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.
Thanks for this Thony, agree
Also in tthe P&AA { https://www.fdic.gov/about/freedom/Washington_Mutual_P_and_A.pdf }
ARTICLE III
PURCHASE OF ASSETS
3.1 Assets Purchased by Assuming Bank. Subject to Sections 3.5, 3.6 and 4.8, the
Assuming Ban hereby purchases from the Receiver, and the Receiver hereby sells, assigns,
transfers, conveys, and delivers to the Assuming Ban, all right, title, and interest of
the Receiver
in and to all of
the assets (real, personal and mixed, wherever located and however acquired)
including all subsidiares, joint ventures, parnerships, and any and all other business
combinations or arangements, whether active, inactive, dissolved or terminated, of
the Failed
Ban whether or not reflected on the books of
the Failed Ban as of
Ban Closing. Assets are
purchased hereunder by the Assuming Ban subject to all
liabilities for indebtedness
collateralized by Liens affecting such Assets to the extent provided in Section 2.1. The
subsidiares, joint ventures, parnerships, and any and all other business combinations or
arangements, whether active, inactive, dissolved or terminated being purchased by the Assuming
Ban includes, but is not limited to, the entities listed on Schedule 3.1a. Notwithstanding
Section 4.8, the Assuming Ban specifically purchases all mortgage servicing rights and
obligations of the Failed Ban.
""Assets" means all 'assets of the Failed Bank purchased pursuant to Section 3.1. Assets owned by Subsidiaries of the Failed Bank are not "Assets" within the meaning of this definition."
why did you choose Delaware?
Realistic numbers/$ data will come after FDIC_R conciliation
JMHO
Tanja
I believe that those $151.150 billion { https://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/wamubalsheet.html } may just be the Deposits ( Liability for the bank ) that the costumers had in WMB at the moment of the seizure { remember that those deposits were $188.260 Billion on June/2008 ( see
www.kccllc.net/wamu/document/0812229110207000000000002 25/40 ) } and that the FDIC rescued and transferred to JPM immediately after the seizure
Certainly Impressive
Thanks so Much for this Tanja
Take Care
I respect your post and opinion tcr7309
Now, why didn't we release FDIC-R in our releases if everything was/is ok (and there is nothing to come)... in your opinion ?
TIA
From memory
FSb was owned by PSH which was owned by WMB which was owned by WMI, but my gut tells me to dig into that PSH created just to make no difference
that Pike Street Holdings + FSB stuff is another of the key events here; FSB was loaded with a lot of cash...
FSB was immediately merged into JPM, different to what happened with WMB...
ps: I believe Pike Street Holdings (PSH) was a holding, created in 2008 just to hold FSB, so FSB was hanging from PSH which hanged from WMB; if it made no difference.... why was it created??
Stock abandonment (about $23,91 Billion) produced the $8,37Billion in Capital Loss (which is a NET/PURE asset)
the problem with he $8,37B in h expiration date, 2017 1st Quarter
you also have the 5,96 NOL (which is not net/pure), a 0,35 (35%) asset (about $2B net/pure worth) which expires in about20 years
I firmly believe that WMIH has to choose between one of those options and I believe they will fight hard to monetize the Capital Loss
Tanjazielman
Pike Street Holdings was created in Feb 2008 just to hold FSB, what differences did it (PSH) make (in real and potential terms)?
TIA
You are Wellcome Jestiron
Take care
PS: I´ve got no PM in IHUB
http://investorshub.advfn.com/uimage/uploads/2015/3/7/fjuhw1,880,000_definition.png
{ See http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/viewer?action=view&cik=933136&accession_number=0001564590-15-001104&xbrl_type=v ; then click in "All Reports" , then wait for about 1 minute (it's a heavvvvy link); then it's all yours }
$ 1,880,000,000 = Amount of reorganization value related to estimated net realizable value of asset dispositions. Reorganization value is the amount attributed to the reconstituted entity, as well as the expected net realizable value of those assets that will be disposed before reconstitution occurs.
