Democracy starts with you, tag your it! ...Thom Hartman
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.
Bob, exactly right. remember, WMI's subsidiary who holds the ABS,MBS,RMBS trust assets and interest, WMI INVESTMENT (WMIIC), filed bankruptcy before its parent WMI did.
WMIIC filed bankruptcy first, to protect its assets from creditors of the holding company WMI in the 2nd bankruptcy....by design.
WMIIC filed bankruptcy #1 with zero creditors who could attempt a hijack. The battle fought over WMI's 'scraps', was truly a battle of control over the ultimate ownership and return of WMIIC assets, being held in FDIC safe harbor and legal isolation during the not yet complete, receivership of WAMU the bank, and the resolution of WMI consolidated entities.
Not mention, 8 years till now - AND still continuing, of our % of ABS, RMBS, MBS certificate investment payments and compounding interest still being collected, is going to be massive in and of itself.
Then throw in up to 8 years of compounding interest on cash from BOTH 1) liquidations 2) refinances
Why does this mention only "funded debt" being wiped out? Why are shareholders being wiped out not mentioned?
it's interesting that the friday PPS has NOT gone to .00000000000000000001 if it is truly OVER as it seems.
a) some people 'out of the room' thought they were smarter than SG's Edgar Sargent and Mike Willingham who were actually IN THE ROOM during mediation - and ended up out smarted themselves....DOH!
or
b) some are playing 'cleanup on aisle 6' for some reason. to keep the facts so muddled and confused, none ever can decipher the truth.
I betcha WMIIC banked its certificate income with its WMI consolidated affiliate bank, WMB.
WHY WOULD THEY BANK WITH ANYBODY ELSE BUT THEMSELVES?
WMIIC's (the 1st BK filer) assets, were protected from WMI (whose BK was filed 2nd), AND from the FDIC, who had no right to keep anything that belonged to WMI the holding company.
and based on JWW original post including footnote 8............what if the the $40 Billion is only BOOK value?
Well, there's what? less than $15B in receivership claims?
$42B - 15 = nearly $30B reasons for DB to accept an unsecured $3B claim, and enough ($22Billion-ish) to trickle back to released equity as 1 of 2 avenues for legacy returning assets.
Jestiron, I don't have private message capability. The 59% is loss severity. so 60% of the original value is gone after liquidation/trustee foreclosure/sale.
Thousands of ABS, MBS, and RMBS securities and their prospectus' are pretty visible.
Regulatory requirements for retention of an equity tranche in those securities is pretty visible. Walrath approved federal judgment rate is pretty visible.
$240B in mortgages held in portfolio on WMI's 10-k is pretty visible. (of course when pledged to back securities and held in safe harbor and legal isolation = not visible to a bankruptcy court. The balance after around $70B in FHLB repayment, JPM's OBS WAMU legacy liquidations into $93 Billion CASH is pretty visible. $38 Billion in mortgage assets still remaining (above the $93 Billion) is pretty visible.
An examiner stating mortgage assets not evaluated nor included is pretty visible.
A claim remaining against the FDIC is pretty visible.
Rosen telling Walrath that equity is free to pursue 'those assets' outside the BK is pretty visible.
I could go on......
Thats like looking at a washing machine mid-cycle, and saying "it doesn't clean my clothes".
Its a common and recognizable pattern here.
Yes imo. Not only in what they retained, but in how they pre-planned to keep their pot-o-gold safe from a BK/receivership scenario. Pre Dodd - Frank, the FDIC had to seize WMI the holding company assets and place them in safe harbor and legal isolation, as well as the OTS regulated banks.
Pretty smart pre-bk planning and design by WMI and WGM . Safe Harbor and Legal Isolation of security assets....not just mortgages...credit cards, commercial lending, etc.....while creditors of WMI bankruptcy #2 fight over the scraps. Perfect sleight of hand. All legal.
