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.
Austin, the 1.9 billion was for reinstatement fees. JPMorgan has yet to pay for the assets they received.. if my understanding is correct. FDIC web site describes their intentions is to wait Up the 10 year max to value the assets, when there is a cost sharing agreement with the acquirer and the seller, then sell them at the current book value, which is much higher now then back in September of 2008.
ItsMyOption, to my understanding the Preferred Class19 is Non Cumulative. That all might have changed, but upon birth of the class, it states "Non Cumulative". Deep down I hope I'm wrong. Lol
No Goodie, maybe reading this will help you understand their reasoning.
From 2008 through 2013, loss sharing was o ered by the FDIC in connection with P&A transactions. In a loss-share transaction, the FDIC, as receiver, agrees to share losses on certain assets with the acquirer, absorbing a signi cant portion (typically 80 percent) of future losses on assets that have been designated
as “shared-loss assets” for a speci c period of time (e.g., ve to 10 years). e economic rationale
for these transactions is that keeping assets in the banking sector and resolving them over an extended period of time can produce a better net recovery than the FDIC’s immediate liquidation of these assets. However, in recent years, as the markets have improved and begun to function more normally with both capital and liquidity returning to the banking industry, acquirers have become more comfortable with bidding on failing bank franchises without the protection of loss share.
e FDIC continues to monitor compliance
with shared-loss agreements by validating the appropriateness of loss-share claims; reviewing acquiring institutions’ e orts to maximize recoveries; ensuring consistent application of policies and procedures across both shared-loss and legacy portfolios; and con rming that the acquirers have su cient internal controls, including adequate sta , reporting, and recordkeeping systems. At year-end 2016, there were 148 receiverships with active shared-loss agreements and $20.8 billion in total shared-loss covered assets remained.
Interesting Wording and Timeline; From 2008 through 2013, loss sharing was o ered by the FDIC in connection with P&A transactions. In a loss-share transaction, the FDIC, as receiver, agrees to share losses on certain assets with the acquirer, absorbing a signi cant portion (typically 80 percent) of future losses on assets that have been designated
as “shared-loss assets” for a speci c period of time (e.g., ve to 10 years). e economic rationale
for these transactions is that keeping assets in the banking sector and resolving them over an extended period of time can produce a better net recovery than the FDIC’s immediate liquidation of these assets. However, in recent years, as the markets have improved and begun to function more normally with both capital and liquidity returning to the banking industry, acquirers have become more comfortable with bidding on failing bank franchises without the protection of loss share.
e FDIC continues to monitor compliance
with shared-loss agreements by validating the appropriateness of loss-share claims; reviewing acquiring institutions’ e orts to maximize recoveries; ensuring consistent application of policies and procedures across both shared-loss and legacy portfolios; and con rming that the acquirers have su cient internal controls, including adequate sta , reporting, and recordkeeping systems. At year-end 2016, there were 148 receiverships with active shared-loss agreements and $20.8 billion in total shared-loss covered assets remained.
Yet Hedge funds have accumulating on the way down and at these low prices there's no major sell offs. Is there?
CIA front company who knows, but it is questionable.
Cura, I noticed that back then also. How about this theory, Great Western buys H.F. financial and then WMIH buys Great Western. It is a great strategy thus buying two in one by waiting a little longer and buying back the subsidiary of its old subsidiary. If that makes any sense... It's just a theory,
Excuse me but I'm sure he had to sign a confidentiality agreement and I'm sure the Hedge Funds are just waiting for any one of them to slip at the tongue so they can come in full force. Remember they lost the whole jar of cookies. His Silence says a Great Deal.
Figure out a way to transfer and I'll buy at .25.... but to my understanding you can't do nothing with escrow, but wait.
JusticeWW, I noticed that too. In the history of the FDIC there is no other failed bank listed as such.
That's is because the Solvent bank did not fail, j(ust my opinion).
KKR is not going anywhere, period... KKR is in control. There is a reason a shark comes around Seal Island. It's to feast!
Not if, but when they get their catch, I'm going to be around to get my handful and run before I get bit again.
Matthew, do you which of the notes are due in 2017 are those the class 19 preferred?
Bbanbob, those are my thoughts exactly. A few days back I was in the process of writing it down but had to put my work shoes back on and walk away, now here I'm reading through your comment only to read my thoughts. There's a sigh of relief to know I'm not alone in my thoughts and that there's another crazy out there who thinks like me. Lol...
Thank you, there are a lot of people who talk and don't do, but you do and then talk. I appreciate you taking the time and keeping everyone informed.
That's bad advice. period!!! Countless of times I've witnessed a drop right before a spike up.
To sell your position at a lost only to miss out on a 20 to 4000% increase minutes later is asinine and foolish. By no means I'm I predicting that this company is going up 4000% it's just an example.
My advice is to Read up on how to invest and trade in the market. There is a lot of good free information out there, look for it, find it and learn.... Good Day to you...
Excuse my ignorance but what is T +3 means?
That is why this CC is suspect...
What wording or actions in the 10k has or is about to take place that warrants a CC in 1 weeks notice?
Also I've notice that the wording of ( the board) looking for the possibilities of a acquisition is not mentioned in this last 10k.
Is it there and I missed it? Or hhmmmm, makes you want to stay positive.....
Look into investopedia.com for these type of questions
Good morning everyone, I know many of Us have been disappointed, time after time, after time but, this one seems different. I'm not sure if I missed it but the wording about looking for an acquisition is not in the 10k like in the past. Is it there and I missed it? And why a conference cal?l to discuss what in particular in the 10 K? There are a lot of questions and we shall get the answer(s) soon... I hope
Maybe it will be nothing...but I want it to be something of substance and hope..
Good afternoon Clawman, I too found it be unusual as well. 1 week advance notice, not 30 or 60 day. To discuss 10K.. hmmm... Something is brewing, hopefully it benefits us too.
Bbanbob, I remember when you shared that experience you were on the yahoo board then.
(11)Holders of Preferred Equity Interests and Common Equity Interests will be issued Liquidating Trust Interests in Tranche 6 on account of those interests when Tranche 2 through Tranche 5 Liquidating Trust Interests have been satisfied in full. Further, distribution to Tranche 6 will be shared 75% and 25% pro rata between claims on account of Preferred Equity Interests and Common Equity Interests, respectively.
I would love for history to repeat itself, back to January 4, 2010 when commons peaked at .71 and Preferred P.s peaked at $110. Anyone else remembers?