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.
By Court’s January 31, 2014 Order:
the Avoidance Actions are currently stayed until the later of
(i) May 20,2014 or
(ii) thirty days after the date which the Court enters a scheduling order governing the instant action.
[Docket. No. 42417]
Yawn!!!
Can't get shares below 0.40!
Anyone?
You should have attached the forum link. EOM
Gus,
We are trying to understand this complex BK,and our position.
Price Wise, its clearly showing no Sell off,, No Vol, PPS range 33-50 and most are holding.
Now, What do you want us to do?
To Sell? To stop reading and trying to connect dots?
To close this bb?
Suggestions Please?
Calendar for Judge Shelley C. Chapman
June 19
http://www.nysb.uscourts.gov/calendars/scc.html
Thank You Sir.
Any of you guys has section 8.13 of the POR handy?
TIA
That was in Sep 13, 2013
I recall it happened before!
One of our friends sold 100K N's at 0.30!
lol
LOL...You don't know what you are talking about!!
Do some readings:
I suggest to start with Dockets 7578, 7579, and 8313
Thats one of the nos lised for LAMCO
http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=113649913
Did you try this one?
6462859039
Read Dockets 7579, 8313
CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT
by and among
LEHMAN BROTHERS HOLDINGS INC.,
LBHI LAMCO HOLDINGS LLC,
LAMCO HOLDINGS LLC
LAMCO LLC and
LAMCO HOLDINGS INTERNATIONAL B.V.
Dated as of [?], 2010
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Term:
The initial term of the Asset Management Agreement will be three years, subject to automatic one year renewals, unless (i) terminatedby LBHI earlier with cause upon 30 days notice (subject to atermination expense reimbursement (as set forth below)), (ii)terminated by LBHI earlier without cause upon 60 days notice(subject to a termination expense reimbursement (as set forthbelow)) or (iii) terminated by LBHI at least 90 days prior to the applicable term expiration date.
Termination
LBHI can terminate the Asset Management Agreement (i) after adetermination of Cause (as defined in the Asset ManagementAgreement), upon not less than 30 days prior notice to LAMCOLLC (subject to a termination expense reimbursement), or (ii) withrespect to all of its Managed Assets or all of its Managed Assetswithin one or more discrete asset classes, at any time without Causeupon not less than 60 days prior notice to LAMCO LLC (subject toa termination expense reimbursement). Upon receipt by LAMCOLLC of a notice of termination from LBHI, LAMCO LLC shallpromptly provide a copy of such notice to LBHI and, prior to theTermination Date, the Creditors’ Committee.
In the event of any termination of by LBHI prior to the TerminationDate, in whole or in part in respect of its Managed Assets withinone or more asset classes whereby such termination necessitatesinternal reallocation by LBHI of the Management Fees allocated toany of the entities listed on Schedule A of the Asset ManagementAgreement in respect of each such asset class ( pursuant to the LBHI Allocation Methodology above) such that the Management Feeallocable to any such entity or entities is increased by an amountequal to three percent (3%) or more per annum, LBHI shall providewritten notice of such increase in allocated fees, as soon aspracticable, to the Creditors’ Committee attaching a description of the effect of such termination on the fees allocated by LBHI to anyother entity or entities listed on Schedule A in respect of each suchasset class.
-----------------------------
April 14, 2010....
LAMCO was originally formed to serve as the asset management platform for Lehman’s parent but won legal approval to run Lehman’s less liquid assets, such as real estate and private equity, for a period of five years back in April 2010, in the wake of its parent company’s bankruptcy back in 2008
At the same time, Lehman sold its North American capital markets business to Barclays Capital and sold its European and Asian capital markets business to Nomura Holdings, but retained the majority of its assets due to the judgement that a liquidation of these assets would greatly diminish recovery value. The focus of LAMCO is therefore on maximising value over time for these less liquid legacy assets. To this end, the asset management firm also manages assets such as derivatives and corporate bonds for Lehman affiliates and has presence in New York, London and Hong Kong.
If this is our Lamco,and I believe it is!
then we ae managing $47.7 bil of assets!
http://investment-advisors.findthebest.com/l/23524/Lamco-Llc
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/savvas-mavridis/4/b8b/211
""In exchange for that eye-popping payday, approved by the judge in charge of the case, Lehman creditors are poised to get 18 cents on the dollar by 2016, from an estate valued at $65 billion, according to a liquidation plan approved in December 2011. Miller, 80, estimated that recovery may rise to as much as 22 cents as the value of Lehman’s assets increases over the next three years to about $80 billion.
