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 would say to retry the download. I think the files are good since most haven't reported a problem.
Set (2) audio files are up.
First audio files are up. MP3 and OGG.
Court hearing audio
Hearing starts at 2PM.
I will be making the audio available in 15 minute increments here as .wav files:
http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=b932994e293c11f5c79b87b207592a1c3b995895f12920e5b8eada0a1ae8665a
At the end I will combine them all into one MP3 file.
No doubt our attorney's have outlined all possible paths JPM might take.. including having their own witnesses. The $4B ruling might be delayed a little while because of JPM but I really want to see what is said about discovery tomorrow.
All cleared up.
Anyway.. it's the weekend and time for some beers. Have a good one!
There was a 24 million share entry at 4:01 listed as "?" not a buy or sell.
Possible R/S and/or dilution is all the more reason to buy CIT-A
"Lehman Brothers Holdings Capital Trust V"
So LHHMQ is not in the list of my post below?
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=39702300
They are all listed as exempt as far as I can tell. See my post here:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=39702300
Why do you think you must own it before the bar date? Why wouldn't these securities be treated exactly like WMI's?
Thanks.
note: WAMPQ WAHUQ and WAMKQ all had claim forms but were exempt as well.
It is listed though. No claims forms needed.
I can't take credit. Others on the other boards found it as well. I just wanted to verify their findings for myself.
I can only compare this activity to my experience with WMI. I think these claim forms are a result of the bar date being set. IMO nothing has changed.. no set payout.. we must wait for the estate to finish BK.
I'm sure those with more experience with this will chime in.
I beleive this is the exempt list. From what I can tell they are all listed. Search for "trust iv".
http://chap11.epiqsystems.com/ViewDocument.aspx?DocumentPk=24f5d9de-55d3-405a-b29d-2065cd3e8efa
I hear some others saying that too but I haven't seen anyone post hard proof. On which document(link) and on which page?
I suspect they will be exempt but I just want to see it. thanks!
How do you know this though? Did you find the cusip in the Master List of Securities?
I searched the PDF document for the cusip and I did not find it.
I want to note that I only received a claims form referencing the LEHLQ cusip. I hold a bit of all the pref's that I was ever able to find.. and that would certainly be all those with a forum here on ihub. Maybe those forms are still in the mail.
No forms from ETrade yet.. only Ameritrade.
It looks like a claim form is needed for LEHLQ.
LEHLQ is not listed on the Master List of Securities.
http://chap11.epiqsystems.com/ViewDocument.aspx?DocumentPk=d497c648-eb7a-45b4-a594-2abc08488ce6
The claim form I have references the LEHLQ cusip of 52520B206
It looks like a claim form is needed for LEHLQ.
LEHLQ is not listed on the Master List of Securities.
http://chap11.epiqsystems.com/ViewDocument.aspx?DocumentPk=d497c648-eb7a-45b4-a594-2abc08488ce6
The claim form I have references the LEHLQ cusip of 52520B206
It's helpful to read transcripts to better understand the mood of all participants. Hearing them would be even better. I'd really like to attend the DC court hearings in person if they actually discuss anything and not just file papers. And if the court permits making audio recordings I'll record the hearing.
I grabbed another 102 shares and it knocked 19 off. I really want to see some great rulings!
I read through the entire transcript. Very educational to see the interplay between all the attorney's and the judge.
I especially liked WMI's story about trying to get an ATM card for the $4B account. Judge says, "that would be a lot of $20 bills." "We'll take it", they say.
JPM was trying to muddy the waters saying the $4B might be only a book entry or that the money came from a sub bank.
JPM does not dispute title to the account. It is WMI's name on the account. I think the $4B is ours.
I'll have to admit to being ignorant of this news. This is the first I've seen it. sorry if this has been hashed over long ago.. but what are the implications?
I am especially impressed with WMI's quick turn-around to product the response. They are really wanting to move things along quicker. They must have worked their tails off to produce it so quickly.
Thanks cents!
I've done nothing but accumulate since last year... and every week I'm more confident we'll win BIG!
Interesting article about capitalization and banks.
