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.
Well, actually, Willingham has 1 million commons and I agree, he will have a multi-million dollar salary while on the board/committee post bk. He is set no matter what happens.
imo
I concur. I am anticipating TPS's objection to be forth coming as well. We may even see an objection from Epoaks )or what ever that hedge fund's name was that was on the EC).
Willingham's sham of a settlement is basically a three way split between TPS / P&K / commons. Not only that, Willingham and Co (2 more) EC memebers will be getting a "job" on the trustee/board/committee post bankruptcy emergence.
imo
Correction: After reding it further, P/K are classed in Class 19, unlike the other DS/POR where they will Class 20, a seperate class from REITS.
imo
I didn't read the whole thing, but skimmed it. They basically get a share of the 30% of the commons and other stuff... they are equal to commons, however, I don't know if the Judge will still rule on their trial, may be may be not. I don't know since there is a DS out or if there is a provision in the DS stating if Dimeq were Class 12, 18, or 21 re: Judge ruling etc.
I didn't really follow Dimeq.
imo
Oh, I didn't know you were serious! Ha ha. Well, there lies a problem, there was no provision for Class 20, the Class we are in, however, we are suppose to be ranked at the same level with Class 19, with the exception of the $50 million to REITS.
So, if we use that as an indication of what we P/K are going to get, then we would receive a prorated share of the 70% plus "other stuff"... (I have not read the entire thing yet)
... BUT, I would like to see it in print before I relay on the Class 19 verbiage and apply it to Class 20 distribution.
oh... and the anwser to your question about the PPS, it should GAP up!
imo
Well, judging by your posts today, I figured you sold, and that is why there was a settlement (after you sold). Well, anyhow, congrats to all! LOL
Jerele, tell us the truth. Did you sell some shares today? eom
Seventh Amended Joint Plan of Affiliated Debtors Pursuant to Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229111212000000000003.pdf
... because, if you take into account, EC's colorable claims, and through litigation, any money coming from SNHs, will go back into the waterfall and pay off Class 18. Without disallowance, the waterfall does not flow to Class 18.
Now is through litigation. If there is a settlement, then scenario is different.
imo
You are obviously not following the wamu case. It is not a dual track case. The coloarable claims will be dealt with BEFORE any confirmation hearing. What does that mean? That means the estate is funding the entire discovery period until there is a ruling on IT claims, UNLESS there is a settlement.
As for your:
Yes, very important to know whether Class 12, 18, or 21 (or was it 22) in a settlement or straight forward waterfall. Huge impact on Dimeq. imo/eom
DS (Jan) and Confirmation (Feb) hearing. imo/eom
Unoffical Transcript of 12/8/2012 hearing
Unoffical Transcript of 12/8/2012 hearing
Point out the word canceled. I can't seem read this quote, nor the other quotes after this post that have already been addressed.
Thanks.
imo
EDIT: Would like to add that I hear that new stock is going to pay dividends now.
------------------------------
If you were to have held to the end, you have gotten new share shares, two set of warrants, and something else, based on general claims, if it exceeded a certain amount.
I, however, did not hold to the end, but sold during the run up because it was taking a little longer than I thought and I wanted to cash in to enter another security. Still did good though.
Finding gems that will make you good money are very hard now.
Good to know you remember me recommending it to you.
I will let you know if I come across something similar.
imo
Why, yes that is the security. If you know what I am.talking about, you must have been one of the ones that made money to. Made a nice change and also on the gm mini senior security. :)
"Illiquid" is not hedgie code for retail won't be filled on the smallest of orders. It is a term widely and commonly used.
I have been filed in illiquid securities before all the time. The most recent one I was filled on was a Lehman security tied to GM senior bonds which I made out nicely.
Illiquid means there are just not a lot of buyers or sellers. That creates an illiquid market. Supply and demand. You can't expect a market maker to sit around all day to fill your ticket while the other securities and trading at high frequency. Lets be realist please...