His estimate is a “somewhat educated guess,” Miller said in an interview near the offices of his law firm, New York-based Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP. “I am sure debt traders have their own projected recovery valuations.”
---------------------------------------------------------------------
That was Harvey Miller, the lawyer guiding Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc....in Sep 11, 2013
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-11/lehman-recovery-seen-as-justifying-2-billion-bankruptcy.html
He estimated recovery to to rise to $80 Bil by 2016...
What do you think will happen next ,since we reached the 80$ bil target in 2014??? :)
Do you guys recall this video for Bryan Marsal (who was CEO of Lehman and resigned 03-12-2013.
Do you think plan is still valid?
http://www.nytimes.com/video/2009/07/06/business/1194841374907/the-unwinding-of-lehman-brothers.html?ref=lehmanbrothersholdingsinc
Agree...
I guess they have a different trustee..
IMO
Refresh your Memory
http://dm.epiq11.com/LBH/document/GetDocument.aspx?DocumentId=1715648
STOCK CANCELLATION/SENIOR NOTES FAQS:
10) I am a shareholder. What happens to my shares now that Lehman has emerged?
There is a frequently asked question site to address shareholder questions at www.lehmandocket.
com. In brief, Lehman shares have been delisted and will no longer trade. The
ownership represented by your holding of Lehman shares is transferred to a proportional
ownership in the share held by the Lehman Plan Trust. Although highly unlikely, in the event of
a distribution for the benefit of shareholders, the Plan Trust will arrange for such distribution to
shareholders of record just prior to the effective date of the plan.
11) I was a Stockholder prior to the filing, what will happen to my stock?
On the Effective Date, the LBHI Common and Preferred Stock shall be canceled and one new
share of LBHI common stock shall be issued to the Plan Trust which will hold such share for the
benefit of the holders of such former LBHI stock. The Plan states that in the event that all
Allowed Claims in LBHI Classes 1 through 11 have been satisfied in full in accordance with the
Bankruptcy Code and the Plan, each holder of an Equity Interest in LBHI may receive its share
of any remaining assets of LBHI consistent with all rights and priorities existing immediately
prior to the commencement of the Chapter 11 cases. At this time it is not anticipated that any
distribution will be made to any holder of an Equity Interest in LBHI.
12) What do I do with my stock certificates?
As the stock is being cancelled pursuant to the Plan, you are not required to take any action
with respect to the stock you hold.
13) I just read that my stock was cancelled. When did this happen? Do I receive anything in exchange?
The Effective Date was March 6, 2012. When the LBHI Stock was cancelled on the Effective
Date one new share of LBHI common stock was issued to a Plan Trust which will hold such
share for the benefit of the holders of such former LBHI Stock consistent with their former
relative priority and economic entitlements. In place of your old shares, an escrow position was
created to act as a placeholder in your account and to represent your interest in the new share
of LBHI common stock for any potential future distributions. The escrow position will mirror the
number of old shares you held as of the Effective Date.
14) Are any tax implications triggered by the cancellation of the stock?
You will need to consult with your tax professional or accountant regarding the tax implications.
15) I now hold a beneficial interest or Equity Interest in LBHI stock.
a. What does this mean? It means you have an escrow position or a
“placeholder” for any potential future distributions of LBHI Stock.
b. Is it worth anything? The Plan states that in the event that all Allowed Claims
in LBHI Classes 1 through 11 have been satisfied in full in accordance with the
Bankruptcy Code and the Plan, each holder of an Equity Interest in LBHI may
receive its share of any remaining assets of LBHI. At this time it is not
anticipated that any distribution will be made to any holder of an Equity Interest in
LBHI. Additionally, the placeholder escrow position is non-transferable.
c. Do I receive any evidence of this interest? The evidence is in the form of the
escrow CUSIP position that will mirror the number of old shares held as of the
Effective Date.
d. Will it show up on my brokerage statement? This depends on the firm, but
generally the answer is yes, under an escrow CUSIP position that will mirror the
number of old shares held as of the Effective Date.
e. Can I trade it? No. The positions in the escrow CUSIPS are non-transferable.
