Lovin' it !
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.
It does not put wamuq in the money. That claim was not listed on the a/ls.
See this post.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=43049053
Absolutely no basis whatsoever. Look at the lack of movement/buying on the WMI preferreds, and that should tell you all you need to know imo.
Do you have a link to support that?
You forgot to mention set-offs. Make sure all facts are included when attempting to tell others what values to assign.
I think that is a great idea, and I would venture to guess that if everybody on these boards started doing that, then the price would indeed go up quicker than if they left them in their brokerage accounts with sell orders at $1000.
When a "lawyer" tells people that a summary judgement in this case could come at anytime, please keep in mind that just because something "could" happen, certainly does not mean that it is likely to happen.
JPM could offer $100/per share of WAMUQ, but it is not likely.
No big news today!
You know as well as I do that there is no chance that the judge would simply write "For the judge to deny the summary judgment all she has to write is "Motion for Summary Judgment denied". " without a well-supported and thought opinion on the matters at hand. Could she do it? Yes. Is it realistic to suggest that she would do that? Absolutely not!!!!!!!
Also, if these are such no-brainer decisions as you suggest, then why haven't these easy, clear-cut decisions been made?
Also, you claim that WMI picked DE because of precedent, but then you go on to say that you don't understand where posters assume DC will be favorable to either the fdic or JPM.
Not much consistency imo.
The next omnibus isn't for a little under a month, but I believe on Tuesday Judge Sleet is supposed to hear arguments regarding JPM's appeal.
If I am incorrect, then someone please correct me.
I would suggest using this site http://www.ghostofwamu.com/ (ghost does a great job of staying on top of all of the related proceedings) in conjunction with this site http://www.kccllc.net/wamu for court related filings and updates.
Have a good night!
That's not true, it was simply uneventful, which was to be expected.
There were only minor items on the agenda, mostly small claims and a few objections that were sustained in WMI's favor.
The hearing only lasted like 15 minutes.
If you want to listen to it, then here is some useful info:
To be notified as the audio archives become available:
http://twitter.com/WaMuAudio
AUDIO ARCHIVE:
The archived audio is:
http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=b932994e293c11f5c79b87b207592a1c837eb5569e6fa9e64ca8d2a77d7aad89
from DanBB's post:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=42913404
If you have shares set to sell at $1000, you can bet that your broker will short them for sure, if they haven't already.
lol Wait to average down until after the stock goes up ?
Kind of defeats the purpose doesn't it?
If you didn't sell, aren't going to sell, and you are confident in your investment, then you should definitely average down imo.
Sleet seems like the kind of person that wants this in his court, and Walrath obviously doesn't seem to concerned about anything. It's as if she already knows that she won't be ruling on anything major, and I'm sorry to those who think that bk court has ultimate power, but imo, this is bigger than the bk court.
Also, it's not like the "deposit" is a new issue, and although I realize that 1 year ago JPM said they were going to turn it over, that was 1 year ago.
So , there are many questions you should ask yourself, but 1 question I keep asking myself is, why didn't Weil make this a priority and demand a trial for the "deposit" a year ago after JPM changed their tune?
I also know that lawyers have weighed in here, but if the receivership came first, and WMI filed for bk after the receivership, who really has the jurisdicition to determine what is/was part of the BANK at the time of receivership? I know the bk court has jurisdiction to decide what was part of the estate, but the bk court does not have jurisdiction to determine what is/was part of the banks.
Chicken or the egg?
Global Settlement Aint Gonna Cover Commons...........
Take special note of the figure $15,000,000,000. The ultimate global settlement figure is going to be a little less than the $15 billion, but it will be pretty close.
"Washington Mutual, Inc. (NYSE:WM) today announced the company has established a US $15,000,000,000 Global Bank Note Program (the "Program") for its two main banking subsidiaries, Washington Mutual Bank, FA (WMBFA)
and Washington Mutual Bank (WMB). "
http://www.allbusiness.com/banking-finance/financial-markets-investing-securities/6067418-1.html
Don't believe the "$12+ the LAW is the LAW Go WAMU"theories .
That was regarding 1 claim, and it is nothing new.
This sums it up pretty well.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=42993573
She did not say that she would render her decision ASAP.
She said that she would "endeavor to get something out as soon as possible" at the end of the arguments a while back.
Venturing to get something out does not mean that she will render her decision, and the probable outcome is that there will be a trial regarding the $4 B.
They were relaxed because there was nothing of importance being argued at all.
The $3.6 B wasn't even on the agenda. The people that told you it was, or that it would be ruled on today lied to you.
"We'll stand adjourned then."
Now the lawyers are all laughing, as am I.
I guess you don't understand how receivership and/or bankruptcy works.
"JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon eats banks for breakfast"
http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2008/09/27/2008-09-27_untitled__dimon27m-1.html
JPM had everyright to withold the money from Lehman, and if you feel differently then provide a link that proves otherwise.
