Linda is biotch...! LOLz JayKay
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.
Depends on who you ask what is "quite a bit". It just means more shares per P you own. THe exact amount per P, if I recall someone did a rough estimate, was about 25 new shares per P.
This does not even factor in if the 70/30 split changes in favor of preferreds, then it would even be more.
However, don't quote me the 25. That is just from memory and someone rough math.
imo
The reorganized entity needs funds to operate. Money will come from the liquidation trust provided that there is money left over from the Class 16 on down.
imo
Means more shares for prefferds come distribution time. eom
Wanger, you are still buying more commons after Willingham sold commons down the river???? Seriously???
See para 38.
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229120213000000000021.pdf
imo
LOL, yes you are correct. Class 20 use to be the place holder from the "OLD" POR for P/K.
Yes, Class 19, is the current place for P/K/REITS/TPS, etc.
Thanks.
imo
I wouldn't say it was a "trap" because the EC sent out their Q&A that addressed the possibility of the 70/30% split may change as well as the debtor's DS/POR which indicated the same disclosure.
BY commons voting to accept the plan, they accepted the possibility of the 70/30% split to be altered and left to the Court to decide during confirmation.
imo
Yes, you only really need 1 impaired class to vote to accept the plan to have the plan confirmable.
The fact that Class 16 voted to accept the plan is especially important and bodes will for Class 20 though 22, because they were the fulcrum group who were the eventual owners of reorganized WMI.
By Class 16 accepting the plan, by both numbers and value, they accepted the transfer of reorganized WMI from Class 16, to Classes 20 though and including Class 22.
So any objections from Class 16 pro se, etc. will be squashed.
This plan is going to be confirmed. You have every Class accepting the plan EXCEPT for the lowest Class (that counts, common vote really does not count, only their releases)
Since Class 20 voted not to accept the plan, they did not consent to the 70/30% split of the reorganized WMI and the liquidation trust between equity tiers, ie. commons and preffereds.
Now, as it appears, that is the only thing left to confirm the plan.
We will find the results at the end of the confirmation hearing commencing, I believe, Feb 16, 2012.
imo
I agree, the evidence does support your post plus I am.sure the aaoc has an incentive to push this plan through confirmation and end the it "it" allegations.
Imo
Needs to be 2/3 or more imo/eom
Rocki, when to talk to people who are in love with their stock, all rational goes out the window.
They will only listen to "the good", and not the flip side. Anyone not in the "pump/cheer" camp are immediately labeled as naysayers, bashers, etc.
They only see the reward and dismiss the risk associated in such a speculative investments.
This happens on all stock boards.
Fortunately for the Wamu commons, they, imo, will still receive a distribution, although reduced.
Although, I do agree with you, for some, not all, you cannot feel sorry them. Some were innocent that fell for the "pump".
imo
Those are the claim holders who are being converted from Class 18, to new commons within the 30% split, Class 22.
One of the claimants in Class 18 could be the PFG claim. If remember correctly, about $54 million is being converted of their claim to Class 22.
In other words dilution to Class 22.
imo
Another positive of the vote tabulation is that PIERS Class 16 votes to "accept" the plan in both dollar amount and number of voters.
At least they can't, as the fulcrum, object to WMI2 moving from Class 16 to Classes 19 through 22.
IMO, this was important for Class 16 to accept as the actual fulcrum.
The common vote never mattered, it was just their releases.
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229120213000000000026.pdf
imo
DECLARATION OF DAVID M. SHARP WITH
RESPECT TO THE TABULATION OF VOTES ON AND ELECTIONS
PURSUANT TO THE SEVENTH AMENDED JOINT PLAN OF AFFILIATED
DEBTORS PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 11 OF THE UNITED STATES
BANKRUPTCY CODE WITH RESPECT TO SECURITIES VOTING CLASSES
Class 16 – PIERS Claims
Page 10.
Accepted:
856 (84.67%)
$771,478,598.22 (99.11%)
Rejected:
155 (15.33%)
$6,959,274.50 (0.89%)
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229120213000000000026.pdf
Theoretically based on the POR, you have 1 year to give the release, however, it really all depends on your broker, whether they will provide you the additional opportunity to tender your release beyond the "voting" deadline.
Also, you have to factor in the T+3 settlement time.
I took no chances, I sent mine in.
Bottom line: It all depends on your broker. Not all brokers are the same and have different procedures.
Sorry, i could not shed any more light on the subject.
imo
Release = distribution
No Release = No distribution
That is how they will know how much to distribute.
Last day, depends on your broker, if they will even take a release past Feb 9 or what your broker designated as your deadline. Not 1 year.
imo
I am 100% certain that CT is "considered" subdebt. If you know how it is structured, then you would agree as well.
Sorry to say, if you think the $65 is a settlement, then I am certain this is your first bankruptcy.
There is a person on here that "claims" that their wife is an attorney who practices in bankruptcy law.
I suggest you tell that person to confirm that $65 billion is not a settlement and that seniors are entitled to 100% payment in full plus post petition interest.
I am certain. I guarantee it. I am 100% sure. I am positive.
imo
1. The $65 billion is not an allowed claim nor a settlement, it is what debtors project they can produce in 3 years. The balance is due and owing until paid in full.
