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.
I missed that before. Obviously this is extremely fishy. What are the chances of it being a ploy to manipulate the stock? Got to believe very good to say the least. This situation stinks to high heaven. AIMO.
I witnessed some oddities for the first time today.
I placed a buy order for wamuq, $250 approximately. For the first time, the purchase was broken down into 5 incremental buys. One purchase was processed for like $9 and change! The price fluctuated just above and at my limit order price. Strange.
I like the way that sounds! Thanks for clarifying.
Hey wamuvoodoo,
With respect to what I posted about what would need to be rewarded to get commons in the money...I said around $15BB.
I agree with you RE the $3BB for preferreds (wampq) to be paid at face. I was estimating the additional $4 BB for wamkq to be paid in full as well as any additional payment that might go toward any unresolved, at this time, parties. This guesstimate was based on discussions on the board prior. I thought more than $4 BB total ($3 BB for wampq + $1 BB for wamkq) might go to a party/claim I can't recall right now. Please clarify this for me if you can, I'm sure you can. I'm sure I'm mistaken, but I thought $15 BB was what it would take at most. $8 BB for liabilities confirmed by the debtors, to date, plus preferreds (pq and kq), plus $3 BB I am obviously fuzzy on.
I'm sorry for any confusion I may have caused. I just like being safe in my mind so when a greater return occurs I am pleasantly surprised instead of vice versa.
All of the above in my opinion, of course. Thanks for clarifying.
I very much do appreciate your opinion. Thanks for responding. It's always good to have balanced input with a conservative approach. At least I will balance out my risk and hedge so to speak. Again, thank you for taking the time. Case of a lifetime.
Voodoo,
I believe it is $8BB in liabilities that are owed, and I thought no more than $7.5BB for preferreds, at most, under any scenario. So for commons to get anything, then isn't $15BB+ that must be awarded?
Thank you steved_45,
I can see you are evaluating the situation critically. So what do you think? Do you believe our investment is too risky? Would you invest with the understanding you currently have (maybe you already are invested)? How do you think this will all shake out?
steved_45,
What do you make of the Dr. A objection letters from May and June regarding the true valuation of WMI? If my memory is correct, in the June letter he addressed the issue of the loan performance being better than expected, and he used conservative percentages to support his valuation.
That was a gracious and gentle way to make a point. Nice link you posted.
I see your point. I'm holding to the concept of fair market value of assets seized. 'Fair market value of assets seized,' the statement, packs a wallop in terms of meaning, I see.
This begs the obvious question; what was WAMU worth?
Now our EC threw out '$30BB' in court. And we've heard 'tens of billions of assets.' We've heard about NOLs, $20BB in cash transfered away from, WMI?, post seizure, 2200 branches @ $1.5MM-3MM, TPS, and subs just to name a few. And we've heard about $8BB in liabilities.
We know that whatever Susman disclosed in chambers, that some argue based on the billings reports might have been a substantiated valuation of assets, changed the direction of the case.
So, what is precident in cases similar to this? When parties have overstepped their bounds, have they been required to pay for their mistakes in the past? I gotta believe that when it's all said and done, part of the proof of fair value must be in the billions JPMC has profited from WAMU assets...to the tune of what, $2 BB/ month?
You got me thinking to be sure.
RE 'wamu portfolio'
Hasn't this portfolio generated enough profit by now to pay all classes and the $8BB in liabilities? How was it that JPMC acquired this portfolio?
Wasn't Wamu solvent at the time of seizure? Wasn't it a holding company that was seized? Does the law only apply some of the time? Or all of the time?
IMO. Susman AND the EX have already established/proven at least $30BB in assets. IMO, they aren't investigating to see IF A>L. IMO it's because they KNOW A>L that the investigation is continuing. Once it has been established/proven the assets are there, then fault exists. Damage is done. Crime has occured. They will find the culprits, IMO.
IMO, shareholders chances, and Susmans' chances for that matter, don't hinge upon whether assets exist to put all in the money. Now, because the parties didn't pony up earlier, it is a matter of how much more than $30BB there is and who exactly is at fault for the injustices purpetrated. The vice is just beginning to tighten.
I believe our chances of settlement on, or before Nov. 1, 2010 are on the rise.
AIMO. And as posted before, I am nobody except another citizen entitled to their opinion...at least by this date in American history! :)
'the really scary stuff over the next three weeks.'