Keep your treasure safe in a BK remote subsidiary, with ZERO CREDITORS to contest, who files first before the parent files second (by design), stick the parent with the debts and the creditor fight, stick the FDIC with unwinding the whole shebang, generate massive amounts of residual certificate income every single month with no operating costs/employees/bricks-n-morter banks........
Its a clock that keeps on ticking, while earning federal judgment rate. The number is staggering. Former equity who released will be very happy!
uh, no, that's the public case, lol.
WMIIC intentionally and strategically filed Bankruptcy #1 securing its interests in private, behind corporate veil, (no creditors=no prying eyes) minutes before its holding company WMI filed Bankruptcy #2 with the EXTREMELY public $32B in assets.
By design. Meanwhile, All safe harbor and legally isolated assets and interests had been secured privately in Bankruptcy #1.
Great magic show by the worlds top bankruptcy strategists, now for the benefit of those who released.
That's a beautiful sight, from a very familiar page.
1) $78 Billion in assets backing securities that were pledged, not sold to the investors who earned a % of the income generated monthly........that were REPAID......refinanced.....homeowner sold......etc.
That is $78 Billion which 'used to be pledged to securities', that are now CASH.
PLUS
2) $49 Billion in assets backing securities that were pledged, not sold to investors who earned a % of the income generated monthly........that went into default.......liquidated..........foreclosure....trusteee sale...at least a > 60% average liquidation value.
That is $15 Billion which 'used to be pledged to securities', that are now CASH.
78 + 15 = $92 Billion in cash, just from freed up formerly pledged mortgage assets, liquidated to CASH.
Now, think about the nearly $2 Trillion in securities that WMI subs like WMB wrote, that WMI/WMIIC kept a senior equity tranche in as a regulatory requirement..........plus federal judgement rate interest compounding since Oct 2008..............the numbers are mind blowing!
Need a refresher on safe harbor and legal isolation, to find out how the FDIC can keep valuable assets pledged to ABS, MBS, and RMBS off its books?
"1) the WHAT mortgage assets kept in FDIC 'Safe Harbour' during receiverships
'Safe Harbour'.....you must read this........especially the second link.
I found 2 areas where 1) the FDIC has the authority to securitize receivership loans and 2) FDIC provides safe harbor for mortgage pools OFF THE BOOKS to banks in receivership to protect them from bankruptcy and receivership. I smell the holy grail trail.
Here another puzzle piece. It raises a lot of questions and points to new areas of DD. No wonder there is no court record of Mortgage Pool balances for WMB or WMI - receivership safe harbor allows the bank to keep it off the books for 'protection' from bankruptcy or receivership.
1) Apparently the FDIC Resolution Trust Corp (RTC) or its affiliates has had the authority to securitize pools of mortgages from receiverships. History here: fdic.gov/bank/historical/managing/history1-16.pdf
2) Even more peculiar is that the FDIC isolates securitized loan pools from a receivership for safe harbor to protect it from bankruptcy/receivership and the Insured Deposit Institution (IDI) is allowed to keep it off the books. http://fdic.gov/news/board/10Sept27no4.pdf
"Treatment by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation as Conservator or Receiver of Financial Assets Transferred by an Insured Depository Institution in Connection With a Securitization or Participation After September 30, 2010.............
The Rule [color=red][size=18pt]continues[/size][/color] the safe harbor for financial assets transferred in connection with securitizations and participations in which the financial assets were transferred in compliance with the existing section 360.6. The Rule also imposes further conditions for a safe harbor for securitizations or participations issued after a [receivership] transition period......
The Rule defines the conditions for safe harbor protection for securitizations and participations for which transfers of financial assets are made after the transition period; and clarifies the application of the safe harbor to transactions that comply with the new accounting standards for off balance sheet treatment as well as those that do not comply with those accounting standards. .........
