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.
Don, I hope she will do all of that! I am certain that she could. The Tribune judge is just next door to her courtroom, and I would think they have occasion to chat...maybe he'll encourage her to do the right thing and be strong and bold about it.
she might, but I don't think that's her reputation. of course, she's never had a case like Wamu before.
its a tough call, to be very honest. I have no doubt as to her honesty or ability. however, she is as much worried about setting trends as in having her decisions overturned...and that may be our saving grace.
maybe her spunk was showing yesterday and she'll stick with that. a very good friend of mine is a superior court judge, and I wouldn't want that job for anything...I suspect its so much more complicated than we think.
JMW is very well respected in this community, however, so I will have faith in her ability...
incredulity is probably the best description, jack. the amount of lying that happens in front of her has always been certainly obvious to those of us in the gallery, but she either hasn't seen it all, or can't do anything except lay a trap...which she was doing yesterday.
however, she was shaking her head during the exchange and smiling...as I described in my tweet yesterday...sort of a wtf look.
she had also just had someone completely disrespect her in a previous hearing...I got to the court so early that I sat through the end of an earlier hearing...I predicted yesterday morning that she would not be inclined to put up with much after the exchange I heard in the first hearing.
WaMu Judge Allows More Creditors to Join Insider Trading Probe of Funds
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-29/wamu-judge-allows-more-creditors-to-join-insider-trading-probe.html
:) I agree with part of your assertion...JMW enjoys bantering with strong male attorneys. The women typically don't banter with her and neither do the non alpha males.
She must get tired of sitting up there and being treated with kid gloves, so in a sense she does flirt a bit.
She does not get pushed around by overt displays of strength, or displays that are over the top, such as Eckstein today.
I think that she is cautious by nature, and is not terribly interested in trailblazing, so that when we hear an attorney being pushy, and she backs down, I believe that she is thinking about staying on the conservative side of making a decision.
you asked...just my thoughts!
you know, the comment seemed to get lost in everything else today that we're talking about...and even when I heard it, I was concentrating more on the implied number of term sheets referenced...but in a side conversation this evening, this came up and I wanted to bring it out to the board's attention again!
no, all of the players were still in the courtroom or out in the hall. right before that, there were a couple of attorneys who came up to say something to another attorney...and at one point, I forget when, there was a slight buzz in the courtroom in response to something said.
she spoke to her clerk/law assistant, I'm sure, but no one was called into chambers.
hey guys, that comment that Sargent made about the 4 billion having been part of the estate until April when JPMC pulled that off the table...how would that affect the waterfall for commons??!!
you're very welcome!
and, i am so coming to visit the next time I cruise down that way!!
well, the depos were under oath...we don't know what they got there, and at the confirmation hearing witnesses will be under oath...
feels like the set up to perjury to me, but as i said to Chris, I'm no attorney!
thanks :)
you need to come to another hearing!
is that all it is these days? wow, what a bargain!
exactly. he was as bored today as I've ever seen. he did not need to be there, except its his show!
so very true, CWG! the entire courtroom was chuckling, and I was out and out laughing at the totally blackened page...if only it were really funny, instead of really sad!
her face was priceless today!
sorry to hear about the lack of T-storms...hope you get them tomorrow then
well, I'm no attorney...but one way could be to have them look at a document that the EC had obtained from another source, but that should have been provided by the HF being questioned...and then ask if this was one of the docs produced...when they say no...that would be on the road to perjury...no?
let me stick to my "shoes"...I do that much, much better :)
Semper Fi, sir! thanks.
Remember that today's fight was between EC/hedgies and TPS/hedgies.
The only other people who got involved were the UCC who opposed the EC motion and Feldman who supported it.
Debtor's are still involved up to their ears...whether or not Rosen said anything...he was continuing to position himself as now in support of a "global" settlement, including EC (my thought)
David,
The Rosen comment? No, he actually stood up and said that they were choosing not to get involved at all in today's discussion, focusing instead just on keeping the confirmation hearing on schedule.
This may be the only hearing I've been to where there were two attorneys sitting on that side, Rosen and another; no associates nearby, no reams of files delivered...and possibly the only time he didn't jump up to intervene at all.
Thanks for the reprieve this afternoon...I needed to get out and take a walk to clear my head.