If they need to raise more capital, that means they aren't earning very much, AND they still have to pay back TARP, so it is actually possible for it to go lower than that.
Definitely not a buy right no imo, unless you are planning on selling it right away.
It's WAY OVERPRICED, and it has been due for a correction.
imo, it's going to drift down for quite some time.
Support at .30 seemed to be holding too, so did the "support" at .24, and the "support" at .22, and the support at ".20", and the "support" at .18 , and the "new base" at .15, etc.
I thought it was pretty funny when it was already trading at like $190/share, and then when earnings of like $1.80/share were announced, it went up like $15/share.
I think at some point, there will have to be a major correction regarding valuations, and AAPL is not the only one that is trading at ridiculous multiples.
AAPL still trading at over 100 times quarterly earnings.
If earnings stayed where they are now, it would take them 25 years for the earnings to match the stock price.
I'm not saying it will go down, but the valuations on this stock are absolutely hilarious imo.
100+ times quarterly earnings = way too high, even if earnings increase
Just give her a little time. She has only had 13 months to make JPM turn the cash over to WMI.
You would think if the cash was WMIs and if there were no valid claims that can be used as set-off, the cash would have been ordered returned a long time ago.
That obviously isn't the case.
Got your response, and I completely understand.
It wasn't a secret that the banks were going to be seized, and you can rest assured that WMI knew it, which is exactly why they "transferred" the $3.67 billion to the deposit account right before the seizure.
Also, their financial condition was no secret as all anyone had to do was look at their SEC filings to see what kind of shape they were in.
WMI executives engaged in fraudulent behavior, they misled investors on several occasions, and JPM will get the discovery they want both in the bk case and the DC case, and don't let people tell you that the bk and the DC case aren't related, because they are more than related.
The court has had 13 months to order the money returned to WMI, yet that hasn't happened.
So much for the courts I guess.
It is clear that you don't understand what set-off means?
Also, if the money is WMI's without a doubt, and if Weil is so great, then how could it be that after 13 months WMI still does not have control of the $4 billion?
I understand that there was major corruption involved with the seizure, receivership, and firesale, but that has nothing to do with the fact that WMI does not have control of the $4 billion after 13 months of being in bk.
So, even though it doesn't make sense to you, it is more than possible that IF Walrath rules that the $4 billion is WMI's, JPM won't have to turn the money over.
That's the way it works.
Now, look at WMIs SEC filings and what was considered part of the bank. It doesn't matter if WMI originally owned something, because once things like the TPS were accounted for as part of WMBs capital structure, they were part of WMB and not WMI, regardless of original title.
WMI is trying to claim things as their own now that they are in bankruptcy when they accounted for and reported them as belonging to /being a part of the banks.
I didn't make the laws.
It is more than possible, but most people don't like to talk about it.
The TPS claim is more than valid, and right in WMI's own SEC filings it states that the TPS were part of WMB's capital structure.
Yep.
Set-offs.
Just like in the LEH case. Everyone was accusing JPM of stealing $16 billion from them and claiming that they have to give it back, but guess what? They still have it. Why? imo, the same reasons they still have "WMI's cash".
If the $4 billion was WMI's without a doubt, then the money would have been turned over 1 year ago. Even if JPM said they were going to turn it over and then changed their mind at the end of last year, it is now almost November of 2009 and Weil and WMI's legal team still hasn't been able to get the money back which should tell you something.
Even if the judge rules that the $4b is a demand deposit belonging to WMI, that does not mean that the $4B will have to be turned over.
First of all, something isn't slander if it's true, and second of all, the law is the law, which is exactly why this process will take years to play out, and not the "settlement could come at anytime" mentality that is displayed frequently on this forum.
The trust preferred security claim has not been overruled by the judge, and that is just one of many claims that could set-off the $4B (if it were to be ruled in WMI's favor)which would prevent them from having to actually turn the cash over.
I eat banks for breakfast.
http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2008/09/27/2008-09-27_untitled__dimon27m-1.html
Funny you should mention trusts, because the TrustPreferredSecurities that were part of WMB's capital structure belong to JPM, and even IF Walrath were to rule that the $4B is WMI's, JPM will not have to turn it over as the amount of the TPS would be enough to set-off the $4B in cash.
Tell yourself whatever you want, and if Mary can do whatever she wants, then why hasn't she done anything ?
The cases are directly related whether people want to admit it or not, and I also know that people try to claim that JPM doesn't have any ground to stand on there, but that is simply false.
It's just like how the FDIC doesn't belong in court, yet there they are.
The same people claim that the $4 billion is WMI's and Walrath knows it, but if that was the case, the $4 billion would have been ordered back to WMI last fall.
March 21, 2010 is WAY TOO EARLY for a settlement imo.