The Securitization Rule provided a “safe harbor” by confirming “legal isolation” if all other standards for off balance sheet accounting treatment, along with some additional conditions focusing on the enforceability of the transaction, were met by the transfer in connection with a securitization or a participation. Satisfaction of “legal isolation” was vital to securitization transactions because of the risk that the pool of financial assets transferred into the securitization trust could be recovered in bankruptcy or in a bank receivership. If the transfer satisfied this condition, the Securitization Rule confirmed that the transferred assets were “legally isolated” from the IDI in an FDIC conservatorship or receivership. The Securitization Rule, thus, addressed only purported sales which met the conditions for off balance sheet accounting treatment under GAAP........
Statement FAS 166 provides that transfers of participation interests that do not qualify for sale treatment will be viewed as secured borrowings.....
An FDIC receiver generally makes a determination of what constitutes property of an IDI based on the books and records of the failed IDI. Given the 2009 GAAP Modifications, there may be circumstances in which a sale transaction will continue to be reflected on the books and records of the IDI because the IDI or one of its affiliates continues to exercise control over the assets either directly or indirectly. The Rule provides comfort that conforming securitizations which do not qualify for off balance sheet treatment will have access to the assets in a timely manner irrespective of whether a transaction is viewed as a legal sale.......
If a transfer of financial assets by an IDI to an issuing entity in connection with a securitization is not characterized as a sale and is properly perfected, the securitized assets will be viewed as subject to a perfected security interest. This is significant because the FDIC as conservator or receiver is prohibited by statute from avoiding a legally enforceable and perfected security interest, except where such an interest is taken in contemplation of insolvency or with the intent to hinder, delay, or defraud the institution or the creditors of such institution.....
The Rule also provides that in the event the FDIC repudiates the securitization asset transfer agreement, the FDIC shall have the right to discharge the lien on the financial assets included in the securitization by paying damages in an amount equal to the par value of the obligations in the securitization on the date of the appointment of the FDIC as conservator or receiver, less any principal payments received by the investors through the date of repudiation, plus unpaid, accrued interest through the date of repudiation......
2) the WHERE Purchase and Assumption Agreement section 3.1 - "a"ssets within "A"assets (certain assets of WMI subsidiaries not sold with the "whole bank")
It's been right there in the P&A for 6 years. Section 3.1. "Assets" sold versus "assets" not included in the sale.
The assets WITHIN EACH of the Asset subsidiaries of WMB were not part of the sale price. One of a few valuable things this includes is mortgages held in portfolio throughout various WMB subs such as WAAC, WMMSC, WMBfa, WMBfsb, etc.
This is not including and on top of any assets WMI holds, because we all know that holding company assets can't be illegally seized, but can be held in safe harbor by the FDIC per it's mandate, to protect those assets from creditors in bankruptcy.
also.....
WMBfsb is missing about $40B of money that wasn't retail customer deposits.....is that a "A" or "a"
Etc. etc.
JPM only purchased the servicing rights of WMI,WMB, WMBFA, WMBfsb, Long Beach, WAAC, WMMSC, etc per the WMB P&A and further confirmed in the DOJ settlement agreement Line 13. of http://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/resources/51720131119202421482972.pdf Whereas certain mortgages held in portfolio were not sold to JPM.
Senior and junior debt not being bought, also means noboy's selling it off en masse either....there's is no run for the exits on this product........it is being held.
Who owns most of it................our dearly beloved hedgies? previously caught inside trading and losing to equity big-time?
Scenario I see:
What's a hedge-hole to do? IF its a no money scenario with the WMB receivership waterfall, and they sell based on Material Non-Public Info (MNPI) than they'll lose their shirts again for inside trading.
AND if there is money coming into the WMB receivership waterfall, they can't buy either because of Material Non-Public Info (MNPI).
Whether there 1) is money or 2) no money coming into the WMB receivership waterfall, will never be revealed by junior or senior debt trading because those who own/hold it presently can't trade either way. The lack of debt trading indicates nothing.
Just REMEMBER: There are 2 paths of $$$$ recovery to those who released. (unless your only financial interests are Senior/Junior debt holdings in the bank only, then only 1) below.)
