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.
The 75/25 split applies only to what value comes back to LT ie if $1 Bil comes back pref's get $750 Mil and commons get $250 Mil. Your 1000 Q's only applies when the return is divided by how many "Q" shares were released to get an average pps.
Really??? You are going to base your whole argument on a case against one homeowner who probably defaulted on his mortgage??? Same source as yesterday's revelation? Good luck with that!!!
I posted this question on 21/2/2015 at 8:37pm but received no response from our board favorite. It is no longer desired since I have received my answer elsewhere.
"Questions???...anyone!!!
(1) It has already been established that WAMU at one point serviced as much as $600 Billion worth of mortgages composed of WAMU originated loans and loans from external sources.
How were these mortgages accounted for by WAMU in their reports ie were they categorized or indistinguishable from each other ?
(2) It is claimed by some that JPM "bought" over $200 Billion worth of high interest income producing Portfolio Loans for $1.9 Billion and by others that they bought the servicing rights only.
How does JPM account for the loans that they just service and the loans that originate from JPM or those that were acquired from WMB. Again are they categorized accordingly so that a distinction can be made ?"
This is great news and it occurred despite all those inane posts about Escrows...all I can say is WOW!
I find it very interesting that a new "UNICORN" theory is being bandied about but there are no long winded, complex thesis type responses forthcoming to "the bunk" same as per norm.
This is all IMO of course since I am not privy to "ALL" records pertaining to this case and would never profess that I am, as happened here on a daily basis ad nauseam!!!.
Members of this board will discuss WMIH when there is actual issues to be discussed like at this present time. Were it not for those very Escrow dreamers(as you put it) this board would be as "DEAD" as the WMIHP board. It is what it is so just deal with it already.
So true. Here waiting patiently and praying for the best outcome for us all!!!
Actually if I remember correctly, the 2.5% due to WMIH is to be paid from the 25% due to Escrows ex common shares, thus they would then receive a 22.5% return.
I have always believed that our Escrows would be paid at some point. To be honest my expectation is way more conservative... somewhere between $100-$1000(worst and best case) so I am actually intrigued that it could possibly be more.
Tanj I hope you are right since if what you are saying is true my days as an employee are over...LOL. With this said, I am still "eagerly" awaiting an explanation from a board "EXPERT" before I form a final opinion.This is all IMO of course since I am not privy to "ALL" records pertaining to this case and would never profess that I am, as happens here on a daily basis ad nauseam!!!.
That would be true except for the fact that these are the "ASSETS" that the court did not recognize or were legally exempt from the bankruptcy. How can the claimants reveal "hidden assets" that are in the eyes of the court, not there!!!!This is all IMO of course since I am not privy to "ALL" records pertaining to this case and would never profess that I am, as happens here on a daily basis ad nauseam!!!.
Sorry but did I miss something??? When was "Reconciliation" debunked and by whom pray tell???
I do not believe they will be forthcoming with any info since the bankruptcy is not closed and there are still pending claims to be settled or expunged. Any info released showing assets are available now would be like opening a "Pandora's Box". This is all IMO of course since I am not privy to "ALL" records pertaining to this case and would never profess that I am, as happens here on a daily basis ad nauseam!!!.
There is a separate board(WMIHP). Just nobody posts there.
There seems to be an unsolicited "expert" "response" or "explanation" provided on every aspect of this case thus far, so why not provide one on this requested subject matter?
The FDIC sold $240+ Billion in high income producing loans for a meager $1.9 Billion to JPM and that $0 is coming back to the LT in the form of "RECONCILIATION" from the Receivership.
This gentlemen is the true "UNICORN" theory being postulated here!!!!
Ranger...I read your post and clearly understood your point of view concerning the WMIH trading history and what can and can't be inferred from that data. Sometimes one's words can be distorted to produce an intentionally obfuscated post as with this subject among others. Do not be bothered by this, I can emphatize.