http://www.bos.frb.org/economic/neer/neer1997/neer597c.pdf
Owl Creek -- a good read
(found on Yahoo)
Washington Mutual
In the ten days leading up to the largest bank failure in U.S. history, in the midst of a plunging stock price and negative headlines, Washington Mutual experienced a fatal “run on the bank” as paranoid customers withdrew more than $16 billion of deposits. On September 25, 2008, the regulators seized WaMu Bank, the primary operating subsidiary of the holding company, and on the same day, in an FDIC-brokered transaction, JPM purchased the assets and assumed all of the deposits of the bank in exchange for a $1.9 billion cash payment. Left behind were $13 billion of bonds at the bank subsidiary and $7 billion of bonds at the holding company, all trading at extremely distressed levels. Also left behind were all of the assets of the holding company, which were lying outside the jurisdiction of the FDIC. The crown jewel was roughly $4 billion of cash at the holding company that was held on deposit at WaMu Bank (and its subsidiary) prior to its failure. This was subsequently assumed by JPM as part of its deal with the FDIC to assume all deposit liabilities. Because WaMu’s consolidated financial statements eliminate this intercompany balance, many investors did not initially realize that this value existed. And even those that did, worried that the Bank or JPM might find a way to latch onto the cash. Other non-cash sources of value include a sizeable tax refund from the IRS, a liquid securities portfolio, several wholly-owned subsidiaries which generate positive net income, and potential proceeds from a number of material lawsuits with third parties.
By locating and studying numerous documents, such as public financials, bankruptcy documents, regulatory filings, monthly operating reports, state filings for the insurance subsidiaries, litigation pleadings, etc., we were able to identify these sources of value and take advantage of unprecedented fear and dislocation in the markets to build a position in holding company senior and subordinated bonds at attractive prices. At the beginning of the case, we took severe haircuts on possible valuation because of the tremendous lack of disclosure. But since that time, with each additional public disclosure, our understanding of each piece of value has become more thorough and granular, and the range of possible outcomes has continued to tighten to the upside. Although the absolute upside is less than it was a few months ago since bond prices are now higher, the primary risks to value erosion have also lessened materially in our minds, and we continue to believe that the overall risk-return is extremely good. As a bonus, in today’s investing environment where predicting a company’s “normalized” earnings and cash flows can oftentimes feel like an exercise in futility, we very much like investments like this one which are market agnostic and have multiple analyzable aspects for us to dig our teeth into. It is worth noting that this investment process has been a team effort from the start, with numerous analysts and portfolio managers pitching in to help understand the various aspects of this case, from the bankruptcy process, to tax implications, to valuation of certain non-bank assets, etc. It is because of this, we believe, that we have largely been able to tune out the “consensus view” of this credit, appreciate it on a bottom-up basis as a unique, high-conviction investment opportunity, and size it accordingly.
Stock Limitations
I don't recall which board, but someone had said there was no limit on ownership of K's. There is a limit.
4.5% on P's
4.75 on common and "any other preferred series stock" H's and K's.
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229081119000000000002.pdf>
(grabbed from Yahoo)
"After four hours of argument.." WOW!
Rule 2004 discovery is powerful and difficult to appeal
http://www.abiworld.org/committees/newsletters/litigation/vol3num3/LimitonExaminations.html>
Excerpts below:
Rulings on Rule 2004 Examinations May Be Appealed
Rulings on applications for or opposition to Rule 2004 examinations are generally considered interlocutory. Pontikes v. SIP Claimants (In re Comdisco Inc.), 2006 WL 2375458 at *3 (N.D. Ill. 2006); In re Dinubilo, 177 B.R. 932, 939 (E.D. Cal. 1993). District courts are alert, however, to the unusual nature of bankruptcy proceedings, in which many rulings might never become appealable, and may therefore exercise their broad discretion to review orders on these examinations. The standard of review, however, is abuse of discretion by the bankruptcy court, making success difficult, though not impossible. Pontikes, supra; Dinubilo, supra, (sustaining use of Rule 2004 but conditioning future examinations on use of Bankruptcy Rule 9014 and corresponding Rules of Civil Procedure).
Conclusion
Rule 2004 is one of the most powerful procedures in bankruptcy practice. Pendency of contested matters or adversary proceedings in the bankruptcy case or lawsuits in state or federal court can make this procedure unavailable. There is, however, much flexibility in this general rule. Making careful distinctions between the purposes of the Rule 2004 process and discovery in the other proceedings, highlighting differences in the parties to the two, creatively controlling the use of the results of the examination, and avoiding burden on the target of the examination can justify exceptions to the “pending proceedings” rule.
Maybe the $15/pps trade is an error. I'm watching using ETrade.. the trade is not on the ticker.
Sure hope no one fat fingered that... that would hurt!
Or they had a stop-loss... even more stupid.
H's at 8.40
Finally broke free a bit.
Don't you mean LHHMQ and LEHMQ?
Let's see what 10:30 brings.
I agree that discovery was the big news. But Walrath exercising jurisdiction is also pretty big. We really need a decision on some assets to move the PPS big. IMVHO
Walrath's opinion is a very interesting read on discovery. I learned from it that 2004 discovery rules offer less
'protection' under deposition than 'normal' discovery. ie.. less right to an attorney for representation during deposition and less right to object to questions.
Rule 2004 discovery is going to kick JPM's #$#@$!
Mordicai -- Is Walrath free to discuss both cases with the TPG Texas judge? Thank you for input on these issues.
We need twitter for reporting news this weekend!