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.
looks like proposed wamu settlement is helping the commons
the POR states that the cancellation will occur on the effective date. I'm uncertain if it must be the same date as the POR confirmation.
Im not suprised J.Peck approved the por. he has rubber stamped just about every else the debtors placed in front of him.
interestingly, the commons are hanging in there.
Lehman Seeks Holiest (Bankruptcy) Sacrament: Confirmation.
http://blogs.wsj.com/bankruptcy/2011/12/06/lehman-seeks-holiest-bankruptcy-sacrament-confirmation/?mod=google_news_blog
another plan was filed yesterday.
NOTICE OF FILING OF MODIFIED THIRD AMENDED JOINT CHAPTER 11
PLAN OF LEHMAN BROTHERS HOLDINGS INC. AND ITS AFFILIATED DEBTORS
Doc 22973 Filed 12/05/11 Entered 12/05/11 18:44:52
$199B under management make me think that its not their money. still, over $1B in revenue isn't peanuts. Let's hope their expenses are a lot less.
thanks for posting
They recently filed a preliminary objection to the Plan. Docket #20414.
In their own words from the objection,
"1. Mason is an investment manager for various investment funds and managed
accounts that in the aggregate own approximately $380 million of notes issued by Lehman
Brothers Treasury Co., B.V. (“LBT”), a foreign, non-Debtor entity currently undergoing
bankruptcy proceedings in the Netherlands. These notes are guaranteed by Debtor Lehman
1805577v1/012712 - 2 -
Brothers Holdings, Inc. (“LBHI”), and thus Mason is a creditor in this matter, with claims treated
under Class 5 of the Plan. Mason is a member of a similarly situated class of LBT noteholders
who hold approximately $34 billion in claims."
Basically, they are objecting to the 20% plan adjustment that the debtors are using to gain support of the creditors who had proposed different plans. they are challeging the validity of this action, also, they are planning to perfom discovery on the debtors.
I believe this good for us, because more discovery on the debtors will probably translate to more objections, and hopefully more disclosure.
i agree. Justin did a great job for equity, up until the first confirmation hearing.
I believe Mason is getting ready for a confirmation fight, and that means objections to the existing plan. Mason must feel confident about their position if they are building up their defenses and getting ready for a fight. This is good news for Lehman's lower classes.
looks like Mason Capital Management is recruiting more of Susman Godfrey's WAMU A-team.
they now have Justin Nelson.
Docket #20589
Application for Pro Hac Vice Admission filed by Justin A. Nelson on behalf of Mason Capital Management LLC. Filing fee collected, receipt #187800. (Porter, Minnie)
this is great news, and should really help. hopefully we will see an updated balance sheet soon.
thanks for the dialog, it was helpful.
stepping away for while
well, this part here makes me think that part of class 5 is going to class 3. the debtors are quite good at this shell game.
DS, bottom of page 81,
"In addition to the Distribution of their Pro Rata Share of Available Cash, holders
of Allowed Claims in LBHI Class 5 will receive their Pro Rata Share of amounts that, if not for
certain contractual subordination language, would have been distributed to holders of Allowed
Subordinated Class 10B Claims and Allowed Subordinated Class 10C Claims; provided,
however, that 20% of the aggregate Distribution from LBHI (including any redistribution from
holders of Allowed Subordinated Claims) on account of Claims in LBHI Class 5 will
automatically be reallocated to the holders of Allowed Claims in LBHI Classes 3 and 7, on a pro
rata basis. Claims in LBHI Class 5 are impaired by the Plan and are entitled to vote to accept or
reject the Plan"
well ok. i'm unsure where these claims are going.
anyway, class 5 claims are also being redirected, in part, to classes 3 and 7. 10A is subordinate to class 3.
what i'm trying to find is the updated DS. this should show the value of the new claim.
btw, i don't hold any claims in 10A, just CTs and a few prefs.
yes, i checked earlier. it's docket# 20016
J.Peck signed it.
ORDER APPROVING A MODIFICATION
TO THE DEBTORS’ DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Upon the motion, dated September 9, 2011 (ECF No. 19813, the “Motion”),
yes, no change yet. i just checked the docket for a newer version, but i can't find one.
according to the filing, they removed this part, (iv)securities lending agreements, of Claims against LBHI based on its guarantee.
also, class 5 is listed as, LBHI Class 5-Senior Third-Party Guarantee Claims
so, by removing some claims from class 5, the claim size of class 5 should be reduced.
however, i currently haven't been able to find where these went. actually, according the the DS that i'm reading, they're still listed in class 5. so, i think that there must be a newer DS out there, somewhere.
anyway, this change should help CTs, if that's your question. i will look into this as i can.