$15,48 a share
{ $8,370,000,000* / 540,475,541** = $15,486362221893774837814538586123 a share }
*: http://investorshub.advfn.com/uimage/uploads/2014/9/4/hwvah5,96B_8,37B_View_Filing_Data.png ; Net/Pure Asset
**: http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=111291190
When expecting billions/believing billions are deserved ( maybe they are...) "just a few hundreds" (of millions) recently kicked in this through Series B preferred offering may look like small... It's not IMHO
For example, The fact that our HF's ( larger than 5% ones: Appaloosa & Greywolf ) have kicked in another $137,779,000 through recent SBP offering is quite huge { Especially when their holdings in WMIH on ( for example ) April 09 2013 where these : Appaloosa partners = 17,029,994 Common Shares ; Greywolf Capital Management = 14,938,315 Common Shares }
If you additionally consider that while HF's couldn't add ( due to 5%+ holdings restrictions ) some retail averaged down/added/entered here at 0,50$.... then the fact that HF's are currently kicking in here a "few hundreds" ( with the fixed conversion range we have here ) is not that irrelevant, IMHO,... { Not everyday you get a 4X to 5X advantage over some of the best players of the industry investments ( investment that is suppossed to bring huge gains ) }
The fact that we want/believe we deserve more doesn't mean that we are getting nothing, IMHO
I don't know if an organic, steady and modest grow or a "tidal wave" is coming but i believe we can start to look at the horizon with new and more refreshed expectancies
GL
thanks so much for bringing this into attention Large, really impressive
let's see how things go on regarding FDIC-R & JPMC
GL
I was not trying to give a market value for WMIH shares with my post ( http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=111291904 )
Donotunderstand,
Why don't you include the net/pure $8,370,000,000 ( http://investorshub.advfn.com/uimage/uploads/2014/9/4/hwvah5,96B_8,37B_View_Filing_Data.png ) Capital Loss Asset in your analisis?
Actually things have been quite opposite to that,
what I see here is that our admitted by market value (per share) was less than $1 before KKR joined us, then we cemented a $1,32 to $1.48 base value { KKR warrants price ($1.48 and $1.32) } and now we are talking about {$1.75 to $2.25}* much larger/cemented base value a share
Following a similar strategy while adding a few profitable business to our shell company will mov€ thi$ (pp$) even faster, IMHO
*:conversion price is currently (if announcement/acquisition happened today) $2.23
JMHO
ps
i)can we digest 8.37B OL in 2 years?, how much capital & how many acquisitions we need to accomplish this goal??
Hi KABOOM TIME
I've got not private messages in IHUB...
Thanks for the kind words and GL my friend
Let's see
Series B preferred authorized but pending (issue & conversion) = 10,000,000 -600,000 = 9,400,000 shares
{ per SEC filing: "...The total number of shares of all classes of capital stock which the Corporation shall have authority to issue is Three Billion Five Hundred and Ten Million (3,510,000,000) shares, of which:
Three Billion Five Hundred Million (3,500,000,000) shares, par value $0.00001 per share, shall be shares of common stock (the “Common Stock”); and
Ten Million (10,000,000) shares, par value $0.00001 per share, shall be shares of preferred stock (the “Preferred Stock”). " }
in gross numbers, we currently "have"
71,465,629 shares (from warrants + Series A preferred??, pending conversion) { http://investorshub.advfn.com/uimage/uploads/2015/3/1/ismzvPRE_14A.png ; from the "Proxy Statement": " The holders of Series A Convertible Preferred Stock and Series B Convertible Preferred Stock outstanding on the Record Date are entitled to an aggregate of 10,065,629 and 266,666,667 votes, respectively, at the Annual Meeting." }
202,343,245 shares outstanding {From SEC filing ( http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/933136/000156459015001104/wmih-10k_20141231.htm ) As of February 18, 2015, 202,343,245 shares of the registrant’s common stock, $0.00001 par value, were outstanding. }
266,666,667 shares (from Series B preferred, pending conversion, so no sure about final conversion price/converted number of shares...) { from the "Proxy Statement": " The holders of Series A Convertible Preferred Stock and Series B Convertible Preferred Stock outstanding on the Record Date are entitled to an aggregate of 10,065,629 and 266,666,667 votes, respectively, at the Annual Meeting." }
71,465,629 + 202,343,245 + 266,666,667 = 540,475,541 Shares
3,500,000,000 - 540,475,541 = 2,959,524,459 Shares (potentially pending to issue...)