1) Via WMB and the receivership waterfall. and......
2) Via WMI/WMIIC, the bank holding company company and its consolidated entity legacy interests, where I believe the bulk of the $$$$$ will return from.
...WMI and all banks since year 2000, got to keep all securitization assets off the books to avoid higher capitalization requirements.
New rules in 2010 changed this among other things for any banks still left standing, although the FDIC document states that pre-2010 securitizations under old rule are grandfathered in, as-is.
Ultimately it boils down to every party knew full well the elephant in the room, and every party hoped the others didn't or couldn't leverage their way into it. The SNH's attempted to strong-arm control of the debtors as they've done since the time of the dinosaurs. Fortunately for us, these knuckle draggers shot themselves in the foot.
And if you released as advised by SG/MW and even Rosen, than you will be golden, as the resolution of WMB and its holding company WMI, is finally concluded.
The FDIC is not misleading anyone by not reporting assets in Safe Harbor and Legal Isolation.....ie mortgage, credit card, and other assets pledged (not sold per prospectus') to ABS, RMBS, MBS securities, whose income feeds tiered certificate ownership that WMI/WMIIC owns, as was a regulatory requirement, that they have significant skin in the game, of what they securitized and sold.
SAFE HARBOR and LEGAL ISOLATION = Off Balance Sheet. Perfectly legal way to hide assets in plain site, every day. Bankruptcy and creditor remote.
I seriously doubt the SEC would commence a whistle blower lawsuit without there being credible supported evidence. The SEC doesn't have a real aggressive track record for doing their job, and I take comfort in the fact they got off their collective butts and out of the office for Sandridge. And the financial whistleblower rewards are large enough, that if the employee knew by participating, they would be ending and blacklisting their future in any related field, that they'd take the time to obscond with enough 'nail-in-the-coffin' evidence. AIMVHO.
Equity wasn't anticipated to survive BK, but it did through tenacity and perseverance. You know we will upset the apple cart again. Times are a changing.
Happy Trails
What is costing $500k per quarter since 2008 for A&M to manage TO THIS DAY?
What 'INVESTMENT' needs this much management?, to the point that WMIIC, continues to pay WMIH's bills for them, without reporting this crucial information to us, its shareholders, as required by uplifting to the NASDAQ?
Grace period = OVER
Why did WMIIC (WMI Investment Corp) pay WMIH's Alvarez & Marsal bill this last quarter?
Why has WMIIC been paying this $500k bill every quarter since 2008 as approved by
BK judge Mary Walrath?
WMIH is listed on the NASDAQ with real SEC reporting requirements. WHY is the MATERIAL fact that a third party (WMIIC - non SEC reporting), paying WMIH's A&M bills not being reported to the SEC by WMIH?
Hmmmmmm, a lawsuit indeed......this is critical information being withheld to investors in WMIH stock. IT is time or else.
Excellent find!
Pre-committed assets held in escrow; for example, in a trust fund. These pre-funded contributions could be in form of "bail-in" debt, where a troubled company basically bails itself out down the road if needed, from funds it sets aside in trust periodically.
Upon failure to meet obligations, these trust funds would be then used to meet new guarantee contributions to THE BRIDGE COMPANY.......this is exactly like a bridge SPOE entity (Single Point of Entry).
"The SPOE approach therefore assures the continuity and removes any need for the taxpayers to provide solvency support"
Now, where have I heard that before - that it cost the taxpayers nothing, since Sept 2008? ; )
Who has a claim against the FDIC? WMILT.
Does FDIC trade CLAIMS for EQUITY, in its SPOE or bridge company? Yes.
SAUSAGE.