One correction. The WAMKQ should be $2.5 instead of $25
You post with such authority and confidence so let me try the same..... I DO NOT AGREE WITH YOUR ASSESSMENT !!!!
So the available court documents provide the full picture of this bankruptcy that some can totally disregard another point of view??? Please read the much quoted POR v.7 and I assure you there are vagaries present also in this so called definitive document that only the authors can decipher accurately.
Simply put...you believe that JPM "bought" all loans for $1.9 Billion and as such there is nothing left...end of story whereas I do not under any circumstances subscribe to that belief.
Correction to my last post...
"This is the post you responded to where you first misrepresented AZ's theory about KKR/CITI"...
Let me be more RELEVANT, CLEAR and CONCISE then....
"... This is why Blackstone has never been far away, and why KKR and Citi are here now ... I believe the process is about to begin reasonably soon
R's obligation to the original debtors estate ... and everyone on stand by, to help the liquidating trust handle these returns"
from AZ post#414294
This is the post you responded to where you first misinterpreted AZ's theory about KKR/CITI as he clearly stated above and made your erroneous claim that they would be entitled to 67% of any returns from "R" to WMIH which as you stated "makes no sense". Again I reiterate...any returns from "R" will flow directly to the LT only, not WMIH!!! I just added the additional examples to emphasize the folly of your initial response.
Correct!...I forgot the decimal point. Thanks
Total escrow share count may look something like this...
WAMPQ - approx. 3 million shares ($3 Billion value)
WAMKQ - approx. 20 Million shares ($500 Million value)
TPS - approx. 26.3 Million ($4 Billion converted to Escrow shares)
Wamuq - approx. 1.2 Billion shares (???)
This would mean that for every $1 Billion that returns to the trust....$750 Million goes to pref's and $250 Million goes to commons. Further broken down for a $1 Billion return.....
WAMPQ - $100 per Escrow share
WAMKQ - $25 per Escrow share
TPS - $15.2 per Escrow share(granted their $4 Billion interest was converted to Escrows)
Wamuq - $0.21 per Escrow share
I am using approximations of the data available, so some values may not be 100% accurate
Re-post#414312
Questions???
It has already been established that WAMU at one point serviced as much as $600 Billion worth of mortgages composed of WAMU originated loans and loans from external sources.
How were these mortgages accounted for by WAMU in their reports ie were they categorized or indistinguishable from each other ?
It is claimed by some that JPM "bought" over $200 Billion worth of high interest income producing Portfolio Loans for $1.9 Billion and by others that they bought the servicing rights only.
How does JPM account for the loans that they just service and the loans that originate from JPM or those that were acquired from WMB. Again are they categorized accordingly so that a distinction can be made ?
"R's obligation to the original debtors estate ... and everyone on stand by, to help the liquidating trust handle these returns "... the last line in AZ's post you referred to...
"I only have two remaining questions regarding the markers and returns to the original debtors estate"... 1st is when ? and 2nd is how much
from AZ post#414210
"However, again, and In My Opinion, KKR & Citi (and I also think Blackstone) are sittin' in the hallway waiting for the FDIC to return assets seized that have NOT been in a position to be liquidated as a return to the original debtors estate" ...from AZ post#413024
I cannot speak for AZ but I believe you are misinterpreting his posts. I always read his posts and never...anywhere has he ever asserted that KKR/CITI are here to be able to claim 67% of the returns from "R" directly to WMIH. His posts refer to their involvement when the loans are returned to the original debtors estate.
WMIH is not the original debtors estate!!!
You are correct when you said "it doesn't make sense" since KKR/CITI "ARE NOT" entitled to 2/3 of any returns from "R" due to their preferred stake in WMIH. WMILT is the main recipient of the receivership's reconciliation process, not WMIH!!! You believe AZ's theory is erroneous, so how can you counter his argument with an even more erroneous theory of your own!
YOUR WORDS RIGHT? post#414299
"So WMIH gave up 67% control to KKR/Citi...
...knowing that $27 billion was coming back????
Why would anyone do that????