Do you own LEH cap trusts? If you do, then you were filled, right?
BTW, I am not the kind of person who cheers along with the "perfect storm" crew, and then when they are gone and no more cheering, blame anyone, including them for reality. Just have to face reality and the choices YOU make/made.
imo
... however, the security may be very illiquid . . . but still tradable...
You can still trade caps and subs, but it does not mean recovery or distribution.
Commons/pref, the last time I looked were to be consolidated into 1 share w/ their respective tiers, as such, effectively no trading.
My outlook has not changed, toast...
imo
Read what I posted and then read what you posted.
Now the question: Where did I say the Cap trusts and sub notes are cancelled?
Your response makes no sense . . . or relevance nor does it dispute anything I have posted.
All you did was strengthen my position.
imo
I said:
Agreed, however, I am still weary of Willingham... until I see the DS. imo/eom
I concur, any settlement/GSA will be incorporated within the DS. To me, the settlement has been reached/accepted by EC, and all they (all parties) are doing now is DS/POR verbiage that will be acceptable to all parties. One of Parker Foses' arguments during the last confirmation was mediation should also include all parties in agreement to POR language to streamline the POR/Confirmation process without objections and more wasted estate resources.
Judge Walrath has stated no dual track (if I can remember correctly).
No peep/disagreement from EC lawyers while Rosen speaking re: filing of DS as soon as Monday and Rosen's mention of confirmation hearing in Feb 2012.
Everything "seems" to be headed in the right direction for a nice Xmas 2011/New Year 2012.
Well, gotta go, I have get back to work. tah tah
imo
Subordinates, in the same sinking boat as you. imo/eom
Wow... Sure does not change the Lehman POR. imo/eom
Joyce:
I have always advocated "diversification".
As for the "perfect storm" group, I did call out Brik, howver, I have no comment on coach.
imo
Phong67 said:
Usually the loudest (cough) cheerleader is the one dumping. =)
Like I (Dick Flud Jr.) said: would you rather be told the truth or be lied to? imo/eom
Ding ding ding!!! We have a winner. Yes, any money above $65 billions still goes to creditors up until the allowed claims amount.
Regarding your equity question (keep in mind, I do not know the poster nor do I endorse him, however, I can tell you that equity is toast):
The Godfather: I will keep my post brief and straight to the point because of time constraints. Anyone can chose to face reality or keep their "rose colored" glasses on.
Equity: preferrds and commons. Debtors keep them so they keep NOL carry forwards intact because all the major holder/institutions have already sold. Debtors canNOT have any major changes in ownership for at least 3 years or it will effect NOL carry forwards and reduce recovery for the creditors.
Cap trust/subordinate bonds (example: LEHNQ, LEHKQ, LEHLQ, CUSIP's etc.): Keep them intact. Why? So senior bonds can continue to enforce the subordination clause / make whole clause provisions. What does this do? Any distribution to cap/subordinate bonds are re-allocated to seniors bonds. Seniors bonds make (recover) more money than any other holding company creditor because they keep cap trusts/subordinate bonds intact. The reason why there is no ownership restriction on Cap Trust/subordinate bonds because it does not effect NOLs.
Using the combination of the above, yields a higher recovery for senior bonds because debtors are not paying any taxes (while enforcing the tax attributes on no ownership change re: NOLs) while they are liquidating Lehman and thus any taxes money not paid is then going to creditor.
Those of you know me, know I am straight shooter and tell it like it is.
In the end, I do not like to see people lose money and I want every one to make money.
People can choose to wait 5 to 10 years and be disappointed or face reality today.
Truth hurts, but I rather be the told the truth than lied to for many years... but that is just me.
imo
All Cap Trusts, subordinated debt, all types of preferreds, commons, etc. are toast.
Do not waste your time with this Lehman stuff unless you have some sort of senior obligation(s).
Trust me, you guys are just "spinning your wheels".
imo