Yes, the FDIC would have those assets under their temporary control, but they'd technically reside in an FDIC bridge financial company or SPOE, as I posted. As the 'WAMU' estate and the receivership PAA is reconciled, the FDIC would use their temporary control of the assets to exchange last remaining claims for equity in the new bridge SPOE (technically WMILT has 'claims' against FDIC and didn't release). Get it now? That's why FDIC isn't released, as we are one of the claimants in line for new equity in the SPOE bridge company.
Thanks Tanja! Tim Geitners "There will be no other WAMUs" always pops up in my mind when you see the regulatory structures going forward from Sept 2008.
I wonder, as until reconciliation of the PAA and receivership is complete, your right there is 'nothing official yet' to monetize............and regarding my post on FDIC bridge companies for receivership and holding company assets (SPOE) - -- and WMILT being a pass thru trust, would any change in assets ever have to be recognized? Could the FDIC who's books are private anyway, 'launder' the value off-book and away from public scrutiny, at which point it passes through the Trust without a footprint, and then....?
The FDIC's job is to protect the DIF (even though WAMU has always been a 'no-cost resolution?). We have to go through the gatekeeper FDIC first, who creates a temporarily controlled bridge financial entity to temporarily hold assets in safe harbor and legal isolation, upon which time the PAA and resolution and receivership is finalized, and any residuals exceeding claims (as I FIRMLY believe by large amounts), are released to those inheritors of the estate, those who released. That's why at this time our claims against the FDIC is not released.
"As receiver, the FDIC would establish a bridge financial company for the failed U.S. holding company to which the FDIC would transfer the assets and certain very limited liabilities of the receivership estate." This is a powerful sentence.
The FDIC takes the new equity of the SPOE bridge company, and trades it for remaining claims (future WMB bondholders claims?) against the receivership.
"The FDIC would, in turn, exchange the new debt and equity for the claims of the creditors left in the receivership." Another EXTREMELY powerful and RELEVANT statement.
Remember WMI's 3 different Thackeray LLCs involved in mortgage assets? I do. Remember my DD Thackeray III Bridge formed in DE? I do. Remember 'WMI Parent' formed last December? I do. Remember how DE corporate annual reports remain anonymous until after the first year report, so initial filings are nonexistent ----whereby an entity could "hide the sausage" in plain view out of sight from everyone but the restructuring company by shifting to a new LLC every year? I do. Remember that our dear restructuring agents A&M has been billing to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars while our WMIH shell sits frozen? I do.
Do you think there are other bridge SPOE companies regarding different asset aspects of WMI consolidated entities? I do. Thackeray is just mortgages. What are the other ones? What else wasn't included in the PAA, and/or that was WMI's, that the FDIC is 'holding' in a temporary bridge?
The unique and one-off resolution and receivership of WMI and its consolidated entities, imo, served as a base for future resolution and wind-down regulations. It also gives some solace looking at the similarities between what we have observed and what I expect is still to come, as we find ourselves embedded. Remember Tim Geitner said, "there will never be another WAMU"
Holding Co and Bank Resolution - Single Point Of Entry strategy ascends (SPOE)
copyright 2016 - Columbia School of Law http://clsbluesky.law.columbia.edu/2015/08/27/pwc-discusses-resolution-single-point-of-entry-strategy-ascends/
"The SPOE strategy under Title I requires considerable planning to ensure the material entities under the holding company have access to adequate capital and liquidity to stand on their own (and remain out of bankruptcy or receivership) following the holding company’s bankruptcy filing. SPOE generally incorporates the assumption that the holding company will continue to act as a source of strength to its subsidiaries up until the moment it files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Therefore, during the “runway” period immediately preceding its bankruptcy, the holding company may fortify the material entities’ capital and/or liquidity positions through investments (of cash or assets) or advances.