That is giving up $18 billion of "known recoveries" for only $600 million in preferred stock. Maybe it is just me, but that just doesn't make sense."
Just for our discussion's sake lets say that the unicorns did come home and by some heavenly intervention, $30 Billion was returned to WMILT. Do you contend that WMIH would receive the full $30 Billion and KKR/CITI because of their preferred investment would be entitled to 67% of the spoils equating to $20 billion automatically??? I ask this since this is exactly what you posted above and I in response informed you that you were terribly wrong. Was this an example of one of the Relevant,Clear and Concise posts you were referring to?
Relax....That was just me doing my LG impersonation, and not a very good one at that!!!
Why the irrelevant and convoluted response? "YOU" posted that $18 Billion of the $27 Billion would go to WMIH and argued why would current WMIH holders would allow KKR/CITI to purchase this bounty for a meager $600 Million....remember??? I was just responding to your incorrect assertion, that's all!!! I am fully aware you don't think the $27 Billion exists, so how then can you use it as the reasoning for your argument?
With regard to the 2.5% return to WMIH that's all it is....2.5% of all recoveries to WMILT. This i also believe(??) will be paid out of the 25% return to Escrow holders who previously held common shares as per the payout matrix.
Well it's apparent that some people genuinely believe that ole "BONDS" lost $6-8 Billion of his investors money and just said "oh well...you win some , you lose some I guess!?!".
Questions???...anyone!!!
It has already been established that WAMU at one point serviced as much as $600 Billion worth of mortgages composed of WAMU originated loans and loans from external sources.
How were these mortgages accounted for by WAMU in their reports ie were they categorized or indistinguishable from each other ?
It is claimed by some that JPM "bought" over $200 Billion worth of high interest income producing Portfolio Loans for $1.9 Billion and by others that they bought the servicing rights only.
How does JPM account for the loans that they just service and the loans that originate from JPM or those that were acquired from WMB. Again are they categorized accordingly so that a distinction can be made ?
I totally agree with you 100% but to add to what you said a little. It is because equity in many bankruptcies DO NOT read between the lines is the reason why they continually get shafted. Here we have two camps...one camp is attempting to read between the lines and the other is taking things at it's face value. At some point we will get our answer and hopefully sooner than later.
"IF" that 27 Billion comes back I assure you it won't be going directly to WMIH but rather the Estate which has little to do with WMIH except for the 2.5% return....Correct???
MBS loan figure seems correct since as far as I can see is that Deutsche Bank are the only ones with an MBS claim so far. That claim is for about $10 Billion and they are going after JPM (backed by the FDIC, I might add) for compensation and not the former WMI estate.
Many times it has been said that this case should not be compared to K-mart and I totally agree. This case is not a K-mart...it's a SUPER MEGA K-MART!!! The more I read and examine the evidence, it's plain to see that basically the same playbook was being used here but just on an infinitely larger scale.
The "Moneymen" saw vast value from early on and wanted it for themselves, so they devised a plan to hide/undervalue assets to show that equity should be cancelled. All this being done under the legal protection of the law/court and once equity was removed from the picture and all other impediments resolved....guess what???....
Except in our case luckily they failed.
Question???
Was this bankruptcy ever about WAMU actually being "bankrupt" and could it really be compared to other bankruptcies where equity was extinguished?
Based on your answer...would only WMIH (Shell) be the end game?
The same can be said for those who hold your view since they are just as adamant that Escrows will not be paid anything or very little. As you stated....where is ""your""(unicorn non-believers) definitive proof of what is going to happen???
Ask yourself this question...why would the debtors/trust want any info leaked or shown that there is value left when there are still substantial unresolved claims against the estate.
When the bankruptcy is officially closed, only then do I believe a clearer picture will emerge and a definitive outcome can be predicted...pro or con as per Escrows. Until that happens, speculation is the "order of the day" on both sides of this issue.
"We just don't agree on the "what if" amounts that some claim"
With this I see and have absolutely no problem whatsoever.