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 agree it sucks! Our only hope is someone with a big stake files an Appeal.
BTW here is Steinbergs # if you want tto thank him 1 212 556 2158
It worked thanks, I just emailed you.
Linda,
I just checked no new email.
Tom
I agree I wouldn't sell, the risk is minimal now, but after JMW rules, and she is anxious to end this, there will be a long wait for any further action with any result.
I'm not saying Art constructed it all I'm saying is they want him to go away and offered him out of our share. If we get the proper conversion rate this will throw a monkey wrench into the settlement with the EC.
Also heat of the moment but i do not put anything past Rosenrat!
I was just guessing on the trigger but 74% of the newco I believe would be 74% of the $57 million allocated to equity. Is that correct? And if so $42 million divided by 110 million = .38!
Much , much better than the Stip.
Of course it would be great to get the full litigation award but thing have been going badly and .38 looks good right now.
Great and Thanks, I will email you since I agree with what you are saying and this way I will not let my anger toward the Judge come thru, if I write my own objection..
I do not know where all the other great analytical minds on this board went to but our strategy should be and correct me if I’m wrong.
Object to the Judge’s ruling by Jan 25, and not because we were ruled equity, because she will not reverse herself, but to clarify our conversion formula to equity. If we are equity then Judge Walrath relied on the Dime Warrant Agreement to convert us from warrants to common stock, so in accordance with consistency we should convert our warrants based on the Dime Warrant Agreement conversion formula.
The trigger? What better date than the Judge’s ruling that we are equity?
Dime Litigation Prospectus
Upon the occurrence of the trigger, you will receive the right to purchase
your pro rata portion of an amount of our common stock equal to the adjusted
litigation recovery divided by the product of (1) our adjusted stock price
multiplied by (2) the number of LTWs issued and reserved for issuance. When you
exercise your LTWs, you will be required to pay an exercise price equal to
$0.01 per whole share of our common stock you will receive as a result of that
exercise. In the case of a reclassification, reorganization or combination by
us, the exercise price formula will be adjusted. See "Description of the LTWs--
Adjustments" beginning on page 17.
For example, if the adjusted stock price of our common stock on the
occurrence of the trigger was $20.00, the number of LTWs issued and reserved
for issuance was 110,000,000 and the adjusted litigation recovery was $250
million, then the number of shares of our common stock issuable upon exercise
of each LTW would be 0.1136 ($250,000,000 / ($20 x 110,000,000) = 0.1136).
Using our numbers
$337,000,000 / ($.06 x 110,000,000) = 51 shares
51 shares x 110,000,000 = 5.6 billion shares
75% of newco stock
We need a clarification in order to make an intelligent choice regardin the Stip.
Question: When do we vote on the Stip? It should be after Jan 25, correct?
Paper by mail is how I always go but I’m always dubious as to whether the Judge ever reads any motions filed.
Do you think Judge Walrath will read the objections?
If he is Appealing wouldn’t that mean he is not in agreement on the Stip.
I thought he was part of the negotiated Stip. I’d rather he was not a part of the Stip. Then the Stip was to buy him off? Because the Stip is a bad deal for us warrant holders.
A party can also attend a hearing telephonically.
How is that done? I’m not too savvy when it come to electronic filings, etc.
At the hearing the JMW will ask if any objection were filed and BR will read off the main objection points. No one has to be at the hearing although she will likely ask if anyone would like to be heard. Pending any objection JMW can ether ask for changes in the settlement, accept Art’s appeal to move to Judge Block (not likely) or put her rubber stamp and approve it.
OK..thanks! I will start som arguments and post for review, but i'm sure JMW will deny. Will BR read anything that has not been raised or might sway the Judge? Not likely. But it is a matter of principal to have our say without getting to nasty..
Did anyone ask Art that if we accept the Stip are we precluded from filing a petition with Judge Blocks Court?
that's correct...Agree to Stip no Appeal.
Yes it is not hard. The last time we filed objections (about 30) they were all consolidated and Art carried the ball; we did not have to appear.
But now what happens since he is part of the Stip...who represents us in Court?
The Court consolidated our claims because they didn’t want to be mobbed and it was a good way to hold off our anger. Now they are ready to close shop on us and MW is just going to DENY and wrap this up one time instead of dealing with us at every hearing. Does that make sense?
We can file objections, I did in the past, but if you do not show in Court it will not be heard. Correct?
Yes, anything that can keep us in the game and get Judge Block looking at the BK ruling and what he could do in his Court regarding the award.
A good start!
It reminds me of a joke;
What are 10 lawyers doing chained together at the bottom of the ocean?
A good start!
I know it's a big problem. We need someone in DC. I am in NYC. We need a motion prepared first and filed. Then maybe someone close can appear if a hearing is set. I would be willing to be part of a team.
I did forget, but I'm not sure i'm pleased. What will their fees be against our .09 cent? Art already has a claim of .028!
If we go pro se we can formulate our arguments and strategy in each counter motion filed, but someone who can articulate our position in Court would have to be there at each hearing and others for support. It is a large endeavor.