And that's why I just deposited more money in my account and set extremely low buy triggers...and that's why I will continue to keep putting more money in my account as it comes in over the next 3-? weeks. I will just keep taking opportunites as they are given to me! :)
Thanks MMs.
That is a great, to the point, truthful, telling post.
For at least two years now a lot more has been going on than meets the eye of the common citizen, who I might add is toiling as best as they can to keep their head above water probably with little time to invest in discovering the truth.
And why must many toil so much more these days? True some bit off more than they should have, but many are victems of the practices of key players alligned with some parties of this case. The audacity to blame it on the shareholders! 'They should have investigated...' blah, blah, blah.
Drive it home EX, EC, UST and THJMW.
Wonder if Rosen might be more inclined to consider Sussman's question the next, and third time I might add, Sussman comes calling?
There is absolutely no good reason for those funds to remain sitting where they have been for 2 years!
Great Fortune Cookie. Sometimes they're pretty accurate. Things seem to be shaping up just so in our case.
Catchy. It will be interesting to see if SS would be in support of shareholders puting an ad out. I'm for the ad idea if and only if SS recommends/supports it, and will gladly contribute.
I smell a great headline coming.
Thanks. I'll keep an eye out.
Great stuff. What's this going to cost? 10K, 50K, more?
We need to make this happen. May the legal eagles lead this action presenting facts succinctly.
how about wamboozled, then then the bair naked, undisclosed truth of the wamu heist...
THAT'S IT!!! LOVE IT.
Wake Up America, You're Being Wamboozled
The Undisclosed Facts Surrounding the WAMU Heist...Until Now
How about $100 BB?
Unbelieveable.
I agree. Thank you for responding.
I want her to bare some teeth with appropriate law behind them. It seems to me the case is at a point where THJMW must do this for the case to effectively proceed.
I didn't hear first hand the testimony of S. Bair today, lurked the board to get the gist. No remorse. Strong front and all. Were you at all surprised by her presentation? It seems we have just the forces representing us in this case on our side (SS, EX, JMW, EC etc.), which is substantial. It's like 4 parties, shareholders,UST and the truth against the world. How committed do you believe our forces are to go the distance? My hope and prayer is that they collectively see the crimes committed and are moving in united force to drive the case to justice.
What a story this would be.
fsshon,
Why is it that the ex might not have the authority of the court at this point to pry the requested docs from the party requested?
Isn't it an act of contempt for the parties not to comply?
I'm telling ya, it's the case of the century (understatement). Our very freedom is at stake with this thing, and the war is happening right before our very eyes.
Thank you.
If enough others agree to go in, then I will pay up to $250 to make this happen...full spread ad in a major newspaper.
What is the status of this trial?
sattlement, $4, $8, $0, big players standing by...$.0195...???
What??????
steel58, I like the way that sounds. Would love to see us seriously go on the offensive. Got a feeling our team will do something just like you've laid out when the time is right. Would be great to see on 09/07.
It nice as well as interesting to read that, did I read that correctly?, that the shareholder consulted the EC. Are you aware of any response the EC may have had?
Now that's clear. Thank you. It seems appointment of a case trustee is the next best move then. Hope to see one soon.
What can a trustee do that the ex can't? I honestly don't know. Could you clarify?
Follow up. Minimally, I want bank out of this just as much as anyone else.
Right. I just don't want them to be inclined to do it again, so easily.
So maybe they have banked $50 BB off the assets to date...so take the $50 BB away from them giving it back to the estate. Do this on top of the $100 BB it is valued at. Ream them with some damages to boot. If they don't end up paying $100 BB minimum to much, much more, then why not do it again? Hell, I'm in the wrong business. Went to school a long time for it too. Pays well, but not as good as stealing peoples' money with crooks! Ha!
$100 BILLION. DOLLARS that is, with a capital B!!!
Then, for good measure, add damages X 2, or 3. Now, was it really worth it JPMC and FDIC to hold onto those assets for $2 BB per month for 24-30 months?
MAKE THEM PAY FOR IT. DON'T GIVE THEM ANY REASON TO TRY IT AGAIN. OTHERWISE THEY WILL DO THIS AGAIN. AND AGAIN.
Damn strait.
Now does THJMW have the power? Given how 'patient' she has been, would such action/ruling limit the scope of the appeals process? This I am unsure of to say the least, but I agree the debtors, jpm and fdic have made a mochery of the court...this would be a start to making up for allowing it, IMO.