After reviewing tweets and notes, here are some key utterances that I particularly liked today:
1. Sargent's comment early on that 'we do not need to establish violation of Federal securities law violations in order to pursue this here in BK court. While there may be some violations, we don't need to prove those here' (partial exact quote/partial paraphrase)
2. Sargent again, 'until April, JPMC agreed on every term sheet to return the 4 billion dollar deposit claim to the estate' (how many have there been??!!)
3. Ken Feldman's comment, 'SNH continue to accumulate securities that would benefit from a settlement...that they put together. It could be a coincidence...' (again, paraphrasing. at this point, both he and JMW looked at each other and chuckled)
4. Both Stratton (UCC) and Ownes (Centerbridge) separately pondering aloud the possibility that the EC would settle and leave the TPS behind.
Additionally, by her repeated questioning, JMW was clearly allowing the HFs to paint themselves into a perjury corner, and Rosen couldn't put enough distance between the Debtors and today's entire proceeding.
Ilene
not sure what I can add to the discussion, but will try a little later. heading out for a bit, when I return, I'll look at my notes and put together a summary
I understand that reaction, but I don't see it that way. Certainly the market for most of the day saw it that way, but I stand by my faith in SG to guide this case.
interesting that the Bloomberg reporter wrote a very positive headline to today's hearing.
throughout the day there were veiled references to strategy, or reminders about what the consequences might be. SEC violations, the 4Billion, settlement. and not said, but certainly understood...perjury. not a bad day in Wamuland, IMO
I think there is a rule in business somewhere that says don't let your opponents know your strategy...if they have the docs the attorneys swore they did...then maybe they buried what they really wanted in the midst of much to do about nothing...had the whole army of attorneys and hedgies up in arms...and then walked away with the most important nugget of the day...
I've seen (and you've all heard, if you take advantage of Dan's calls - thank you, Dan -) all of today's participants plead. The only one truly pleading today was Eckstein. that tells us something, right?
sorry you showed up for one of the cancelled hearings! that whole room was filled today and noisy...nice to hear again after some of the deathly quiet hearings of late.
Ken Feldman commented on JMW's demeanor today, asking if this was usual for her, since he didn't remember her this way the one other time he was in the courtroom...what has been really amazing to watch is the extent to which JMW now understands the bs and shenanigans that have been going on. her usual stern look now is often replaced with a shake of her head, rolling her eyes, or outright laughter. today saw all three!
thanks :)
Voodoo, I agree with you and I posted that earlier about the rest of the request being a smokescreen...but I also understand how a little time can give perspective. the market counts on that reaction, and then it can be a chain reaction. to be fair, this is a volatile stock and almost to a person, those that were in last March bemoan not selling out and getting in lower...me included...so I understand how fear is sparked....
it is all good...but when we expect something different, it just has to sink it. you've nailed it, I think.
yes, Ken Feldman did a great job today speaking. He and I had several occasions to talk in and out of the courtroom this morning during break and afterwards and he shared with me some information re the EC and the commitment required by it.
yes, frankly I was surprised at the time, that more discovery wasn't allowed, but I watched her being amazed, surprised to the point of blatant ridicule almost, all the while reading the monitor. So, I presume that she was simultaneously listening and reading the current or prior motion (or both) to gauge the overlap between the two...called the break to give further thought to that and then came back to rule having decided that the EC already had everything they requested, and hence everything they presumably needed, with the exception of the Aurelius piece, which she granted.
The three other hedgies attorneys were a bit disgusted with the proceeding, when it came to the TPS motion. All however, were armed with much emotion today. I don't think they were relieved about a potential outcome being certain, just about being able to report back to their clients that they didn't have to do all the work of gathering the requested docs and email.
However, JMW asked repeatedly of each attorney to reiterate that all docs had been delivered, that all internal communication had been delivered, etc...this may trip one of them up in the trial, if it comes out that wasn't so, and in fact, Eckstein, of Aurelius, tried really hard to tap dance, although she wasn't buying it, and came back and changed a bit of his statement...in my mind, because he realized the box he had put not only himself, but his clients in.
One quick anecdote...when Ed handed out the redacted report, the entire front page was blacked out. JMW laughed, and even BR was laughing about how ridiculous that was! Pretty funny today, even without Art in attendance :)
well thanks! as long as its useful...
