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.
Hey all I just caught something listening to the cut ups of the hearing. Nelson said when they ask about where the 30 billion came from he said "its in our briefing and we explained it there" then he goes on to talk about JPM making money off of etc...
MY QUESTION IS WHAT BRIEFING/MOTIONS IS HE REFERRING TO I DON'T REMEMBER READING ONE THAT TALKS ABOUT THIS EVER. OR IS THIS SOMETHING THAT IS IN THE SEALED DOCUMENT AND/OR STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF THE EXAMINER OR SHAREHOLDERS MEETING...THOUGHTS!
LMFAO...that was sooo classic yet so true. LOL...I'm still laughing out loud as hell and my girl looking at me like WTF...LOL
No problem Ill get that to you either in Vegas or if we somehow end up at a hearing together!
LOL...well here is to good and interesting times!
Trail on Monday silly lol, but since you got it in black and white before I amended it/updated it I will definitely owe you .18 cents. LOL
I BET ONE SHARE (BASED ON TODAYS PRICE) THAT THERE WILL BE NO SETTLEMENT ON MONDAY! Obviously I'm bored and we can all place a one share wager...might help pass the time! LOL
IMO there will not be a settlement this weekend they are to arrogant and feel just like criminals and serial killers do, they won't find anything even if they are right next to the documents. But what the FDIC and JPM may fail to realize just like those criminals and killers is that the truth always comes out eventually and evidence is always found.
Those of you saying they won't let this go because they know they did wrong so a settlement must happen this weekend. I respectfully disagree. There actions and demeanor reminds me of the guy a couple of years that killed two little girls and buried them in his back yard. He denied, denied and denied, even allowed them to search his home knowing they were buried in the back yard and guess what happened later there bodies were found.
Another example look at Michael Vick denied lied and everything else low and behold they found evidence and found the smoking guns in his back yard.
The JPM and FDIC are no different here evidence and the smoking gun will be found (IMO I think they already have them and know exactly where they are and all they need is access..the examiner is that access!) So everyone just sit back and relax...when volume jumps and price goes up then we will know.
I just had to give this perspective to the people saying they would and won't allow the examiner. I hope there is a settlement sooner than later, I just don't think that sooner will be on MONDAY! :)
Now that you say this I find it interesting the FDIC responded to Nelson's comment, yet the JPM attorney was mummm, hmmm didn't want to say anything on record I guess...LOL
He sure did didn't he...the next couple of trading days will be interesting...I think it may be quiet like last week and the PPS stay the same though, but hey were all here for the end game, right?!
Gotcha so they are essentially playing Russian roulette, unless they believe they did nothing wrong...thanks trail.
Oh i was just posting...has nothing to do with you...Sorry meant to update it to say that.
But it posted as a reply instead of new post. Sorry, sorry, sorry. :).
Yes they have to produce if not the judge will just add additional discovery so super full anal probe to any and everything WAMU...that's my interpertation...here read below this should help you understand how serious she is...read carefully and pay attention to her advising they cooperate!!!!....
