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 400-page report, which was made public on Wednesday evening, included case studies on nine different commodities in which banks have taken big ownership stakes, including the 100 oil tankers and 55 million barrels of oil storage capacity that were owned by Morgan Stanley, and the 31 power plants owned by JPMorgan.
How big a role do the banks play in crude pricing?
An internal Goldman Sachs memo from 2011 suggests investor speculation could account for about a third of the price of a barrel of oil. Following this logic, financial speculation, not the physical production and use of crude, could potentially swing the price of oil as much as one-third.
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission has estimated financial speculation can cost of the average American driver up to $10 every time they fill up. But speculation can both increase and decrease crude prices, independent of global supply and demand.
Re:Banks manipulating energy. There have been massive fines.
JPMorgan in Talks to Settle Energy Manipulation Case for $500 Million
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/07/17/jpmorgan-in-talks-to-settle-energy-manipulation-case-for-500-million/
" ... accusations that it manipulated energy prices.
The nation’s largest bank, which has previously clashed with its regulators, is seeking to settle with the federal agency that oversees the energy markets, according to people briefed on the matter. The regulator, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, found that JPMorgan devised “manipulative schemes” that transformed “money-losing power plants into powerful profit centers,” a commission document said.
...
The accusations against JPMorgan surfaced this spring in the confidential commission document, reviewed by The New York Times, that outlined a pattern of illegal trading in the California and Michigan electric markets.
they're not oilmen..they're bankers and they have no interest in running an oil company.
“The Federal Reserve regularly monitors the commodity activities of supervised firms and is reviewing the 2003 determination that certain commodity activities are complementary to financial activities and thus permissible for bank holding companies.”
...
Brown chairs the Senate Banking Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Protection, which will hold a hearing tomorrow titled: “Examining Financial Holding Companies: Should Banks Control Power Plants, Warehouses, and Oil Refineries?” Does that question even have to be asked given the 2008 to 2010 taxpayer bailout of these banks?
Don’t feel badly if you thought banks weren’t allowed to own commercial businesses; much of the investing public and Congress will be flabbergasted to learn what’s been going on behind their backs for the past nine years – all courtesy of the Federal Reserve’s inability to say “no” to Wall Street.
Last year, Omarova published a 77-page paper, “The Merchants of Wall Street: Banking, Commerce, and Commodities,” which provided an in-depth look at the enormous conflicts that the Federal Reserve had signed off on by allowing the largest Wall Street banks to not only hold insured deposits while trading trillions in unregulated derivatives but to also own physical commodities like oil, natural gas, and base metals with the ability to hoard these economically essential products in storage facilities.
The hearing comes four years after 60 Minutes reported in 2009 that Morgan Stanley had the capacity to store and hold 20 million barrels of oil and Goldman Sachs had taken stakes in companies that owned oil storage terminals – while both firms’ oil analysts made public statements that oil would reach $150 and $200 per barrel, respectively.
By controlling warehouses, pipelines and ports, banks gain valuable market intelligence, investment analysts say. That, in turn, can give them an edge when trading commodities. In the stock market, such an arrangement might be seen as a conflict of interest — or even insider trading. But in the commodities market, it is perfectly legal.
not to mention about 25% cash back if you buy at 7 cents on the dollar.
Until the effective date which is sometime in the next 30 days. So, as of Monday, yes.
Nothing
Have you calculated the expected returns?
Plan Item:
1) $10M cash dist -- I calc about $5 per $1000 face
2) 16.5% New Common -- value ???
3) Rights -- Do you know the details?
4a) Warrants for 12.5% New Common -- value ??
4b) Warrants for 5% New Common -- value ??
5) New Building Note Proceeds -- value ??
If I read this correctly, unsecured bonds will get cash from (1) and (5) and 34% of the New Common Stock and the rights to purchase more at a discount.
Thoughts?
I wanted equity to win this but it's not fair to the judge to say he doesn't care. He was quite clear about listening and reading ALL of the common shareholder's concern. As he said, "The value was lost long ago and not caused by this plan." The judge many times thanked the people who wrote letters, each time reiterating that he read "each and every one".