The continuing rights of holders of Equity Interests (including through their
interest in the Plan Trust Stock or otherwise) shall be nontransferable except by
operation of law or upon the death of the holder.
f. Is it taxable? Do I need to report it anywhere? You will need to consult with
your tax professional or accountant regarding the tax implications.
16) What is an escrow CUSIP?
A CUSIP number is a unique identifier assigned to a particular security. An escrow CUSIP is a
placeholder representing the amount of shares held by the former holders of equity interests or
the principal amount held by former holders of notes. An escrow CUSIP is not an “official”
security designation, and it is created solely for record-keeping purposes. The escrow CUSIP
number shall only represent the right of such holder to receive potential future distributions
under the Plan on account of the old or cancelled securities.
17) As a stockholder, am I entitled to a distribution?
If you held Class 12 Equity Interests, the old common stock, or preferred shares, you may
receive a distribution after all Allowed Claims in [url]LBHI Classes 1 through 11 have been satisfied
in full in accordance with the Bankruptcy Code and the Plan. At this time it is not anticipated
that any distribution will be made to any holder of an Equity Interest in LBHI. For all other Plan
Classes, please refer to the Plan.
18) If a distribution is made to stockholders, how will I know?
If you held your Class 12 Interests in a brokerage account, the distribution will be deposited into
your account. If you held your Class 12 Interest as a registered holder in your own name,
notification will be made.
19) Can I change brokers?
Yes.
20) My broker does not want to hold my beneficial interest anymore. Can I convert to
record name?
No. There will not be any mechanism for converting your position to record name.
21) I just moved. Should I submit a change of address? To whom?
Yes, you should submit a change of address. Where you send the change of address request
depends, on where your claim or securities are held. When making the notification include your
name on the account, your old address, your new address, date the change is effective and a
phone or email address in the event there are questions, as well as any account numbers or
other identifying information.
a. If you hold securities, either stock or bonds through a brokerage account you should
contact your broker.
b. If you are a registered holder, holding the stock in your own name and do not hold it
through a broker, please contact the stock transfer agent.
For Old Common Stock
Computershare (formerly BYN Mellon)
1-800-824-5707
For Old Preferred Shares
Computershare
1-877-498-8865
c. If you have a filed proof of claim, then you should notify Epiq the Claims and Noticing
Agent for Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. Write to:
Lehman Brothers Holdings Noticing Agent
Epiq Bankruptcy Solutions
757 Third Avenue, 3rd Floor
New York, NY 10017
22) Where can I find more information about the wind-down?
After the Effective Date, pursuant to the Plan, the Plan Administrator shall wind-down, sell and
otherwise liquidate assets of the Debtors and/or Debtor-Controlled Entities in accordance with
Section 6.1(b)(iii) of the Plan. You may find additional information at www.lehman-docket.com.
23) I held preferred stock. Is my beneficial interest different than the beneficial
interest that a common stockholder received?
The common stock and the preferred shares were both classified as Class 12 Equity Interests
under the confirmed Plan and both are treated similarly under the Plan, but the common stock
and preferred shares shall maintain their former relative priority to each other.
24) What is happening to my Senior Notes?
The Senior Notes are in LBHI Plan Class 3 Senior Unsecured Claims, and the distribution for
these will be paid through your bank or broker through the depository in which your position is
held. An escrow CUSIP will also be established as a place holder in your account for any
potential future distributions.
Guster,
Assuming we are speculating recovery but we don't have a court document to prove it.
You are speculating we get nothing, Can you prove it with a court document? 100%?
TIA
List of Plan Class 10B claims:
(rounded to nearest $100 for readability)
Claim 21805 $314,207,500 CUSIP 52519Y209 - LEHKQ
Claim 22122 $311,742,900 CUSIP 52520B206 - LEHLQ
Claim 22123 $416,013,700 CUSIP 52520E200 - LHHMQ
Claim 21803 $223,469,700 CUSIP 52520X208 - LEHNQ
Claim 21797 $1,264,375,000 CUSIP 524908UB4
Claim 21801 $766,500,000 CUSIP 524908WH9
Claim 21800 $1,933,352,700 CUSIP 524908R36
Claim 21799 $1,516,614,600 CUSIP 524908R44
Claim 21802 $1,521,656,300 CUSIP 5249087M6
Claim 21798 $2,051,666,700 CUSIP 5249087N4
totaling about $10,319,539,000
All of these claims are made by NY Mellon Bank as trustee for these CUSIPs
Debtors’ restructuring website
http://cases.primeclerk.com/flspirits/
Just bought 1000 H's a 42 :)
Thank you Sir
Do you think 0.0002 is a good price to avg down cost?