(1:53:02)
Walrath:
Let me just make my ruling, I think I've heard enough. It seems that all parties are now on board that the appointment of an examiner may help the process here except the WMI Noteholders Group, which suggests that nothing has changed since my original denial of the shareholders' motion for an examiner in May. But I disagree with that analysis. At least three of the factors on which I relied turn out to not be true at this juncture. I had found the Debtor had been investigated to death, the Equity Committee would be able to conduct an investigation that was appropriate, and that an examiner was not a good substitute for the litigation process. Quite frankly I've found that the litigation process is not adequate in this case. There have been inordinate delays and impediments to discovery by all of the parties who have a stake in this case in connection with the confirmation process and that has just convinced me that an examiner is necessary, both to reduce the cost of litigation and to assure that all parties have a forum through the examiner for consideration of their positions. Not simply on the merits of the global settlement but on really the value of the Debtor's assets, both those being settled and those left behind, and the appropriate distribution of those assets under any Plan. I think I made it clear that I think I am not in a position to deal with confirmation at this process... at this juncture... given the inability of the parties to fully investigate or consider all of the claims. I'm not in a position to decide the reasonableness of the settlement at this point without some assistance and I believe an examiner is a good way to go, with the caveat that I agree that this process has to be controlled. The examiner cannot be given carte blanche and no deadline within which to conduct an investigation. There's no substitute for a Congressional investigation. (1:55:39) I will appoint an examiner, will do a dual track with the Plan process. There seems to be some agreement between the Equity Committee, or of the Equity Committee, with respect to the scope articulated by the Committee... Creditors' Committee. There has been some argument that the scope should be limited only to the merits of the settlement... global settlement agreement, and that no looking behind the scenes as to what the Debtor may not have considered is appropriate. I'm not at this point willing to agree with that limitation. But I will do the following. I will give a short time for an examiner to be named and have preliminary meetings with all of the interested parties, specifically the Debtor, the FDIC, JPMorgan, the Equity Committee, the Creditors' Committee if I didn't mention them. And I want a preliminary work plan prepared by the examiner and presented to the Court before the August 10th hearing. I will not require that it be a week but if it can be filed by August 6th so that all parties can comment on it by the August 10th hearing. Secondly I will direct the examiner to commence immediately, even before the August 10th hearing, a review of the documents that the Debtors and the Committee have assembled in the discovery depository. I will give the FDIC the opportunity to present its legal arguments to the examiner immediately as to the legal impediments to any claims that the estate may have against it or any other parties that are governed by the settlement, and I will allow the other parties, to the extent they already have prepared legal memoranda or attorney work product, will direct those parties to present them to the examiner. If they're not presented to the examiner that will play in my consideration later as to what additional discovery or investigation need be done by the examiner, but I strongly urge the parties to consensually provide sufficient information to the examiner to convince them of their belief that any further investigation is not warranted. (1:58:14) I would like a preliminary report by the examiner by the September 7th omnibus hearing regarding this... what it has done to date... he or she has done to date, and what more needs to be done to complete the legal analysis and review of the documents that have been produced. If I am convinced that no additional discovery is needed I would order a report by October 8th. If I believe that additional discovery or review of documents and legal analysis is warranted that deadline may push out. On the dual track, I will consider at the September 7 hearing the Disclosure Statement. I will not consider any additional revisions. If the Debtor has no further resolution of issues with the parties I will consider the adequacy of the Disclosure Statement as it is finalized by the Debtor. Based on the preliminary report from the examiner I will determine whether we can proceed with the confirmation hearing on November 11. I've reserved time at that time and I'm not convinced at this point that we can go forward, but I think the person we need to hear from is the examiner. The discovery motions sought by all the litigation parties I will continue to the September 7th hearing. I think it's more appropriate at that time to determine whether the confirmation discovery should commence immediately, if we're going to have a November 1st [sic] confirmation hearing, or whether the matter's going to be pushed off somewhat, in which case we can discuss better scheduling of confirmation discovery. It may be obviated by what is produced through the examiner and what the examiner reports. So I don't want to consider that today. With respect to the issue of the shareholders' meeting, I will continue that to September 7th as well. I think that I need more information as to whether or not that should proceed on a dual track... or a triple track... with the examiner and confirmation process. If I am convinced by the examiner's report that the process should continue to confirmation without a shareholder meeting I'll consider that strongly in my decision on the Equity Committee request for that. Do the parties think they can present me with a form of order articulating that?
(2:01:10)
oooooooh can someone please answer this question and provide the law or precedent that sort of outlines if the examiner can be stopped via settlement.
This was something withcatz and I was discussing earlier, but don't have clarity on...Fish thoughts anyone? (Bueller, Bueller)
So they technically have until next week to decide on a deal? or else the impending doom of what could be reveled from the examiner.
Interesting observation. They could reach a settlement anytime between now and Monday. When Monday comes around, and if both sides said, we've come to a settlement, there would be no need for an examiner-- right?