Anyone have a link to the details of the plan?
It's not unusual for a lawyer to not object.
One can only object in a matter of law or procedure. One can't object just because one disagrees with the question. That is handled when it's one's turn in either testimony, cross-examination, re-direct or summation.
But, someone would have to argue that in court. The judge has considerable lee-way but can't just pull information out of some blog and base his decision upon that. The information must be presented in court so that objections to it's factualness, relevancy, etc can also be presented.
If no party brings it up, it's a non-issue.
I wouldn't expect a decision for two weeks given Docket #486, et al. Breitburn is fighting back and this will take some court time.
Docket #486
Notice to Take Depositions : Debtors' Notice of Videotaped Deposition of Martin Lewis filed by Stephen Karotkin on behalf of Breitburn Energy Partners LP, et al.,.
https://cases.primeclerk.com/breitburn/Home-DownloadPDF?id1=NDQ1Nzk3&id2=0
Looks like Breitburn is going to fight this tooth & nail. They are now cross-examining outside the courtroom and submitting via video.
Love your sense of humor.
It's trading on the Grey Market where the only publically disclosed information is the last trade date. Reading up on the Greys, it appears that this is used as a holding market while the security get registered for a major stock exchange. Two of the steps for the major exchanges take 3 days each. So, it appears that they are working on it up it takes a minimum 6 working days.
Nothing until hearing resumes Thursday.
I would say middle of next week. Judge's schedule is booked solid this week.
All info still N/A but at least its "listed".
The Hearing continues on Thursday. I doubt if the Judge will rule immediately.
Witness was offended with the implication of a rubber stamp.
Not sure I would say they did nothing but they definitely didn't "challenge" any spoon-fed information. My read was they wrote the report the way the company paid them to.
They will resume at 10am CT, Thursday.
"Name one thing Houlihan-Loki did to confirm"
The silence was defining.
Don't know about anyone else, but I am learning a lot by listening to this cross-examination.
Wow, lawyer just caught the guy. The valuator gets $10M if the plan is accepted, maybe on $1M if not.
Who is the guy? Expert for Commons or Creditors?
Ever consider the numbers are made-up? Please notice that these are not audited numbers; just what the company is releasing. It appears that the company president is not noted for his complete honesty.
For the record, I am neither long nor short. I have been reading through this board doing my due diligence. Not sure if I will join the party, but that will be purely based on market reaction and not because of the company's numbers.
Teleconference info posted earlier today. Scroll down.
Do you have a stock price? Mine still says indetermined. :/
Online Brokers for pennies
My current broker while good for other types is a bit expensive for pennies. What brokers are people using to trade penny stocks? Are there any true flat rate trades? Mine charges $0.0005 for any PPS under $1. That's almost insignificant for shares close to a dollar but prohibitive for pennies.
In a previous post, it was insinuated that the price drop was done automatically. It also said that, as a matter of practice, this was ONLY done if the dividend was >10% the value of the stock. Is the 10% of PPS is for the specific payout or total return for the year?
I was not confused as to what those numbers meant. I was using the numbers as names.
100% of Senior Notes plus ... plus accrued but unpaid interest get 90% of stock. Since the the "unpaid interest" is before the "get", I was suggesting that the combined asset of the bond value AND unpaid interest would be exchanged for the stock. In mathematical terms:
Redeem side -> receive side
BV + UI -> stock
Since the UI isn't on the receive side of the equation, it doesn't appear that it will be paid. It will be something given up for the stock.
I meant the Senior Notes that were exchanged for stock.
Maybe not. It says "for 100% ... plus accrued but unpaid interest ... for ... 90% ... ". It appears to me that unpaid interest is on the relinqush exchange side of the equation, not on the receive side.
Thank you
How many days after ex-div must one hold the stock? Or, does one simply need to hold it until COB?
TIA
CM, Will the interest be paid on the converted bonds?
Enquiring Minds Want to Know.
Do we get face, or in the face?
Yes, $20k Face