9,400,000 (pending B series preferred @ $1000 per unit) = $9,400,000,000
so we have $9,400,000,000 / 2,959,524,459 = $3.1484302755319148936170212765957 a (pending) share, hopefully final issuance prices "will" be higher
Let's see if our "barbarians" can do this 8)
{ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbarians_at_the_Gate:_The_Fall_of_RJR_Nabisco }
Also,
What size of LBO could be done with such amount of $ Billions??
Large enough to monetize $8,37B in CL before expiration date??
it's not impossible, It can be done, our "barbarians" can do this, JMHO
I'll do my best to to miss this part of the saga
PS
8+ ball?: Yes
Totally Agree JB3136
Shareholders should vote accordingly
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=111270754
Good Luck
VOTE BY INTERNET
www.proxyvote.com
24 hours a day/7 days a week
VOTE BY TELEPHONE
(800) 690-6903 via touch tone
phone toll-free
24 hours a day/7 days a week
Use the Internet to transmit your voting instructions and for electronic delivery of information up until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on April 27, 2015. Have your proxy card in hand when you access the website, and follow the instructions to obtain your records and to create an electronic voting instruction form. Use any touch-tone telephone to transmit your voting instructions up until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on April 27, 2015. Have your proxy card in hand when you call and then follow the instructions.
Because a majority of the votes entitled to be cast at the meeting must be represented, either in person or by proxy, to constitute a quorum for the conduct of business, your cooperation is much appreciated.
Shareholders Meeting
Proxy Statement - Notice of Shareholders Meeting (preliminary) (pre 14a)
http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=65667428
Also,
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/933136/000119312515070176/0001193125-15-070176-index.htm
Among the matters to be acted on at the annual meeting are the (1) election of directors, (2) ratification of the appointment of our independent auditors, (3) reincorporation of the Company from the State of Washington to the State of Delaware by merging the Company into a newly formed, wholly-owned Delaware subsidiary; (4) approval and ratification of the 2012 Long-Term Stock Incentive Plan, as amended, and (5) advisory vote on named executive officer compensation.
The 2015 annual meeting (the “Annual Meeting”) of the shareholders of WMI Holdings Corp. (the “Company”) will be held on April 28, 2015, at 2:00 p.m., Eastern Time, at the offices of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, One Bryant Park, Bank of America Tower, New York, New York 10036 for the following purposes:
1. to elect a board of directors consisting of seven members, each to serve until the next annual meeting of shareholders and until his or her successor is duly elected and qualified;
2. to ratify the appointment of Burr Pilger Mayer, Inc., as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2015;
3. to approve the reincorporation of the Company from the State of Washington to the State of Delaware by merging the Company into a newly formed, wholly-owned Delaware subsidiary;
4. to approve and ratify the Company’s 2012 Long-Term Stock Incentive Plan, as amended;
5. to approve, on an advisory basis, compensation of the Company’s named executive officers; and
6. to transact such other business as may properly come before the meeting or any adjournments or postponements thereof.
SEC FILINGS
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/933136/000156459015001104/0001564590-15-001104-index.htm
Effective February 25, 2015, we increased the number of shares authorized and available for awards under the 2012 Plan from 3.0 million to 12.0 million shares of WMIHC’s Common Stock, subject to approval by the shareholders of WMIHC. Effective February 25, 2015, we increased the number of shares authorized and available for awards under the 2012 Plan from 3.0 million to 12.0 million shares of WMIHC’s common stock, subject to approval of shareholders of WMIHC.
Pursuant to the Series B Preferred Stock Financing, WMIHC is required to reincorporate in Delaware by July 4, 2015. The proposal to reincorporate in Delaware will be voted on by our shareholders at our next annual meeting of shareholders. For further information on the Series B Preferred Stock Financing, see Note 15: Subsequent Events, to the consolidated financial information in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
http://globalnews.ca/video/1838837/extra-the-whistleblower
”JPMorgan was one of those big players that was very much involved in these kinds of bad loans,” explains William Black, an associate professor of economics and law at the University of Missouri in Kansas City.