Checked my gmail and had over 200 messages all where twitter notifications as I started deleting them I noticed a Florida Hedge Funds is following me...
Don't know if this is a real hedge fund or what have you just find it interesting.
However, I think I need to put this out there. I am a very nice person and always give folks the benefit of the doubt. I have not locked my twitter cause I would assume that most people are normal. However, in the event someone may feel compelled to say or do something silly via my twitter account or malicious....
I SERIOUSLY HOPE YOU READ MY TWITTER PROFILE AND MY DISCLAIMER: IF NOT ILL POST IT FOR YOU "NICE UNTIL PROVOKED!" SERIOUSLY I AM A VERY NICE PERSON, BUT DON'T LET THE SMILE OR QUIET DEMEANOR FOOL YOU...AND I WILL JUST LEAVE IT AT THAT...
Though its not a problem, I just felt compelled to put this out there something about the hedge fund title made me want to make myself explicitly clear. DONT ABUSE THE ACCESS!
okie dokie...back to lurking! :)
NO TIME LINE SET RIGHT NOW COULD CHANGE BASED ON FINDINGS, BUT HERE IS WHAT THE JUDGE SAID...
I believe an examiner is a good way to go, with the caveat that I agree that this process has to be controlled. The examiner cannot be given carte blanche and no deadline within which to conduct an investigation........memoranda or attorney work product, will direct those parties to present them to the examiner. If they're not presented to the examiner that will play in my consideration later as to what additional discovery or investigation need be done by the examiner, but I strongly urge the parties to consensually provide sufficient information to the examiner to convince them of their belief that any further investigation is not warranted.
Yes you have diamond and what I found interesting was Nelson's use of this Black and White DD "JPM made 29 billion profit after first quarter of purchasing WMI" thats when FDIC stepped up to say that is purely based on conjecture and I can brief this in less than a week to prove what I am saying...if the court will allow me then the judge said stern and snippy/snarky as hell "you can tell it to the examiner!" OUCCHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
He was not a happy camper as Ilene stated. So now lets see just how much that shareholder brief by JPM comes back to haunt him as he openly admiteed WAMU ADDED XX BILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO JPM...HOW CAN THIS BE CONJECTURE WHEN THE VERY PERSON WHO HAS THE BEST KNOWLEDGE OF THIS WHOLE FIASCO MAKES THIS CLAIM AND ASSERTION IN BLACK AND WHITE. THAT MY DEAR FDIC B1+(}{ IS NOT CONJECTURE...LMAO.
I CANT WAIT FOR THAT FIRST REPORT GOOD OR BAD!
it came from either the UCC or Noteholder attorney at any rate it is showing the windfall and i believe what needs to be paid to creditors and how far down equity is...just a bunch of BS to me but not entirely sure what they were trying to convey. Ilene may have better insight! I was tweeting during this juncture...sowwy!
I was talking to Fish and he basically said that we will see how arrogant or serious JPM and the FDIC is about the appointment of examiner!
Also as catz and all of us discussed over lunch...was they better figure out before appointment and examination starts what they want to do because if any criminal, fraud or other things charges can be made by the DOJ there will be no turning back or hiding what they find.
So it is gut check time for the FDIC and JPM if they think there is something that could be found because they f'ed up then they may want to brush this under the rug...rather than risking something be found and then trying to brush under the rug as it may be to late.
Catz or fish can probably better say this....but this is exciting!
UST was mostly concerned about conflict with examiner so wanted to be thorough. IMO the judge wanted examiner appointed ASAP for a couple of reasons IMO \
1) Force them to settle up sooner before examiner appointed
2) to get this show on the road
3) not allow anyone the opportunity to somehow thwart the examiner with delay's or arguments over who they would want. :)
I think we will see the examiner to the end no settlement prior or during I think JPM and FDIC are just too arrogant! IMHO!
going to workout bye and have a good night everyone.
correct. For commons to see 1$ 15 billion would have to be found. this according to the noteholders guy...johnson!
