If the FDIC is impotent at preventing "runs on banks" then what purpose do they serve? Their core mission is to prevent runs by providing confidence. Perhaps the FDIC is obsolete...

Which is EXACTLY what happened to the Apartment Mortgages "sold" (gifted) to JPMC.

I remember (as mentioned several times in years past) how David Faber on CNBC was talking with Kudlow the day of the seizure that the seizure of WAMU was done IN ORDER TO close the OTS. Seems WAMU was the last large thrift under their control. I found the discussion to be VERY concerning.

It was a CNBC segment...but I cannot locate it anymore online.

It was a litte TOO insightful and very suggestive.

-Jest

They went after JPMC first because, in their own words, the indemnifications promised by FDIC were not in place...which put them on the hook for the DB claims.

You seem to believe that there "may be small money coming back to the estate". I agree, but I would add that like every other BK, there is more there than we see. If that is true,..then we could see small money being in the billions....still a drop compared to the $30 Billion JPMC acquired. Remember...small is REALLY big for us (me). LOL

Jest

Nice hotmeat! Seems some of these have been swept under the rug for a while...need dusting off. LOL

But if the FDIC is waiting on DB suits...the Holding Company assets could be held for that reason alone (for example). Suing the FDIC based wouldn't really make sense until these items are closed. We already have the evidence that they are "not released". Question is, what would they be released FROM? This IS on a court filing. They are already ON THE HOOK.

Jest

Wouldn't the court simply say that any action would "not be ripe" based on where we are today? Is this another reason why the FDIC-R is not released and why there are no actions....no "fight"?

That is a legit question. I do not presume to know or suggest this is the case.

-Jest

OK....more info...FDIC in possession of Holding Company Assets??? Some tidbits from Dodd-Frank.

"‘‘SEC. 38A. SOURCE OF STRENGTH.

‘‘(a) HOLDING COMPANIES.—The appropriate Federal banking agency for a bank holding company or savings and loan holding company shall require the bank holding company or savings and loan holding company to serve as a source of financial strength for any subsidiary of the bank holding company or savings and loan holding company that is a depository institution."
http://www.dodd-frank-act.us/Dodd_Frank_Act_Text_Section_616.html

6.18.1. "Source of Strength" Defined. The Act defines "source of financial strength" to mean, "the ability of a company that directly or indirectly owns or controls an insured depository institution to provide financial assistance to such insured depository institution in the event of the financial distress of the insured depository institution."
http://www.aba.com/Issues/RegReform/Pages/RR6_18.aspx

Now...WHY do you think that the FDIC may be in possession of holding company assets??? Don't these sections define the reason why the assets of the holding company may be used to make the creditors whole? Is this why they have our assets?

-Jest

I wonder how I got to see it...I am not a member either. Odd.

Check out the article I posted right before yours. -Jest

OK....here is an article which discusses what I understand to be true regarding the FDIC taking assets of the holding company.... The article below discusses the legality of such an action by the FDIC.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/paul-kupiec-and-peter-wallison-the-fdics-bank-holding-company-heist-1419292997

THIS may be one reason (if not the only reason) why the FDIC has not been released...

Jest

thanks scriv...although...to be abundantly clear...we are talking about the FDICs ability to hold assets of the Holding Co.,... NOT WMB.

Can the FDIC hold assets of WMI/Holding Co. as COLATERAL for the debt owed by the bank WHILE BK was progressing (I use that term loosely.).

THAT is what is being proposed by some.

Would the FDIC BE ALLOWED to disclose the assets of WMI/Holding Co in this case??

Jest

I need to find the language. I have read on serveral occasions that the FDIC has the autoority to HOLD holding company assets. This was in response to holding companies dumping all of their debt into their subs before declaring bankruptcy.

Thanks for your response BK
Jest

Thanks Catz & BK....TCR...satisfied with that answer. Figured it would be trusted by you coming from Catz.

I do like the idea of changing your nickname to Socrates. LOL

C'mon Catz. We don't need a philosophy lesson! TCR asked the question. Do they have the authority to hold assets or not???

You and BK chime in and provide support for far less complex issues than this. Why don't you just help out by answering the question posed by TCR???

I know you AND BK have the answer...why are you holding back?

Jest

BK...can you please answer this for TCR?

That day was the day I realized just how much damage could be done in such a short period of time. I had some idea before that...but being a part of the madness really changed my perceptions. -Jest

The signs? If you knew they were coming it was a LOT easier to read, huh BK??? There was a leak, plain and simple. IMO it was Brian smiling to the court the way he did which was PRIOR to it being discussed. This was THE trigger to move. That day cannot be simplified as some "read" on the market. There was a leak...

Nice spike! eom

Yes. They stated that the FDIC/FOIA service was not intended to do the research that my questions would have required and that they could only provide documents per any request. Seemed reasonable. Did you get any further than I did on the matter?

-Jest

BK ....so literal. Fraudulently Conveyed work better for you?