“What Ms. Fleischmann was to deliver on a platinum platter, a criminal case, against the senior managers of JPMorgan,” explains Black, “of course that didn’t happen.”
Black says it’s easy to get CEOs to agree to huge fines in an organization because they don’t have to pay out of their own pocket.
“Here’s what the CEO cares about. #1: I don’t go to prison. #2: I don’t lose my job. #3: I don’t have to pay back my bonuses,” Black says.
{ http://globalnews.ca/news/1841103/canadian-whistleblowers-testimony-leads-to-multi-billion-dollar-settlement/ }
Doreen Logan
dmac4_2, thanks so much for allowing me to quote your post (initially posted in boardpost MB); dmac4_2 is a former WAMU employee, he worked for WAMU when it was seized...
Quote from: dmac4_2 on July 21, 2014, 08:57:40 AM
" Doreen Logan should know what belongs to WMI and what was taken including any residual interest certificates. She was in Treasury for years and then transferred to Capital Markets. "
Fortunately Doreen Logan is working for us (in the WMI LT)
{ https://www.linkedin.com/pub/doreen-logan/53/909/332 }
{ Doreen is currently living in Arizona with her husband Steve. She is completing her Master of Arts in Religion Global Studies through Liberty University.
Background
Doreen is a CPA and Chartered Global Management Accountant, AICPA; spent 2 years in Cameroon as an Assistant Comptroller with the Cameroon Baptist Convention, and has worked in the financial arena with Washington Mutual Bank, Washington Mutual and WMI Liquidating Trust in California and Washington.
Doreen has a passion for global missions, and compassion for the lost and hurting. Oh, she also has a great sense of humor!
( http://www.ason.org/about/board-of-directors/55-arizona/276-doreen-logan ) }
You are Wellcome investorhub123,
" To protect the confidentiality of the innocent parties and to avoid further litigation by the wrongdoers, all names used in the book are fictitious, as is the name of the government regulatory agency. This book is the account of John Doe, MBA, CPA, whistleblower, certified examiner at the Financial Regulatory Agency. Mr. Doe has risen through the ranks in a long established professional career at the Financial Regulatory Agency spanning nearly 25 years. He headed up the Large Insured Depository Institutions program for nearly a decade leading up to the banking crisis. Agency officials removed him from the role once he made repeated disclosures to the Chairman at the agency, Ombudsman, Inspector General, and others about the deficiencies discovered in the agency’s bank monitoring system. Mr. Doe currently has two formal legal complaints pending with the Office of Special Counsel and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Mr. Doe reluctantly became a whistleblower at the agency once he realized the government was a partner in enabling patterns of defective loans which sparked the recession. Like other government whistleblowers, Mr. Doe was ignored and silenced at the agency until stripped of all relevant duties without explanation after warning repeatedly that a “crisis of our own design” would lead to the bank failures that subsequently occurred. For example, he blew the whistle on a secrecy loophole that created a knowledge gap for risks by non-bank affiliates of consolidated bank holding companies -- the only Financial Regulatory Agency oversight of overall risks at institutions like Citigroup, Bank of America, Wachovia and Washington Mutual.
Had the government listened, billions of dollars could have been saved. Of course, the harm and disruptions the mortgage crisis caused homeowners may have been spared in part as well.
This is the inside story. "
http://www.amazon.com/American-Betrayal-ebook/dp/B00BKZ02UM
You are Wellcome Bizreader, happy to know you contacted him
Dwight Haskins
" Summary
Retired due to health issues. Former government whistleblower at FDIC where I headed up large bank oversight program during the years leading to the banking crisis. I warned top officials, chairman, ombudsmen, Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, and inspector general how managers were burying analyses that warned them of rising risks in the large banks and likelihood of a banking crisis.
***
With sadness, I removed my blog from the Web due to demands by FDIC legal counsel, Sept. 13, 2013. While I do not believe I violated any laws or regulations by posting my disclosures, I agreed to refrain from posting any information which gives an appearance of violating a confidentiality agreement when I was an employee of the FDIC.
I am guided by core values which support community activism; diversity; open communication, engagement, and mutual respect. We need to encourage people to have a good conscience and support whistleblower rights if we truly want an open and transparent government.
My journey as a government whistleblower can be summed up as:
"Nobody cared, then they did ... when it was too late. Why?"
Here is a link to my book for free. Cut and paste this link.
https://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20140709060215-20494629-fdic-betrayal-how-the-lone-whistleblower-at-the-agency-was-squashed-like-a-bug?trk=mp-reader-card
Here is a link to my posts. Cut and paste this link.
https://www.linkedin.com/today/author/20494629?trk=pulse-det-athr_posts "
{ https://www.linkedin.com/pub/dwight-haskins-person-of-conscience/6/a44/399?trk=pulse-det-athr_prof-art_hdr }
Maybe this info has been posted before, I don't know, I found it interesting
Volume is ridiculous but pps is going up strong, besides we have broken sma(20),sma(50) & sma (200) recently
Royal Dude
Not 100% sure my friend, I heard about those bankers "suicides", something really dark must be the reason... avoid whistleblowing? Could be, time will let us know JMHO
Hi thenurseisback
" ESCROWS STILL SHOW ZERO? "
they STILL do
"No one on this board has access to the sealed documents"
regarding this:
i) the number of members (and potential members) is really huge
ii) the meaning of SEALED in the internet era is quite relative... JMHO
GL Nurse
" What J.P. Morgan’s ‘Worst Nightmare’ Thinks About Whistleblowing " (Feb 11, 2015)
http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2015/02/11/what-j-p-morgans-worst-nightmare-thinks-about-whistleblowing/
"... Do you think justice was done?
AF (Alayne Fleischmann): Certainly not yet. I’m still hopeful that, with enough public pressure, criminal cases will be brought against the individuals responsible, not just at J.P. Morgan but also at the other banks that sold fraudulent securities.
My fundamental concern is that these banks are using their lawyers, lobbyists, and PR groups to protect individuals who should clearly be charged and tried in a court of law..."
"... “They were purchasing these loans that they knew people couldn’t pay back,” Fleischmann said.
Fleischmann tried to warn her bosses, but was stunned when she was told not to write e-mails about the problem she claimed to see. “This [was] a massive fraud against ordinary American.” ... "
{ http://globalnews.ca/news/1781678/how-b-c-lawyer-alayne-fleishmann-became-the-9-billion-witness/ }
http://www.wsj.com/articles/paul-kupiec-and-peter-wallison-the-fdics-bank-holding-company-heist-1419292997
" The FDIC’s Bank Holding Company Heist
Recapitalizing a failing subsidiary bank with the assets of the parent firm is contrary to law
By
Paul H. Kupiec And Peter J. Wallison
Dec. 22, 2014 7:03 p.m. ET
Limited liability of shareholders is a basic principle of corporate law. Shareholders can suffer the complete loss of their investment in a corporation, but creditors of the corporation cannot sue shareholders to recover what they may have lost in a corporate bankruptcy. Yet to “protect” against future financial crises, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. has proposed a new bank-resolution process that would upend this principle.
The 2010 Dodd-Frank financial law authorizes the Treasury secretary to seize control of failing “systemically important financial institutions” and turn them over to the FDIC for “orderly” liquidation. This was intended to be an alternative to bankruptcy which, following the 2008 Lehman Brothers bankruptcy, has been portrayed (erroneously) as a disorderly process.
But here’s the rub. The largest, systemically important banks in the U.S. are subsidiaries of still larger bank holding companies. The FDIC’s proposed new bank-resolution process would seize the property of these bank holding company shareholders and creditors to bail out the creditors of a failing subsidiary bank, which is not authorized under Dodd-Frank.
This idea has gained momentum among bank regulators since it was introduced late last year and is likely to be adopted by the FDIC in the near future. Never mind that the plan is at odds with the way corporate law applicable to banks has worked in the U.S. for many years. Or that, as designed, the plan could impose losses on a bank holding company far in excess of its equity investment in a failing bank.
Assume that a bank holding company has $600,000 in equity and $1 million in assets, which includes an investment of $500,000 in a subsidiary bank. If the bank suffers a $1 million loss, it will wipe out the holding company’s investment in the subsidiary bank. Although the loss would cause the subsidiary bank to fail, under limited shareholder liability the bank holding company would still have $100,000 in equity and $500,000 in assets.
Under the FDIC plan, however, the agency will seize all the remaining bank holding company assets and use them to recapitalize the failed bank. In effect, in order to protect the creditors of the bank, the shareholders of the bank holding company are wiped out.
This outcome is no different than if a court were to hold that the owner of shares in a bank is personally liable for its losses, something that has not been done in the U.S. since bank shareholders faced “double-liability,” which was eliminated by law in 1953.
This confiscatory plan for carrying out the FDIC’s Dodd-Frank authority has no legal basis. Title II of the law authorizes the Treasury secretary to seize a bank holding company only if the holding company is in danger of default. Yet regulators claim they have the power to compel a bank holding company to recapitalize a subsidiary bank even if doing so violates limited liability and renders the holding company insolvent.
Not only is there no authority anywhere in Dodd-Frank for the FDIC to seize the assets of a solvent bank holding company, there is also no authority to use those assets to recapitalize a failing subsidiary.
It is important for Congress to address this issue in its next session. If the FDIC were ever to use this plan for a failing bank, likely in the midst of a financial crisis, the shareholders and creditors of the bank holding company would surely sue to prevent the taking of their property without legal authority. Courts, looking at a settled provision of corporate law, would want to see some legal support for FDIC authority to take the bank holding company’s property. Finding none, it is likely the courts would stop what could be a necessary step to keep a large failing bank from causing a wider financial crisis.
All indications are that the FDIC will proceed with this proposal unless Congress intervenes. There are two possibilities. Congress can amend Dodd-Frank so that it explicitly authorizes this regulatory overreach—putting shareholders and creditors of bank holding companies on notice that they are at risk for the losses of subsidiary banks. Or it could simply make clear that taking the property of bank holding companies to save the creditors of a subsidiary bank is not permissible.
What is important, however, is that Congress act, one way or the other.
Mr. Kupiec, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, has held senior positions at the FDIC, IMF and Federal Reserve. Mr. Wallison, an AEI senior fellow, was general counsel of the Treasury in the Reagan administration."
{ http://www.wsj.com/articles/paul-kupiec-and-peter-wallison-the-fdics-bank-holding-company-heist-1419292997 }
This applies to UWBKQ JMHO, the following is also related
http://www.arnoldporter.com/resources/.../publications.cfm?action=advisory&id=1209
" The House of Representatives passed the Financial Institution Bankruptcy Act of 2014 (H.R. 5421) on December 1, 2014. The bill, if enacted, would add provisions to the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, including a new "subchapter V" of chapter 11, under which "covered financial institutions" would be eligible to be debtors in a chapter 11 bankruptcy case.
The House Report says that the bill seeks to implement a "transparent judicial process that allows for the reorganization, rather than the liquidation, of a large financial institution" as a "preferable resolution strategy because of, among other things, the benefits of due process."1
H.R. 5421 would "amend[] chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code to address better the unique challenges presented by the insolvency of a financial institution and better allow such an institution to be resolved through the bankruptcy process."2 It would allow "the … holding company that sits atop the financial firm's corporate structure to transfer its assets, including the equity in all of its operating subsidiaries, to a newly-formed bridge company over a single weekend. The debt, any remaining assets, and equity of the holding company will remain in the bankruptcy process and absorb the losses of the financial institution."3
H.R. 5421 would function as an alternative to the FDIC receivership proceedings under title II of the Dodd-Frank Act, although the House bill does not expressly repeal title II of Dodd-Frank.4 H.R. 5421 would use a "single point of entry" approach that is similar to an FDIC receivership. "Single point of entry" refers to placing only the parent or holding company, and not its various subsidiaries, into bankruptcy.5 "
Thanks for your answer New ¡¡
GL