Once the holding company files for bankruptcy, the material entities would continue to operate as going concerns with a primary goal of executing resolution activities such as the sale, transfer, restructuring or wind down of businesses or operations (including all critical operations)[7] in an orderly manner – all while operating as a going concern and not under the potential structural constraints of a regulatory receivership or similar administrative proceeding. In executing the resolution activities in this manner, more value should be preserved for all stakeholders, including creditors of the holding company which continues to own the equity in all the material entities. Once the resolution activities are carried out, depending on the strategy and nature of activities, the material entities may either re-emerge as new, smaller institutions or, having sold or run-off most assets and businesses, the residual entities (which are no longer systemically important) may wind down under a bankruptcy liquidation (Chapter 11 or 7) or receivership to complete the liquidation of residual assets. To the extent that proceeds from the sales of businesses or assets exceed the material entities’ liabilities, the residual proceeds would revert to the holding company (as ultimate owner of the material entities) for the benefit of its stakeholders.
Since the SPOE structure relies heavily on strong and detailed liquidity and capital management – at each material entity as well as at the holding company – SPOE links resolvability to other regulatory initiatives including: CLAR (Comprehensive Liquidity Analysis and Review), CCAR (Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review),[8] and TLAC (Total Loss Absorbing Capital).[9] The SPOE strategy also underscores the importance of the holding company being “clean” – i.e., not conducting operating activities or critical operations itself, and not being guaranteed by operating subsidiaries." (like WMIIC relationship to WMIH)
That is EXACTLY what happened!
Agreed, health care companies wrote large portions of the Affordable Care Act. Unfortunately with a congress sponsored by corporation, corporations write the rules and regs they want to live under. Citizens United all but guaranteed that big money and corporations get a voice far louder than most of our populace.
WMI was doing the same thing, when it benefited them. Need to protect assets from BK and receiverships? Sure, have the attorney recommend draft language for you to lobby to the regulatory board. If clarification is needed like this letter to the FASB, you work to change it.
I can! And theres more than one cartridge in his clip, lol. I'm still planning on responding to you on that FASB letter you posted last week from WAMU to the FASB on transfers of financial assets. Lotsa good stuff there - just finished re-reading it again. However, I had an idea while reading and I want to look for something first, might be a wild goose chase, but if I can find it.........than smoking gun goes to smoking bazooka.
Watch the movie Wag-the-Dog. Also research 'Issue Advocacy'. That's the what. Question is 'Who'? IT isn't good for us. Gotta watch our backs and our WMIH future.
Yes, exactly. another step to legal isolation and safe harbor. Corporations do act in their best interest with pre-planned bankruptcies to ensure the highest probability of success after re-emergence., and WGM is the best.
And something is also acting in its best interest to wag-the-dog daily.
And then beyond enforceability of bulk mortgage loan sales in PLEDGED securitizations, there's also that pesky unfinished and unreconciled Purchase and Assumption Agreement.........the longest EVER. Must be a lot of 'details'...
BUT, either JPM will either pay the inheritors of the WMI estate, or they must disgorge. I like CASH! $240Billion mortgages held in portfolio, is far more than $25B max in receivership claims.
From the PAA:
"3.2 Asset Purchase Price.
(a) All Assets and assets of the Failed Bank subject to an option to purchase by the Assuming Bank shall be purchased for the amount, or the amount resulting from the method specified for determining the amount, as specified on Schedule 3.2, except as otherwise may be provided herein. Any Asset, asset of the Failed Bank subject to an option to purchase or other asset purchased for which no purchase price is specified on Schedule 3.2 or otherwise herein shall be purchased at its Book Value.
such as,
SCHEDULE 3.2 - Purchase Price of Assets
(d) Loans: BOOK VALUE
(e) Other Real estate BOOK VALUE
imo, the mortgages couldn't all end up at JPM - but even if some were WMB/WMBfsb, there is an interesting exclusion regarding receivership and bankruptcy, that addresses "enforceability" of the sale contract.. Below is from a bulk loan sale from WMB/WMBfsb to WAAC, Oct 2005. (of course you know my feelings on 'sold' versus 'pledged', but putting that aside....)
