30 billion comment like the FDIC lawyer states, that is not in open court. This leads me to believe that he briefed the party in chambers about this 30 billion and made a comment about it in open court along with (PART/SOME) rationale as to how that figure can be validated...i.e JPM first quarter after acquisition. IMHO, this is just one of several ways/reasons they can validate this amount, and I think J. Nelson was just throwing the weakest one out there to get the FDIC's feathers ruffled. NOTICE THE JPM LAWYER did not say one word during the whole hearing...and I wonder why
I didn't catch the reference and exchange in court but after listening to this portion of the hearing I caught some interesting things and tidbits of information almost like they were eloquently and mysteriously giving us clues and breadcrumbs to show us the light! So listen carefully to that piece that was posted at the end with J. Nelson and the FDIC exchange right before the Judges ruling!
Yes I assumed this too (NELSON JUST WANTED TO THROW A NUMBER OUT THERE), but the fact that he went into detail...about it and said as discussed in the brief.
Additionally, where in the Fck did the FDIC lawyer get his figure from...nelson said 30 billion...HE (FDIC) SAID JPM IF THERE WAS THAT VALUE IN THE BANK THAT WAS NOT PAID FOR AND ASSUMING AND SETTING ASIDE THE FACT THAT JPM ASSUMED 60 BILLION IN DEPOSITS...THIS MY FIRST TIME HEARING THIS (OR DID HE SAY 16 BILLION) BECAUSE THEN HE SAYS BOND HOLDERS WOULD HAVE 14 BILLION CLAIM, WHICH WOULD BE A VALID ARGUMENT IF IT WAS 16 CAUSE IT ONLY LEAVES 2 BILLION, BUT NOT IF IT WAS 60 AND THATS WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE HE SAYS...ANYONE CARE TO CHIME IN!
HE ALSO SAYS WE CAN BRIEF THIS IN A WEEK...NELSON ALSO REFERS TO A BRIEFING WITH REGARDS TO THE 30 BILLION...I KNOW IT HAS NOT BEEN BRIEFED IN OPEN COURT SO MY GUESS IS IT WAS APART OF THE DISCUSSION IN CHAMBERS...PLUS THE FDIC LAWYER STATES THAT "WHEN APPROACHED ABOUT THIS FIGURE (THE 30 BILLION NELSON THREWOUT)" MAKES ME BELIEVE EVEN MORE THIS WAS DISCUSSED IN CHAMBERS ON JULY 8TH BECAUSE NO ONE ASKED WHERE HE GOT IT FROM AFTER NESLON MENTIONS IT IN COURT ON THE 20TH. THE FDIC LAWYER WAS THE LAST TO SPEAK AFTER NELSON THEN THE JUDGE.
WOW HOW DID WE ALL MISS THIS DURING AND AFTER THE HEARING...VERY INTERESTING TO ME NOW!
Yes I assumed this too (NELSON JUST WANTED TO THROW A NUMBER OUT THERE), but the fact that he went into detail...about it and said as discussed in the brief.
Additionally, where in the Fck did the FDIC lawyer get his figure from...nelson said 30 billion...HE (FDIC) SAID 60 BILLION IN DEPOSITS...THIS MY FIRST TIME HEARING THIS (OR DID HE SAY 16 BILLION) BECAUSE THEN HE SAYS BOND HOLDERS WOULD HAVE 14 BILLION CLAIM, WHICH WOULD BE A VALID ARGUMENT IF IT WAS 16 CAUSE IT ONLY LEAVES 2 BILLION, BUT NOT IF IT WAS 60 AND THATS WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE HE SAYS...ANYONE CARE TO CHIME IN!
HE ALSO SAYS WE CAN BRIEF THIS IN A WEEK...NELSON ALSO REFERS TO A BRIEFING WITH REGARDS TO THE 30 BILLION...I KNOW IT HAS NOT BEEN BRIEFED IN OPEN COURT SO MY GUESS IS IT WAS APART OF THE DISCUSSION IN CHAMBERS...PLUS THE FDIC LAWYER STATES THAT "WHEN APPROACHED ABOUT THIS FIGURE (THE 30 BILLION NELSON THREWOUT)" MAKES ME BELIEVE EVEN MORE THIS WAS DISCUSSED IN CHAMBERS ON JULY 8TH BECAUSE NO ONE ASKED WHERE HE GOT IT FROM AFTER NESLON MENTIONS IT IN COURT ON THE 20TH. THE FDIC LAWYER WAS THE LAST TO SPEAK AFTER NELSON THEN THE JUDGE.
WOW HOW DID WE ALL MISS THIS DURING AND AFTER THE HEARING...VERY INTERESTING TO ME NOW!