Linda is biotch...! LOLz JayKay
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.
Thanks, that was how I remembered. eom
They were converted to series (I, J, L, M, etc.). They were originally Caymans, REITs, etc. backed by 13 bil of securities.
They are their own separate class with the exception of an additional 50 mil as hush money.
imo
As I recall, there is not vote for D and they are deemed to reject. imo.eom
I don't know what the record date is for voting (I would have to look it up, I am limited to what I do from work), however, it does not matter how many shares you have for voting.
Have a nice day all.
imo
I am work right now and I have not looked at the current POR, however, if it is similar (which I believe it is), then they are a separate class. This class received $50M extra, however are equal to p/k class. Voting, if I recall, was not disclosed or the details were not discussed the last vote.
IMO, I think voting in the H's might be more important. This is a good reason why we should all buy a few, as in 1, 2, 3 4, 5, or whatever you feel like buying (for those do not have any) for voting purposes only.
If I recall, H's voted down the POR by a narrow margin in the previous POR. This time we need to make it a clear vote "No".
I would not worry about DIMEQ because they have no vote and deemed to vote "no".
IMO
Equal footing, but separate Series. eom
The estate's pocket. Eom
Right, if I recall (if approved), that class has a rights offering (option, instead of cash) for reorganized debtor. imo
I believe, if approved, they will get stock in the reorganized Debtor in exchange for their claim or cash. imo
Depends on discovery and who actually bought the securities. Too many variables. It could have been Bonderman telling Tepper and Tepper telling XXX ?
Cross reference attorney billing and calls to UCC and members of UCC spoke to who?
Timing is involved.
Way too many variables.
May be if a governmental agency where to investigate, which is easier, but time consuming.
With discovery, games can be played and prolonged. Too many road blocks until EC files a motion to compel responses and Judge Mary would have to enforce the ruling.
The main thing is, Judge Mary left the FJR vs. contract rate open. IMO, very important and it is in our favor.
Reorganized Debtor is undervalued and NOLs. We are at the cusp (sp?) of being in the money.
imo
yes, because she has not ruled on it and left it open. imo/eom
It is not about math. It is about leverage.
Btw, jpm also took over bear sterns.
Imo
You can use your phones 3g on your laptop and view it on the laptop screen instead of the phone. eom
I couldn't read the whole thing while at work, however, this is the ticket for equity.
This is why I mentioned that Judge Mary did NOT rule on the FJR vs. Contract Rate Interest (which is important to us) and is going to use it as a Trump card if all parties (the four horsemen aka hedgies) could not come to some settlement.
This will be used to punish creditors (mainly the hedgies since they are the ones controlling the BK case) and if used, will automatically put equity (preferreds) in the money and in control.
A ruling in favor of FJR would force a cram down on creditors.
imo
Agreed, quite a few $$ traded there. eom
I think you should be looking at dollar volume. The P's dollar volume is more than 15 times the dollar volume on K's.
We shall see what guidance Rodent gets from the status conference.
imo
Everything I say/said in my posts are speculation and an opinion.
POR and DS should reflect same/similar. POR can be amended so long as it does not lower a class' recovery.
If another party comes out with their own POR, they must have their DS as well.
As for Rodent with his recent filing, this may be the reason why he put out that notice, to "feel out" Judge Mary and see where it goes, ie, new POR, revised POR, new vote, or start from scratch. Only problem with his last filing, Rodent did NOT address all the outstanding issues and left Creditors' Committee to liability. No mention of NOLs.
We will ahve to wait and see what Judge Mary rules.
Again, this is an opinion.
Here is another one:
Court Decision:
I think they will get "something" based on the current POR. There is always something that was "found" or "recovered" assets while in the liquidating Trust.
On the other hand, if EC can put their POR out, that would be better, but it is hard considering all the unknown and disputed known assets out there.
One good thing though, Judge Mary didn't rule on the FJR vs. contract rate. IMO, she is reserving that as her "punishment" card towards the creditors/debtors/JPM/FDIC.
If Rodent keeps up the "games," I wouldn't be surprised if Judge Mary forces a cramdown on the H puts the preffereds in the money.
IMO
I mainly only looked at those 4 paragraphs since it really benefits the preferreds initially. I would say Brian Rodent has an acceptable resolution to the ones I posted, HOWEVER, the question is how many are on the "Trust Advisory Board" and who are the other members and are they "independent"???
If we only have one member, and we are out numbered, then it wouldn't fair nor reasonable.
While skimming the document, I don't recall seeing anything on NOLs for 2011.
As for everything else, I really didn't go through it much other than what i have posted. Rodent only addressed the Court's issues. Whether it is acceptable, we will have to wait and find out.
In my opinion, Rodent is trying to back door the changes.modification to the POR that was denied rather than have an official revision/amended POR to put it up for vote.
EC needs to get their PJS numbers up for their completing POR soon....
Just my opinion though.
Court Decision:
Yes, NOL is a variable.
NOL will benefit the reorganized company, but it would take a long time to use the entire NOL, especially if the reorganized company is a little profitable or not profitable at all.
NOL will have an immediate value if an entity comes in and buys out the reorganized company.
There are other examples...
It is not an asset because certain things have to happen in order to utilize it, but to the right entity, it is very valuable.
All NOL is now is "potential" to have value.
imo
You said:
Your post:
Eztrade: WMB bondholdes was a settlement of $350 ish million. That is all they get.
Re: H's, that is still up in the air until it is confirmed that they lose control.
imo
Typing from phone.
Based on the gsa, it would be no.
If creditors got the federal judgment.rate Instead of contract rate, we would get a sizable.recovery. in addition to fjr, nol, and reorganized debtor starts a new bussiness, we. Could eventuall have near full payout.
But this is all speculation, but I do.think.we.will have some recovery.
Let see.if.we.get a.competing.por soon.
Goodnight.
Imo
Ya, I think it is going to be another POR version. We have to wait and see.
I have to get back to work now.
Today was a good day...
Have a nice day.
imo
I hope you didn't mess up your 15% tax bracket, unless you are taking about the recent fall to $10.
This coming March will be my 365 days for tax purposes.
I almost was going to do what you did, however, got caught up in work. Congrats. eom
Very important to us. imo
Should put the real property in the family trust. imo/eom
Just because you don't see Susman jumping though hoops for entertainment, does not mean he is not doing anything behind the scenes.
Nelson was assigned the Wamu case.
Legal work takes time to build a foundation and form a strategy. You do not want Susman/Nelson throwing their "ace in the hole" for no reason.
Remember, do you want an attorney who "barks" or do you want an attorney who "bites"??
Just sit back and relax. Patience is key...
imo
You are young and so am I, however, take it from someone who has been playing these and understands what goes on behind the scenes . . .
Never, ever go "all in on" any security, no matter how much you believe in it.
At all times, D I V E R S I F Y . . .
That does NOT mean hedge yourself with preferreds, it means have a balanced (mixed) portfolio, until such time you have been "around the block".
imo