They cant stone wall if they do Judge stated in court that she would use such actions in how she defines or keeps scope open moving =forward!!!! :)
Someone contact peg and tell her to change he monthly expense to 30 million NOT 30 BILLION!!!!!
I;m wearing a green shirt lol../
You could never be forgotten hun!
hope to meet you tomorrow never-again. the majority of us sit up in the front rows you can't miss catz and I.
see you tomorrow!
Tweeting may be fun and I may type my fingers off!
LOL XOOM...
Yes STRIKE I can't wait for tomorrow...even if in chambers I'm going to be so damn noisy trying to ear hustle everyone's conversation!
LOL it would be funny if Rosen comes in and says in light of the FDIC's filing we also support the examiner to look into whether or not the FDIC colluded with JPM to seize and sell a solvent bank. In addition, we are now working with the EC and are providing them ALLLLLLLLLLL documents that we have from the OTS, FDIC, and JPM. The Blacked out Kennedy assassination document from the FDIC has already been received by the EC late last night.
Susman walks in and says this is correct your honor, we found the SMOKING GUN contained in this document and the 3.1a that shows over 300 billion in assets illegally seized and sold...
BAMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM now rosen's sneaky snake dirty slimy ways are used in a way that actually benefits us and says F the FDIC for trying to throw us under the bus. Well get our immunity cause we hold all the cards/documents to F both sides FDIC and JPM....
Yeah I'm dreaming...but it would be funny. Any way this is getting good can't wait to be in court tomorrow!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Okay my thoughts on the FDIC filing...I think they shoot themselves in the foot within the first two pages.
1) they state that the debtors should be investigated with regard to the settlement for collusion and conflict...well if you believe this true then why would you accept a settlement from a party that you believe/know is colluding with a party that they have a conflict with! Either you knew or you didn't, and if your just finding this out...then its clear you (the FDIC) should back out of this settlement.
2) with regard to the 30 day suit...they claim the Debtors and the Creditors Committee already looked at this information re the OTS seizure. and I quote "the Estate's fiduciaries (debtors and Creditors Committees..." Now the judge and the world pretty much knows that they are not acting like fiduciaries or in a fiduciary duty to shareholders and the EC, as they have painted us as adversaries. Now with that said, if they consider us adversaries then why would they have filed that claim within 30 days to give us vultures more money. This simple fact alone can be argued as to why the examiner needs to investigate this because the Debtors inability to uphold a fiduciary duty left monds of things unchallenged and investigated. This would just be one example of that. Plus by saying the debtors may have colluded and are in conflict...this adds even more fuel to the fire on why the examiner needs to revisit this issue because the debtors were in collusion, committing fraud and not doing their fiduciary duty. Hell if I can see this in the first couple of pages I wonder what the judge is thinking.
3). If not, then back out and deny/turn away the money the debtors are trying to give to you and provide the EC with non-blacked out documents. Because they have not done this nor seem to have any intentions or doing so, in addition, to not working with the EC or providing them non-blacked out documents, does not bode well to you claiming some type of innocence or non wrong doing, which warrants no examination. By their actions alone to the EC they will need to be examined for collusion just the same as the debtors. Moreover their willingness to take money under such circumstances where they (FDIC) feel collusion and such took place merits an examination as well.
AIMHO...thoughts and bashing are welcomed.
I think if it goes like I'm thinking tomorrow the Judge will come out stern and firm and appoint the examiner and quite possibly make a whole host of rulings. At that point and time I think we maybe see something in the next month or so in terms of settlement.
But now I feel tomorrow will be exciting. I don't know what else BR can say about not providing docs especially if everything goes forward tomorrow. Obviously, it should be clear to the court he is playing games, wasting money, and not doing anything in good faith.
So we shall see, but hopefully we and he gets what's coming. Us in a good way them in a very bad way!
Link?!
Thanks
So wha'ts under seal apparently helps support the need not only for an examiner but also resolution of the shareholderes meeting. Very interesting...hell there statement in support of both of these items now has to be filed under seal!