Tia
.......
May 27, 2014
FINRA Clarifies Reporting Requirements for Tier 1 Capital Securities
Three Types of Hybrid Securities Subject to Classification and Reporting Changes
For some time now, there has been confusion regarding the appropriate trade reporting for certain hybrid securities. Hybrid securities, such as non-cumulative perpetual preferred securities and depositary shares, have certain features typically associated with equity securities and certain features typically associated with debt securities. Traditionally, trust preferred securities and non-cumulative perpetual securities were reported to FINRA’s Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine (“TRACE”) system (as debt securities).
Following the enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act and the implementation of the Basel III capital rules in the United States, trust preferred securities and other “innovative” hybrid securities that once qualified for favorable regulatory capital treatment have generally been phased out. Banks have instead come to rely upon the issuance of non-cumulative preferred stock to raise Tier 1-qualifying capital. Increased issuance activity may have led FINRA to revisit the manner in which hybrid securities transactions should be trade reported.
Despite the debt-like characteristics of these securities, certain non-cumulative perpetual preferred securities offerings and depositary share offerings were reported as equity securities, rather than through the TRACE system. Many investors in these securities focused principally on their debt-like features. In fact, certain institutional investors that have been significant buyers of these securities are limited in their ability to purchase equity securities.
On May 16, 2014, FINRA issued an interpretation clarifying the classification and trade reporting requirements of the following three hybrid securities (the “Covered Hybrid Securities”):1
• unlisted depositary shares having a liquidation preference or cash redemption price of $1,000 or more that is a fractional interest in a non-convertible, preferred security;
• unlisted non-convertible, preferred securities having a liquidation preference or a cash redemption price of $1,000 or more; and
• unlisted capital trust and trust preferred securities.
1 See FINRA Regulatory Notice 14-23 (May 2014), available at http://www.finra.org/web/groups/industry/@ip/@reg/@notice/documents/notices/p507406.pdf.
http://www.mofo.com/~/media/Files/ClientAlert/140527FINRAClarifies.pdf
5. RECOVERY ESTIMATES FOR LEHMAN CREDITORS UNDER CHAPTER 11
At the time of the bankruptcy filing, there were 67,000 claims against Lehman worth $1.16
trillion (Panel A of Table 3). Under a plan that Lehman submitted to creditors and the court
on June 29, 2011, initial claims were reduced to $764 billion, after adjusting for duplicate,
inflated, and invalidly filed claims.35 Of this amount, claims totaling about $214 billion, or
28 percent of the total, were effectively “double counted” since they were either guarantee
claims (claims based on guarantees by LBHI) or affiliate claims (claims by Lehman entitiesagainst each other). After this and other adjustments, allowed claims to third-party creditors
across twenty-three Lehman entities totaled $362 billion.
Of the total allowed claims, recovered assets were originally estimated at nearly $84
billion prior to total administrative expenses of $3.2 billion, amounts due to intercompany
entities or affiliates of nearly $2.9 billion, and operating disbursements of approximately
$3.1 billion, for a net distributable amount to third-party creditors of $75.4 billion (second
column of Panel A of Table 3). The net amount expected to be distributed to third-party
creditors amounted to a claim payout ratio of 20.9 percent.
As of March 27, 2014, the Lehman estate had made five distributions to creditors,
with total recoveries exceeding the initial estimates and allowed claims falling below the
initial estimates. Consequently, the recovery ratio for unsecured creditors has been more than
28 percent (last column of Panel A, Table 3). The amounts distributed include intercompany
claims, so that third-party recovery rates have been lower than 28 percent. For
example, of almost $45 billion provided in the third, fourth and fifth distributions, third-party
creditors received about $32 billion. Moreover, part of the higher recovery rate is due to a
reduction in claims allowed by the Lehman estate. Nevertheless, recoveries for third-party
creditors appear to have been larger than expected, helped by settlements with other banks
and Lehman’s foreign subsidiaries.
Based on the cumulated distributions so far, creditors of the holding company (LBHI)
have received 21.3 percent of their allowed claims in the aggregate. Senior unsecured
creditors of LBHI have received 26.9 percent of their allowed claims (“Notice Regarding Fifth Distribution Pursuant to the Modified Third Amended Joint Chapter 11 Plan of LBHI
and its Affiliated Debtors.” March 27, 2014).