"The recent DS AMENDMENT does not help CLASS !0 A at all - as you think. In the alternative it helps us - CLASS 10 B - and also CLASS 10 C in the waterfall."
you statement from above is a bit simplistic.
if the debtor moved claims out of class 5, as they state, then this should result in a decrease of the claims for that class. this action in turn should result in a benefit to classes that are not senior to class 5, not just subordinate ones.
a simple way to understand this would to be to test a boundary condition.
let's say hypothetically, that class 5's allowed claims are reduced from $52.7B to $0.
do you really believe that there would be no benefit to class 10A?
of course there would be, it's just that such benefits are not limited to 10A.
there is nothing magical about zero, though. if class 5 experiences a reduction in claims, this should benefit the classes that are not senior to 5.
my post from the other day was incomplete, all of class 10 should benefit.
i've been trying to find the value associated with this action, no luck yet. also, where did the claims go?
the debtors state in their motion that they will remove the securities lending agreements, but in the latest DS, they're still there. it looks to me that what they actually removed was the guarantees for prime brokerage and similar agreements.
ok, thanks for pointing this out.
i just read it again. meant to do that the other day.
oddly, the Recovery Analysis for LBHI class 5 still shows $52,702M, with 12.2% recovery. i expected a decrease there. they must not have adjusted for those securities lending agreements, yet.
yes, as of now, classes 10a/b/c, 11, and 12 won't receive any distributions.
however, the debtor recently filed a motion to amend the latest DS that helped class 10a in the waterfall.
i will have to look for the details, i dont recall.
this might have something to with what hestheman was posting about earlier.
from the DS, "LBHI Class 12- Equity Interests in LBHI
Equity Interests in LBHI includes any shares of common stock, preferred stock,
other form of ownership interest, or any interest or right to convert into such an equity or
ownership interest or acquire any equity or ownership interest, including, without limitation,
vested and/or unvested restricted stock units, contingent stock awards, contingent equity awards,
performance stock units, and stock options or restricted stock awards granted under management
ownership plans, that was in existence immediately prior to or on LBHI’s Commencement Date.
Equity Interests also include Allowed Claims against LBHI arising out of, or relating to, or in
connection with any of the foregoing that are subject to section 510(b) of the Bankruptcy Code.
Holders of Equity Interests in LBHI are not expected to receive any Distributions under the Plan."
what we really need is some more information. hopefully soon, glta
Well, it's possible. in either case, CTs survive confirmation.
my understanding of the the plan however, makes me think that the debtors are being more literal with their words.
3rd amended DS, section XV.3.b.ii, page 148
"As indicated above, based on a
historic section 382 analysis of the changes in LBHI’s stock ownership, as well as the order
entered by the Bankruptcy Court effective November 5, 2008 imposing certain restrictions on the
trading of LBHI’s equity, the Debtors believe that no ownership change under section 382 has
occurred to date, nor will occur prior to the Effective Date, that would limit the availability of the
tax attributes of the LBHI Group to offset such taxable income. Moreover, pursuant to the Plan,
the holders of Equity Interests will maintain their economic interests in any residual assets of the
Debtors after the satisfaction of all Allowed Claims, which economic interests will be
nontransferable. Accordingly, consistent with the intended treatment of the Plan as a plan of
liquidation for federal income tax purposes, the Debtors do not believe that the Plan should result
in an ownership change of the LBHI Group"
and if you look at LBHI class 12, its defined as Equity Interests in LBHI. this makes me think that they plan on using class 12 for the NOLs.
btw, lots of NOLs, page 144,
"for federal income tax purposes, the LBHI Group reported a consolidated
NOL of approximately $48 billion. For the tax year ended December 31, 2009, the Debtors’
federal consolidated income tax return reflected an additional NOL of approximately $5 billion"
it's too early to tell how far the waterfall will reach, yet.
however, according the latest DS/plan, the debtors have stated that they will use existing equity to form the plan trust, which will maximize NOLs to help creditors recover. if they recover in full, then equity will begin receiving distributions. so, from that, its sounds to me that all classes must survive post confirmation. as far as actual recovery for CTs and equity, so far, they state that there won't be any.
well, i'm in agreement that some money will likely go from barclays to lehmans. also, that barclays received a once in a lifetime deal, and all sides know it.
lehman filed the appeal because Pecks decision favored barclays. still, $11B is a lot of money, even for rich companies, and not an amount to abandon lightly.
so, a quiet settlement/agreement is definitely possible.
i suspect that the debtors will have to make adjustments to the DS/POR prior to confirmation. the DS objections were postponed, and i'm sure there will be additional ones filed before then.
Lehman to Drop Appeal of Ruling in $11 Billion Barclays Suit
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-21/lehman-to-drop-appeal-of-ruling-in-11-billion-barclays-lawsuit-over-sale.html
seems like they're in a rush to confirm the plan
after reading their motion further, i'm not sure they actually support that position, but they do not object to the amendments made to the DS, docket #19813.
perhaps that motion will clear things up a bit.