Which part? -Jest

I spoke to my Scottrade rep this afternoon...he sent me to someone at corporate who stated that we will see something overnight. Soon!

Jest

It is sad to think JPMC has acquired and is toying with BILLIONS of Legacy WMI assets, yet the waterfall is only a fraction of that away form seeing anything for escrow.... Think about this. Why bother bring it so close? $51 million is a drop. Why are we so close?

Jest

Royal...its another step...but it is not necessarily proof that the escrow asset/large $$$ release proposed by Tanz, LG, AZ, etc. it forthcoming.

After all, we already received a release of shares...yet noone talkef about THAT particular sign of a release of funds.

Waterfall is in play.... Lets look for more news about Piers being paid (which may ALSO be soon), then we start the REAL discussion about $ for LTI.

We ALL need to be REALLY careful here.

Good Luck RD,
Jest

LOL Phinhead!!!

Fraud. You say that shareholders got more than they deserve....that we didn't fight. You must be new to this. The REAL longs know we had to FIGHT to even have a voice...and by the time we received it (Equity Committee via Trustee) the ship had set sail. Then UNDER DURESS (at least in my opinion), we were cornered into signing a POR 7 which was supported by M.Willingham and SusmanGodfrey. A POR which was crafted before our assets were defined to THE SHAREHOLDERS because the assets were "intermingled". We have been screwed and cornered and misrepresented throughout. How could "Fair and Reasonable" even be established without knowing the assets?

Your comment regarding "what shareholders deserve" is uninformed, insensitive, and counterproductive to ANYTHING beneficial to ANY holder of escrow OR WMIH shares.

Good luck to the legitimate longs of escrow and WMIH,
Jest

My FOIA was also received and is being processed within 20 days. I also received the reference number.

Questions were less precise than yours but about similar subject matter.

Jest

Elizabeth Warren would be an interesting option. I have sent her messages regarding usury-style student loans and debt.

Totally agree there hotmeat! It's madness to use these values especially when you look at these examples; KMart and WMI. Perhaps that is what made them such great targets....old old property with very very low book values on assets. I will bet they use a ratio book value to estimated market value to determine how sweet the returns could be.

Jest

As I understand it, BK procedure, NOT nefarious lawyering, are the reasons for the massive variance. Book values used as a standard in BK proceedings. It was also very recently quoted as EXACTLY THAT. "all assets are acquired at book value with the exception of securities which are purchased at fair market value.".

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=115736573

MY POINT, was make the correction before repeating the half-truth 500 times as we all know LG will do.

As I clearly stated in the FIRST FEW WORDS, it is a matter of house cleaning....accurate posting.

I support LG...but lets be concise before repeating something ad nauseum.

Jest

Hold on...just a bookkeeping matter...

Wasn't it posted several times now that the BOOK value of the land Kmart had purchased all the land for over many decades was used in their BK?? The uninflated value they purchased the land for? the real value was then realized AFTER emerging when the land was sold and reflected on the books.

This should not affect your post, but wanted to make sure you were going to repeat the correct information 500 times...

Jest

we need to redefine the corrupt, the perpetrators of the corruption, as "economic terrorists" in the eyes of the public, which effectively they are... let that concept marinate for a while. Once "The People" see the logic in that concept, that truth,..they will pay attention to it....then maybe some real action.

They aren't killing people, they are killing the dreams of the people.

Jest

Amen Bizreader. Great post! -Jest

why would S&G (not to mention Willingham) push for a solution that allowed for the OUTRIGHT THEFT of the holding company assets?! Assets which THEY knew were not legally under the jurisdiction of the FDIC to touch.

That makes ZERO sense. ZERO!

UNLESS....they are anticipating a return of those assets...and hence the NON-RELEASE of the FDIC-R.

Sussman knew these were untouchable by the FDIC!

Why would they have just given up on us?

I'm sorry, but IMO this WILL make sense soon. I refuse to believe that S&G just rolled over on us.

IF they did, then THEY are the ones who should rot in hell right next to the other greedy devils.

Jest

WAMU and now FNMA. Something needs to be done. The powers that be and our government are out of control.

When was the FDIC-R released?

Unfortunately, this is clearly true. Question is, how do WE change that??? Our government is the cartel. Most powerful in the world...of all time...and THEY are the puppets. Scary concept.

"The law is behind them."

thank you wwhatthe for your response. having worked with bids in another context, I'm not sure I see or understand (in the clipped passage) anything stating the bid price of $1.888Bn IS the initial payment.

Generally an initial payment would be a percentage (say 10%) of the bid price.

I would like some other opinions and I will also review review the links you have graciously shared.

Your point is heard though....IF the 1.888Bn is only an initial payment...what would the total bid be? Or...a better question, has the question been sent via FOIA request. I am the one who issued the FOIA which showed the $1.888Bn bid form...perhaps I should push for more info....

I greatly appreciate your reply wwhatthe!

GLTY!

Jest