2. Yes, there are disputed claims. Some can be "slashed", allowed, settled, etc.
3. CTs are not part of that 1 trust share. I wouldn't worry about that. They are sub debt.
Good night.
imo
Yes, they are entitled to principal plus post petition interest. imo/eom
IMO, the guarantee on a subordinate security are worthless because they are contractually subordinated to seniors. If they pay on the guarantee, the seniors will take it away.
Plus, the trustee never put the guarantee in their proof of claim.
imo
The projection was it will take 3 years to come up with $65 billion to pay higher tier LBHI creditors. The estimate that $65 billion equates to about 21% recovery based on selling assets over the course of 3 years.
So "Based on priority you will have to get the full face before a cent from LEHPQ" means: CT must be paid in full before prefferds sees 1 penny, right?
If that is true, and APR applies, then we should be able to apply it here. So if we do apply it here, then seniors must be paid in full before CTs sees a penny.
Wow, what a concept....
imo
Gee, so do you understand APR yet? You state CTs can get a divy without higher tiers creditors get their principal? LOL Then you state that equity cannot get paid a penny without CTs getting paid in full. So which is it?
APR or NOT APR.
I guess if you own CTs, you make up the rules to suit what you hold right? Ha ha haha I get how you operate. After you sell your CT, are you gonna buy LEHPQ (preffereds) and then say, "ya, seniors and CTs do NOT have to get paid in full because I own LEHPQ and we are going to get LAMCO!" LOL
Your own post:
The Plan has already been confirmed. You don't even understand the words: cram-down. It comes BEFORE the plan is confirmed. ROLMAO Try to read your own link and try to comprehend them before you post and make a (fill in the blank) out of yourself.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204770404577082451546013514.html
Yes, however, creditors would have to negotiate terms, conditions, re-age, etc. and it would be spelled out in the POR. In Lehman's case, it is not happening.
imo
Read the post he responded to:
Yes, eom.
Basically, it is any distribution to that Class/SubClass, will be taken away and redistributed to another Class which is likely more senior ... hence, that is why I say seniors are paid in full first. I have not read what 6.4 says since I am not really near a computer.
That is why seniors keep subordinated debt intact, to take away their distributions and obtain more recovery than any other non-sub claim (and NOLs).
imo
No, I own CUSIP 5249087M6, which I believe is the same one below. Although I am not a CT owner, I am a direct owner of the bond itself BNYM.
I never said that CTs would be lumped in with preferreds and commons.
Walrath said it was not a punishment to use FJR. You cannot punish someone for an unproven allegation.
imo
They entire conversation was about interest on CTs can be paid while seniors didnt have to be paid in full. You entered the conversation late.
BTW, you cant account (pay) for interest on CTs unless it (CT principal) was paid in full as well.
imo
ZXC is talking about paying interest on CTs, while seniors are not paid in full.
That said, you cannot pay a junior security while a senior security is still in deficit of principal. Subordination.
imo
If you understand how CTs are structured, you would not need confirmation that it is debt. It IS debt, period.
As for WAHUQ, Walrath stated FJR was not a punishment for IT. Walrath stated there were colorable claims, BUT did NOT state there was IT involved, ONLY a POSSIBLE claim. Get your facts straight.
I like to be realistic, not day dream.
imo
No, you can't pay any interest if the principal is not paid in full.
imo
CTs are considered debt, period. There is no question about it.
BTW, WAHUQ units were not smacked down because IT, it was because of FJR/Subordination and that is the reason why they were smacked down and are at their current price point.
Just because someone has a different view does not make them "rain[ing] on [their] parade". May be they do not like kool aid or being realistic.
imo
POR is produced from BK law.
imo
Preserve NOLs and enforce subordination for the benefit of senior creditors.
imo
No... principal and interest due to seniors are to be paid in full, regardless of any principal and interest due on subordinates and equity.
Any divy distributed to subordinates will vigorously objected by ALLL creditors, besides, the debtor has to petition the court and have a divy approved by the court. Debtors just can't pay divies without court approval. Guess what, not gonna happen. Debtors will NEVER petition the court to pay divies to subordinates when seniors are deficit in principal. (exception to REITs)
Prospectus is trumped by BK law, therefore, no divies beyond the 18 months until eternity or seniors paid in full, principal and interest.
imo
I am 100% sure no divy, until all seniors are paid in full. Same with all Bankruptcies, with the exception of divies connected to REITs for tax status purposes.
Think about it... How can someone get a divy if someone above you did not even get their principal? You are taking that person's principal and calling it a divy distributed to you, a subordinate.
Hey, all I am is realistic, that is all.
Have a nice weekend. I am outtie.
imo
No, means no change for commons and prefferds get more distribution. imo/eom
I agree. TPS/REITS have two (2) different TPS Groups. Each Group is made up of a hand full of hedgies, etc.
My thoughts are that they will leverage their position some voting "no" with releases to the plan, and with some of their strategic positions, vote "no" with withOUT releases thereby preserving their potential full equity claim amount in the billions, which indirectly allows other Class 19 members more new shares distribution per old shares, i.e. more than 17.xx.
In addition to the 'possible" change in the 70/30 split, of course.
Here are just a few: