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 can guarantee you that if those assets are hard assets, they are not going to sell them just to pay out the commons
This is laughable. WMI have to sell the "hard" asset to paid common ?I didn't hear GGP liquidate their compnay for common get paid.You know what is reorganization aren't you?
DS will be continued till the final report of examiner IMO. DS can't provide enough info for adversary parties coz it never had a proper discovery. An examiner will pan it out but before that ,I don't think we will see a ruling regarding the DS.
GSA is in a 9019 motion subject to grant/overruled by the judge,it never stand until the judge approve it.
The disclosure statement is a document that must contain information concerning the assets, liabilities, and business affairs of the debtor sufficient to enable a creditor to make an informed judgment about the debtor's plan of reorganization. Regarding the GSA combine in the disclosure statement,EC already in their discovery motion point out they don't have enough info to make a judgement call on the GSA and they are stonewall by debtor ..that's why a examiner is brough in for a independant investigation on the GSA. While everybody is waiting I can't see why THJMW will make a 180 turn and approval the DS and think EC will have enough infomation now.
So your logic to assume sep 24 she had to made a decision is totally wrong..she put the hearing on several scheduled hearing before and postponded.
"How can she reject it on Sept 24? That would mean the POR is dead. That would mean that the GSA is dead. That would mean she has come to her conclusion about the settlement, before the examiner has given his final report. This judge is nothing, if not careful. She won't box herself in this way."
How can she approve/reject the DS that tight with GSA?without the examiner's report,you just answer that urself,she can't. GSA is in central stage for all adversary parties.She has no choice?tell me a reason why she has no choice.
What I mean is judge can't approve DS without approve the 9019 motion GSA. And the reasonable of the settLement is the key why court need an examiner.So I don't see DS can go through befor examiner's final report comes out
I might be wrong but before POR can start distribute the asset to creditor , DS must present adequate info of the company asset and that's why GSA is a foundation in Weil's plan. Without the GSA, DS is incomplete and 9019 motion granted is mandatory for DS going forward ,then we can start a confirmation hearing. That's why debtor asked Judge to postpond the DS hearing after examiner's final report ,but I had no clue why Judge put it on Sep 24th's hearing.
Can you tell me how Judge can give DS a go without the approval of GSA while waiting for the examiner's report?
unsecured creditors in addition to the approx. $8 bil owed to the secured creditors
Are you sure about this?
Actually they do settle for the collateral held in JPM around 9(?)bln.
Posted by: REALtime64 Date: Monday, September 06, 2010 11:11:17 PM
In reply to: None Post # of 235460
this hearing will show most of the hidden assets this is really going to fly late in the day................
Posted by: REALtime64 Date: Tuesday, August 31, 2010 7:26:13 PM
In reply to: gophilipgo who wrote msg# 233897 Post # of 235461
like i said last week!!!! .20 is the new .17
Enjoy.
yes it's only about the account setup.9019 motion between debtor and IRS is totally different stuff. I don't understand why people making big deal of it.
It's before POR v5 and we didn't' see anything fruitful in POR V5.
No won't happen
Judge is not an examiner nor an investigator.EOM.
I don't know honestly but Weil gain a lot of respect at the beginning ,everybody believe they are doing their best to represent the creditor and shareholder,remember those "Go Weil","Go Quinn" slogan? UST might catch wind of the shame GS and quickly move in.I still remember the motion of UST to acquire the shareholder list from debtor state the negotiation might hurt Equity (not exactly word)..that pretty well state the position of UST.
Of course Joyce campaign is really a game changer as well.
This is checks and balances. You can't deny UST just by your feeling. Obviously UST has done a great job in this bankruptcy case.Without UST move in and quickly appoint an EC..we will be destroyed by now.
60 bln deposit. Not deposit from WMI. It's the bank deposit from retailer/commercial customer.
When everybody talking about imminent settlement ,settlement won't come.
When everybody expect a delay surprise caught you off guard.
Just my gut feeling...
It's okay.This is a double-edge sword. In short term examiner might hit some roadblock but eventually the GS will expired and POR will postponed. Examiner has all the power to dig out the truth and even..help to setup a settlement.
I don't think it's Judge's call.Not a professional but I think the attorney-client privileged is well protected and Judge can't just simply scratch it.
Debtor FDIC/JPM has a lot to hide , especially ,the doc that discussed the strategy .I believe examiner can find a way to get the info but expecting some speedbump ahead.
Are we reading the same doc?It stated all non-privileged doc but doesn't prohibited FDIC object the request.
Hidden asset is different from the fair compensation for WMB and WMB fsb.Did you read the footnote?
???check the docket number.
My Opinion still ,
We (Debtor) should have held out for more ( IN the shame global-settlement )
Check this thread very interesting.
http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_(A_to_Z)/Stocks_W/threadview?m=tm&bn=86316&tid=504227&mid=504227&tof=3&frt=1
(Debtor) should held up more from JPM/FDIC in the GS but they decide to ..
My Wag only of course.
The scope of examiner can still be limited. Obviously there are multiple outstanding , Adversary Proceeding, business tort claim,value of the sub..So nobody know it's really about settlement figure or scope of the examiner.
But 2 hr's meeting in chamber to hammer out a settlement ..unlikely
Another post state WMB Bondholder is not happy after the secret meeting ..they might not able to get examiner to investigate their claim.IMHO of course.
good point but in the motion from EC said document is from the debtor,not the third party and not from soloman.
I personally don't mind preferred take a
sizeable enough haircut
TGJMW is not in control. Other forces will need to step forward to prop her up.
What kinda of control you want to be ?Each and every motion needs to be signed by her.Grant/deny motions as many as possible is not the way to show the ability of "Control".
Parites had to touch the settlement or related issue if an agreement needs to be reached about DS by all .
Susman's argument is more focus on the 2004 conducted by Debtor is a premature discovery that's why we want an exaimner.I can't see this issue resolved by only turning over the document. Most likely , the more document being turned over the more evident EC will have to prove it's a shame 2004 discovery last year.
This is a key issue lead to the death of current global settment.
So Susman is tighten the rope on Hosen's neck, the talk might not be fruitful but I don't think they can just simply slice the document discovery /examiner out of the context.
It could be ,but I don`t think it`s so easy to settle a mutil-billions lawsuit within a few minutes in chamble. The talk broke down already per EC`s file.
It would be nice anyway.
your trained eye doesn't work last time about 3 million mark.
Housekeeping file,may 13,old one object to the por 1.0
Section 1129(a) of the Bankruptcy Code lists the requirements for confirmation, including:
the plan must be lawful and proposed in good faith;
impaired claims and interests who have rejected the plan must receive at least as much as they would have gotten under a Chapter 7 liquidation;
It's not about chapter 11 or 7, Preferred had to agree to take the haircut.
Shareholder do deserve a fair compensation ,
" preferreds do not have to be paid in full for commons to see a dime in this case"
I only say preferred do have priority over commons either in chapter 7 or chapter 11.
BTW settlement means no fraud committed, absolute priority still in effect.Unless DOJ step in and crime committed , preferred share doesn't need to be paid in full for commons to see something.But that will not be good for most of us coz there will be different payout between pre/post seizure.
I am not sure I get your points, the liquidation preference doesn't deny the absolute priority in BK chapter 11 case.
Do you have any precedent case that without the consent of preferred shareholder , common will get paid in the money pool of preferred shareholder,aka break the absolute priority rules?
Insolvency or not, the only matter is if the money pool is large enough to pay out preferred first then common share.That's the waterfall analysis comes into play here.
Do you have any link or fact back up your statment?
"preferreds do not have to be paid in full for commons to see a dime in this case." without the consent of preferred shareholder.
I had nothing to say anymore.good luck with that.
1-3$ for common no surprise,but will not in 3 wks.
yes.So you just going to knock on JD's door and ask for the money?
Yeah right 50 years. All the A & M expert will be lost their jobs cause no company can afford to buy the others.
Anyway I think 200$/share is reasonable.