The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors filed an updated statement in connection with the disclosure statement.
they support the debtors position that certain class 5 claims are no longer senior to subordinated notes. this is good news for juniors.
i will try to find the original debtors motion.
from that filing (docket #19929),
"2. The Debtors now assert that, based on further analysis, they have
determined that the Securities Lending Agreement Claims are not entitled to be treated as
“senior” obligations under any of the Indentures and are not properly classified in LBHI Class 5.
Therefore, such Claims should be removed from the illustrative list contained in the Disclosure
Statement."
also here's a footnote,
"Although the Motion is not taking any position as to the alternative classification of the Securities Lending
Agreement Claims, presumably, the Debtors envision that such Claims belong in LBHI Class 9A (Third-
Party Guarantee Claims against LBHI Other than those of the RACERS Trusts)."
this should bring CTs a little less out of the money, LOL
he shrugged of the objections, hopeful that he won't have to deal with them. i guess he decided that it's a lot easier to just be spoon fed by miller and his cohorts.
3 years on, Lehman on path to exit bankruptcy
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/3-years-on-Lehman-on-path-to-rb-2068894073.html?x=0&.v=1
yes, at least two weeks.
I read through the transcript earlier, and Peck is one cold fish. especially the way he treated Hansen. He sided with the debtors for the most part, and was only too happy to postpone any real objections until the confirmation hearings.
btw, did you notice that he dismissed the pro se objections. apparently, he was expecting your call.
I don't know, but it's possible. I believe with over $15B of subordinated debt out there, some of it must be held by large and/or institutional holders.
for anyone interested, the 8/25, 8/30, and 9/07 transcripts are posted on lehmancreditors.com.
8/30 was the DS approval hearing, perhaps there is some insight in there somewhere.
yw. we need something more. like an accurate balance sheet and A/L numbers. perhaps an update to the DS/POR that details their plans for post confirmation.
what i find difficult to believe, is that with so much junior debt at stake, why the larger holders aren't making any noise.
it's a waiting game for now. glta
lehman was trying to recover the difference between the $2B listed on the clarification letter and what actually was paid to the ex-employees. while that difference is still a lot of money, it's nowhere near what would be neccessary to put us in the money. something more significant needs to happen.
while a little more cash into the estate is always a good thing, i don't take this as very bad news.
I managed to pick up a few thousand LQs at the bid, but those days might be over.
someone seems to be excited about the CTs, that's for sure.
new docs available on epiq sys.
looks like the debtors updated the DS/Plan again.
19633 9/1/2011 Order Signed on 9/1/2011 Admitting Edgar Sargent to Practice Pro Hac Vice in this Court. (Related Doc # [19543]) (Nulty, Lynda
19632 9/1/2011 Order Signed on 9/1/2011 Admitting Lindsey N. Godfrey to Practice Pro Hac Vice in this Court. (Related Doc # [19544]) (Nulty, Lynda)
19631 9/1/2011 Amended Order Signed on 9/1/2011 (I) Approving the Proposed Disclosure Statement and the Form and Manner of Notice of the Disclosure Statement Hearing, (II) Establishing Solicitation and Voting Procedures, (III) Scheduling a Confirmation Hearing, and (IV) Establishing Notice and Objection Procedures for Confirmation of the Debtors Joint Chapter 11 Plan. The Confirmation Hearing Will Be Held On 12/6/2011 at 10:00 A.M. in Courtroom 601. (related document(s)[19579]) (Nulty, Lynda)
19630 9/1/2011 Disclosure Statement / Blackline: Debtors Disclosure Statement for Third Amended Joint Chapter 11 Plan of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and its Affiliated Debtors Pursuant to Section 1125 of the Bankruptcy Code filed by Lori R. Fife on behalf of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.. (Fife, Lori)
19629 9/1/2011 Disclosure Statement / Debtors Disclosure Statement for Third Amended Joint Chapter 11 Plan of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and its Affiliated Debtors Pursuant to Section 1125 of the Bankruptcy Code filed by Lori R. Fife on behalf of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.. (Fife, Lori)
19628 9/1/2011 Chapter 11 Plan / Blackline: Third Amended Joint Chapter 11 Plan of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and its Affiliated Debtors filed by Lori R. Fife on behalf of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.. (Fife, Lori)
19627 9/1/2011 Chapter 11 Plan / Third Amended Joint Chapter 11 Plan of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and its Affiliated Debtors filed by Lori R. Fife on behalf of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.. (Fife, Lori)
Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. says a portion of the nearly $30 billion in claims filed by J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. in Lehman’s bankruptcy case should be sharply reduced, WSJ reports
http://blogs.wsj.com/bankruptcy/2011/09/01/the-daily-docket-solar-darling-to-file-for-bankruptcy/
yes, looks like J.Peck wants to deal with the objections during confirmation. he's probably expecting more of them to be settled before then.