More curios than ever as to what is under seal and what happen in Chambers. Sigh
Tomorrow will be a long one and hopefully fun!
Where is the link to BOPs post and the context of the conversation...Thanks.
Thanks Hard and all for your replies very helpful!
Hey can anyone involved in Bear Sterns, please provide me and the board with insight. Yes I and we know that it was low balled at 2 dollars then ten within three days. But what were the details (specifics)
Did it halt or immediately trade up to that amount then on thee final offer did it just shoot up.
Did you have to sell or could you just hold on to the shares till you actually sold. (Reason I ask this question is because I was in CIT and I have never sold my Prfrd shares, however they still show up in my account with a zero dollar amount and I still have the ability to sell them.
Just curious if someone would be so nice as to offer up a play by play for how it all went down. Did the offer come out of now where or was it in a filing, court etc...
Thanks trying to have some type off an idea of how this may or may not work.
Thanks. (OH sorry if this is stupid questions) LOL
It was stated at the 7/8 hearing when they were going over the adjournment of that hearing!!!!
I don't think it has any correlation to market opening or halting this stock!
So could it really be the OTS knew they were getting F#O#U02 and gave Susman incriminating docs to stick it to Obama and his BFF Dimon, who will be out by the end of the Summer (he is resiging last I heard)?
WOW if that is in fact somehow true coupled with the timing of the bill signing...so it would make sense to settle before that signing so the parties don't have egg all on thier faces if shit hits the fan...
Can 20 month's of BS, Lying, Fraud Coruption and whatever else you wanna call it really be this simple and summed up in a matter one week due to some type of revenge by the OTS...Is it really that simple and logical...hmmm Can't be or can it...thoughts?!
If it is oh that's some ill fated irony for someone!
LOL Ill be there Iphone ready to tweet and take pics if he offers a settlement or some FRUIT!
Did no one catch this article or Dudebug's post...What the hell are they talking about?!
Interesting article on new JPM Investment Banking Heads ...
Note the bolded comment. Hmmm ... that's WMI not WMB!!
Am I missing something??
Willsey has raised capital for clients in the U.S., Europe, Asia and Latin America, according to JPMorgan. He has managed major financing deals, including Visa Inc.’s $19.7 billion initial public offering, Wells Fargo & Co.’s $12.6 billion equity offering used to acquire Wachovia Corp. and JPMorgan’s own $11.5 billion equity deal to acquire assets of Washington Mutual Inc., the company said.
Why is no news good news...because we got what we want in the bag and we are not pressing forward on getting that final confirmation by the Judge...so logically it makes sense to be inclined to bellieve there are some "on-going talks" still taking place!
I wonder if 7/20 will be the new 3/12 but only in the opposite direction. If I don't here anything or see any filings by 7/19 @ 10 pm. I am not going to the court hearing, because IMO this would mean rosen will show up to court and say we have an agreement no need to move forward with the items on the agenda or we were not able to come to an agreement...then BAM examiner.
But if filings come out prior to then Ill be sure to be there to listen to the spectacle of arguments that will ensue about everything since the last meeting.
So I'm in a wait and see pattern...:). Sorry for the rant!
FROM ILENE: Received a text from Ilene to post something for her...I told her yes! She sent me a follow up text asking if she could call. Below is what Ilene reported to me over the phone...
I called and spoke with Judge Walrath's Clerk (his name is Brandon. Before getting to Brandon, I spoke with 3 or 4 people who all asked if I was a reporter (I thought this was interesting). Brandon told me what goes on in the Judges Chambers is never on record. So the transcript being referenced is the 1.5 minute exchange from the hearing. The transcripts from the hearings are always sealed and takes 3 months for them to be unsealed.I asked why they had the filing if it was for only 1.5 minutes. Brandon said that the filing was not anything unusual. I asked again, why the filing? I don't recall there ever being a filing saying the transcripts from the hearing are sealed. Brandon said it was standard procedure. Brandon also said that there is no court reporter and nothing is ever released from Judges chambers.