I liked that reference :) There were two such references today, and they were sort of "throw away" lines...buried, almost, but good.
reeks of continued talks, or maybe they both know we weren't that far away, number wise?
or maybe they just know we're trying to settle.
now THAT would be a sight to behold!! not as good as a settlement...but still...
Just once, I would love to be able to tweet something really huge from court...but I think, in large part to many of the political/economic reasons we've mentioned here...that our wins will be smaller, less broadcast wins...
but you have no idea how I go into to court, eager to report a major win!!
I think our position is as good as it ever was, even though it felt like a loss today, or at least not a slam dunk win.
Our guys seemed happy with the outcome, and the lack of Ed Sargent jumping up and down beating his chest tells me that 1)he was not surprised and/or 2)it doesn't matter.
The problem with a little bit of information...is that its not all of the information...and even though we uncover and dissect so much here, the one thing lacking is a knowledge of the strategy. Which is why I keep saying that I trust them. To me, other than arming myself with as much information as I can stand, in the final analysis, it comes down to that.
When I look at the price action, it makes me sick, but is that really the true indication of the potential outcome here...and if it is, why is it not back at $.04 or lower?
I know nothing...these are just my musings...
Well said, Don.
Let me just add a quick comment, and then I really must eat something before I sit down to answer questions...
JMW ruled the way she did because all of the attorneys stated on the record that they had previously complied, and that the EC already had the information in their possession...except on Aurelius, and the additional info requested of them.
It would seem clear to me that Aurelius is unhappy to be on the hot seat...leading to the question of why...so perhaps the attempt to get the "additional" information (which was only very weakly countered by Sargent) was a smokescreen to have her hone in that which was most important, Aurelius, and to look for low hanging fruit if they could find any.
We still have the depo tomorrow and that is good. We had two parties talk to the possibility of the EC settling the case prior to confirmation, and out from under TPS, which could leave them in the cold.
There were a couple of nuggets buried today I thought. The admission that Aurelius had worked on a settlement without benefit of including all the other parties, and the veiled threat of the SEC/DOJ interest if there are trading violations...and given Aurelious' lead in attempting settlement, they have a heightened requirement under SEC rules, as a fiduciary...hence the concentration on the ethical walls (I think).
Extremely interesting to see the realigning of some of the interests...and the Debtor choosing to stand aside from the fray.
Ilene
she is slightly better in person, and approachable, to some extent..but so far, ineffective and uninvolved.
Hi all...off to the courthouse shortly.
See you later :)
Jane Leamy (Joe's replacement) comes to the hearings, but my own assessment of her, based on what I see and from conversations with her is that she is a typical government employee...overworked and underpaid...a less than passionate attorney who has little energy.
how this translates to her filings...I am not sure. she often confers with our attorneys, so perhaps she is monitoring the case until the appropriate time to file something else...
I'll make sure today that I post whether or not I see her.
I guess I was reading into it...my mistake.
I certainly agree with your thinking that they've got everything covered on their end already.
They don't earn the big money by having someone like me question their strategy, that's for sure!!
its all in the interpretation, I guess, but my interpretation is that the Debtors originally wanted to have the day before to submit objections, and to bring all supporting documents, etc to court at the confirmation hearing.
in the request filed this morning, the EC requested one day earlier for the debtor's objections and three days prior to that to submit other docs. the court granted that, so to me, its a win for EC...which makes it a limited win for the debtor. I don't know why the EC didn't push for more time to object...so I can see where you are interpreting this as a loss for EC, given that there appears to be a disparity, but I think (and I haven't pulled it up again to type this, so forgive me) that they got what they had requested.
again, to me...the one thing that BR was counting on/hoping for was the ability to drop a surprise or two at the confirmation hearing, and they now cannot do this...giving us the time to review their objections and supporting docs with enough time to be prepared.
after the last hearing, there was some concern about the EC's lack of formal request to extend the deadline for objecting to POR6.5...and even though I believe strongly in their ability...perhaps this was an oversight on their part, and has come back to haunt them...
all IMHO, only!
this is how I'm reading it. nowhere in the order does JMW grant that. instead, she has altered both requests made to her...so her granting of the motion is a very tempered win for the debtors