I guess it depends how much you have invested in this thing.
I don't see much downside. After we file they file and we have counter arguments. We need someone to represent us. Unless we go pro Se, but that will be difficult.
It sounds like we are better off without the LTW Stipulation. Then we would be back at getting 30% of about $57 mil. This is the most confusing mess i've ever seen, you don't know who is working for who, and whose side your own lawyer is on (Art).
I agree…where are all the others? in shock!
Maybe we were in the wrong Court and counted too much on Art, but this Stip is a sellout and Art still gets paid. (What did he really negotiate, our position or his fee?)
Anyone have a boiler plate type petition we can all complete Pro SE and file with Blocks Ct for him to rule on before he closes down his proceeding?
Taking it to Blocks Court is our last chance for an honest look at this and a return of our Award.
We are done in BK Court!
We either take the deal or opt out and go it alone..
so let's try Blocks Court before the deadline (Feb 1,?)
Judge Block's Anchor Litigation proceedings?
Like I stated last week (Tues.) I thought Jan 11th we would be toast, but 10 cents is a little better than toast….but not much.
Some of the other posters on this board, when discussing how Judge Block might play a role in this royal screwing had said that we could file something with his Court (maybe it was Grunge or Merchant or Wallst, I don’t remember). What exactly was it that we could file?
Question: Can we petition Blocks Ct for the difference of what we get from the BK Ct and the Litigation proceedings? For instance and argument sake, we get a total value from BK of $20 mil leaving us out $317 mil of Litigation proceedings uncollected. We petition Blocks Ct for that part of our award that is currently held in dispute. Basically settling with BK CT giving them their undeserved releases, but pursuing our claim were the money really is and recover our economic loss.
Our position is simple “It’s our money” and Judge Block understands our claim.
What do our legal friends think? Is this a possible strategy? Seems fair, but lawfully I do not have any idea?
Yep, we’re toast after Wednesday’s Hearing; I hate to admit it.
Maybe if we all (DIMEQ) filed objections to the upcoming POR and showed up 100 strong at Court on Wed.(power in numbers) someone would have taken notice to MW’s unjust ruling but now it’s over.
Appeals if any take a long time…back to .02-.03!
Beyond all the great point to argue MW does not care!
Good bye and good luck to all!
Question:
The POR grants releases to the BOD for their Breach; Does that cover all breaches (warrant holder and/or Equity holders) or is it specific to any one class and if so, do we have to get it out of the POR in order to keep our claim alive??
Anyone have an answer? The hearing is on Jan11, 2012
I wish someone would clarify this.
Thanks!
That is object to it to stay in the game?
I agree. Would we have to appeal the POR on Jan 11?
How about this theory,
the Judge MW couldn’t see why the debtors should pay from their share, the $337 award transferred out by the BOD fiduciaries, even though this was never argued (unless I’m mistaken)
And since the Judge in all her wisdom ruled against clawing back the award (or something to that effect) she now can pretty much say “you go after the BOD and their O&D insurer”
and not allow releases, regarding the breach against the warrant holder and thus leave this out of the POR #7.
If not then we should argue this in objecting to the POR because it is not within the law to allow the release from liability for their breach of fiduciary duty.
Maybe Judge Block could intervene, for he does not fear the FDIC or JPM or some large Rosenrat law firm and he could see the large injustice carried out by MW (we can forgive Mary for she does “not have a clue”)
Block knows who the litigation award belongs to!
I feared that!
it is the 4th...if they don't get it by tomorrow, they can suck wind. I will personally deliver Rosen's right up his ?#%$
I just filed my objection to the 7th POR deadline tomorrow. Some sham, ruling today deadline tomorrow.
How can this fly, the way this Kangaroo court set this one up? What a disgrace!
Jmbell42
I have to give you credit for a lot of patients with the forgoing interpretation of the opinion on Tranquility bordering on arguments that might be made by Rosen.
Imo.
Yes thanks it looks good.
I love this:
Even if the language in 510(b) was ambiguous, equitable
concerns weigh against subordinating Tranquility’s claim.
Tranquility did not purchase a security of the Debtors and did
not assume the risk (and potential rewards) that a shareholder of
the Debtors assumed.
And also the objection to the POR #7
A good day!
Happy Holidays! :)
Deleted again, what for calling Marayata annoying?Oh well, she really is obnoxious and condescending.
Look at her statements in her posts below
Post 5251 Now run along... let them them mediate.
Post 5254 Why, because you don't know what is going on and need someone to tell you or read to you? Need hand holding?
Get a clue please.
How about some other opinions about her attitude in her statements (I’m assuming she is female).
Anyway don’t worry I won’t post anymore. You are a little too sensitive.
Happy Holidays and may Dime prevail!
In your opinion, doubtful!
If it was that simple this would have ended July 2010.
Within the law?
In the event Dimeq is deemed equity, is it within the law not to recognize the LTG warrant agreement conversion rate or more importantly to release the BOD from liability for breach of fiduciary responsibility?
I think not..
imo