"This Agreement, the Term Sheet, the Confidential Pricing Supplement and all other documents and instruments contemplated hereby to which the Seller is a party, in each case assuming due authorization, execution and delivery by the Purchaser, evidence the valid, binding and enforceable obligations of the Seller, subject as to enforceability, (i) to bankruptcy, insolvency, receivership, conservatorship, reorganization, arrangement, moratorium, and other laws of general applicability relating to or affecting creditor’s rights, and (ii) to general principles of equity, whether such enforcement is sought in a proceeding in equity or at law. All requisite corporate action has been taken by the Seller to make this Agreement valid and binding upon the Seller in accordance with its terms."
2 thoughts, I firmly believe and have seen a lot of evidence pointing to "Seller" doesn't mean ownership; more like pledging assets that are held under ownership elsewhere, and secondly and specifically with this paragraph above, if WMB/WMBfsb did own any mortgages midstream during the receivership/BK, this paragraph is quite specific about the rights of creditors/equity ahead of this buyer (WMI selling to itself, lol) WAAC (WAAC shell corp which went to JPM for servicing). And we are a creditor of the estate. IF mortgage assets such as these are interrupted due to receivership/BK, then this is where legal isolation/safe harbor steps in.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1317069/000127727705000807/mlpawaac.pdf
ReplyQuoteNotify
Thanks T, this is a great read. I haven't seen this before.
Great points you made, especially 'A'.
Yes, you got it now. A 5TH AMENDMENT TAKING (5AT) to prop up JPM who's potential failure would've been the largest of all bank failures.
If the American public knew how close we were to a financial nuclear meltdown, that was so bad, we had to rob a solvent historic banking institution to soften the landing, there would've been far more collapse in the markets and public confidence, leading to a much more intense and prolonged depression than the one we got.
Imagine, if the public was told we need need to cannibalize private banks to keep the ol USA from going bankrupt.......instead what we got was a blend and fold, of the good and bad, that 'averaged' the potential financial collapse.
There is a WAG-the-DOG campaign on every MB daily, to keep public opinion stuck on the fabled story that WAMU was the epic failure, not JPM.
I will say, the BK design was ingenious by utilizing "legal isolation and safe harbor".
There is an anonymous ID that was trotted out after the mortgage DD started years ago on another MB. They claim to have worked for WMB as a partial cog in the securitization chain.
Their claimed experience ignores that 1) WMI assets and 'mortgages held in portfolio', as well as 2). the FDIC P&AA section 3.2 saying assets owned by WMI/WMB subs, are not sold to JPM nor included in the Purchase and Assumption Agreement. So really any assets of Assets within WMB, were not sold to JPM in the PAA.
Further, my DD of "bulk loan purchase and sale agreements" show WMI legally sold to itself from one pocket to another, hundreds of billions worth of "loans held in portfolio" (as shown in WMI consolidated entities, consolidated 2008 10-k).
In the sale, these assets were effectively only "pledged" to WMI's own subs as buyers, and parent WMI retained title to these assets to hold in its portfolio. REMEMBER, assets within Assets (certain WMI/WMB Subsidiearies) were absolutely NOT sold to JPM, unless they want to pay for them as the PAA provides.
Therefore, ONLY certain whole bank assets were sold to JPM, excluding assets (such as portfolio mortgages) of the Assets (WAAC, WMMSC, etc which JPM getting the shell only for mortgage servicing). Then, for the sake of a 'public' bankruptcy and political flogging to hide a 5th Amendment Taking of WMI consolidated to save JPM, the FDIC in 2010 renewed and made retroactive all provisions of "safe harbor and legal isolation" of mortgage assets, which stripped WMI of one of its largest assets, the $278 Billion in portfolio held loans.
Legal isolation and safe harbor gives the public impression of diminished assets, allows the FDIC script to continue of the 'largest bank failure in history', and solidifies the legitimacy of the Delaware chapter 11 filings (2).
This Value eventually returns to the WMI estate and only to those who released, after remaining claims.
Thx bruddah! We'll see how long that stays up.....