We examine historical recovery rates to assess whether LBHI’s recovery rate so far
has been significant (as argued by Scott [2012]) or poor (according to the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation [2011]). Average recovery rates for senior unsecured claims between
1982 and 1999, based on bonds, loans, and other debt instruments, are estimated at 56
percent for all industries and 59 percent for financial institutions (Acharya, Bharath, and
Srinivasan 2007). Recovery rates are considerably lower during periods of distress: 19
percentage points lower in recessions (Schuermann 2004), 15 percentage points lower in
periods of industrial distress (Acharya, Bharath, and Srinivasan 2007), and 15 to 22
percentage points lower, depending on the default event, during credit cycle downturns
(Bruche and Gonzalez-Aguado 2007).39 Thus, even after accounting for possibly reduced
recovery rates due to adverse credit and macroeconomic conditions, the recovery rate so far
for LBHI has been low compared to the historical average. With additional distributions yet
to come, the final recovery rate is expected to be higher, but it remains to be seen whether it
will meet historical norms.
While the average payout ratio for Lehman and affiliates has been about 28 percent,
recovery rates have been higher for creditors of certain derivatives subsidiaries of LBHI and
in a few cases have reached 100 percent (Panel B of Table 3). The plan had estimated that
seven of the twenty-three Lehman entities would pay all of their claims in full and have
remaining funds for their shareholders. Prior to its bankruptcy filing, Lehman traded
derivatives through a number of wholly owned subsidiaries, both in a trading capacity and as
an end-user, as listed in Panel B of Table 3.40 Lehman’s first liquidation plan filed in March 201041 had called for maintaining the corporate distinction of each of the twenty-three
Lehman entities that had filed for bankruptcy, implying that each affiliate would make
payments to its creditors on the basis of its own assets. Derivatives creditors would have
generally benefited from such an approach given the positive equity cushions of most
Lehman derivatives entities.
General creditors of LBHI argued that parent company guarantees of affiliates’ debt
meant that more debt resided at the parent level while assets were at the subsidiary level.42
As such, creditors with claims against an affiliate subject to an LBHI guarantee could
recover against both LBHI and the affiliate. An ad hoc group of ten LBHI creditors
submitted their own liquidation plan on December 15, 2010, proposing to “substantially
consolidate” all affiliates’ assets into one Lehman entity. In contrast to the existing company
structure, under the consolidated structure, guarantee claims would be eliminated. Therefore,
holders of parent company claims would receive more with consolidation. Lehman rejected
this plan and, after further negotiations with creditors, submitted an amended plan on June
29, 2011, that proposed to retain the corporate formalities of each debtor entity, but to
redistribute the payouts made to certain creditors. After further revisions to this plan, the
Modified Third Amended Plan was finally confirmed on December 6, 2011, following a
creditor vote, and became effective on March 6, 2012, enabling Lehman to emerge from
bankruptcy and make distributions to creditors.
As a result of the plan, between 20 and 30 percent of payments owed to creditors of
various operating companies were forfeited and reallocated to the parent company’s
creditors. In particular, distributions due to claim holders of derivatives entities such as
LBSF, Lehman Commercial Paper Inc., Lehman Brothers Commodity Services, Lehman
Brothers OTC Derivatives Inc., and Lehman Brothers Commercial Corporation were reallocated to holders of senior unsecured claims and general unsecured claims against
LBHI. Accordingly, while Lehman Brothers OTC Derivatives Inc., Lehman Brothers
Financial Products and Lehman Brothers Derivative Products all had recovery rates of 100
percent, LBSF (the largest derivatives entity) had recovered about 31 percent, despite having
a positive equity cushion (Panel B of Table 3).
Recovery rates for large derivatives counterparties are likely to be different from
those of other secured creditors. This is because the Lehman estate followed a different
settlement approach regarding these claims, as discussed in Section 4. Under the Chapter 11
liquidation plan, the eight largest financial institutions were allowed about 65 percent of their
asserted claims, while the thirty largest big bank counterparties were allowed about 47
percent of their asserted claims (Panel C of Table 3).
EXCELLENT reading....
http://newyorkfed.org/research/epr/2014/1403flem.pdf