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.
Depends: As a trader or someone looking for substance... ?
Off the top of my head: Decision/Opinion on POR, not a hearing date.
Oral argument on abandonment of WMB stock.
Mtn Reconsideration.
So far...
Happy new year.
imo
FYI: Ever wonder what is with all the block trades?
Investing Dying as Computer Trading, ETFs & Dark Pools Proliferate
On Tuesday January 4, 2011, 4:55 pm EST
There's an old Wall Street adage meant to inspire investors that goes "it's not a stock market, but a market of stocks." Consider that dead.
Computer trading, dark pools and exchange-traded funds are dominating market action on a daily basis, statistics show, killing the buy and hold philosophy still attempted by many professional and retail investors alike. Everything moves up or down together at a speed faster than which a normal person can react, traders said.
High frequency trading accounts for 70 percent of market volume on a daily basis, according to several traders' estimates. The average holding period for U.S. stocks is now just 2.8 months, according to the Crosscurrents newsletter. In the 1980s, it was two years.
"The theory that buy-and-hold was the superior way to ensure gains over the long term, has been ditched completely in favor of technology," said Alan Newman, author of the monthly newsletter. "HFT promises gains are best provided by holding periods measuring as few as microseconds, possibly a few minutes, or at worst, a few hours."
The problem is only made worst by the proliferation of exchange-traded funds, traders said. The vehicles, which make trading a group of stocks as easy as buying and selling an individual security, passed the $1 trillion in assets mark at the end of last year, according to BlackRock. This is probably why all ten sectors of the S&P 500 finished in the black for two consecutive years, something that's only happened one other time since 1960, according to Bespoke Investment Group.
"The capital raising stock market of the past hundred years has morphed in just the last 10 years into a casino," said Sal Arnuk of Themis Trading and a market infrastructure expert who advised the SEC after last year's so-called Flash Crash. "Who is doing the fundamental work analyzing stocks? In the end, we've greatly increased systemic risk."
Another factor jumped into the fray in December: dark pools. Off-exchange trading accounted for more than a third of the trading volume in December, says Raymond James. While these trades are eventually reported to the public markets, they further damage price discovery, an essential element for a fair securities market, investors said.
"This was a record high market share for off-exchange trading and we believe the SEC will ultimately be forced to react to support the price discovery process by limiting off-exchange trading for all traces except for large block trades," wrote Raymond James analyst Patrick O'Shaughnessy in a note to clients yesterday.
"This destroys capital markets," said Jon Najarian, co-founder of TradeMonster and a 'Fast Money' trader. "Hidden trading venues, where some participants get to peek at the orders as they are entered so long as they agree to 'interact' with a minimum percentage, is not an exchange, it's a license to steal."
While many see these forces aligning to cause a sort of self-correcting powerful drop in the market down the road, others feel like it's creating an opportunity for the stock pickers to mount a comeback.
At the end of last year, something strange happened. After tracking the S&P 500 for most of 2010, the Russell 2000 Index, made up of many small companies with very different characteristics and merits, broke away in the final three months to double the gains of large cap benchmark for the year.
"Small cap outperformance in the last quarter is a very good sign this trend is ending," said Joshua Brown, money manager and author of The Reformed Broker blog. "Winners and losers are starting to separate themselves after a year of the whole risk-on (buy anything), risk off (sell everything) of the last year."
Of course, you could have just bought the iShares Russell 200 Index ETF (NYSEArca:IWM - News) in September.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Investing-Dying-as-Computer-cnbc-2290421841.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=main&asset=&ccode=
Agreed, pretty free guaranteed money. eom/imo
Actually, that is what HUQs are worth, $34.xx (ish) range. It was based on original issue discount.
HUQs got 100% of the full allowed claim.
They are only worth $50 if held to term, unlikely at this point.
imo
Commons, Ps, and various series (I, J, L, M, etc.) of converted Caymans, REITs, etc. eom
Ownership restriction ordered by the court to protect NOLs, etc.
For Ps, it is approx. 4.xx%.
No one can accumulate more than 4.xx% or if they already have 4.xx% or more, they cannot accumulate anymore nor sell without court approval, etc.
imo
Ya, we are kidding around. =) eom
JW?!? (LOL)
Now .07 to 3PPS that's a HUGE difference. 8-0
I am guessing you didn't see the hint of sarcasm. eom
However when there is a 20-25% difference from K's to P's it's fun to flip from K's to P's and keep the same face value.
It matters if you want a higher rate of return of your speculative investment (assuming if does pay off).
It would not matter which one is a better value if in the end it will be a total loss.
As of right now, all preferreds are considered overvalued based on the current POR/GSA.
imo
It is about perception: Cheap vs. Value
People think buying Ks is "cheap", but in reality, it costs more.
People who are value oriented understand the difference.
Another factor is there is no restriction on ownership of Ks, while Ps has one in effect.
The traders like to play with K.
imo
P $21.50 finally broke thru, but the K remain manipulated.
And before they were WaMu's they were Homes Savings, the ones with all the beautiful exterior marble slab walls
However I'm not sure she will outright reject it but perhaps put out an opinion which forces a significant change.
Makes you wonder how soo much money can trade on such a thinly traded security. eom
Thanks, but it is a group effort on the Wamu boards, each and everyone of us contribute in one form or another.
We all have each other's back so we can all make an informed decision on our investments or speculative investments.
imo
Yes, my thoughts are that since you have 4 (?) hedge funds controlling this BK, they are the majority owner of the WAHUQ. They, at this point in time, stand to take over the reorganized WMI (wipe out out equity), reap the benefits of all the NOL and the tax carryforwards.
I was trying to see if there is any selling pressure on WAHUQ to signal any money moving from there to the next in line of the waterfall, ie, preferreds.
imo
Why are you even entertaining him? eom
Thanks, it looks like almost no volume all day, expect 2 x 200 trades on WAHUQ, then 30 minutes before close (or 30 min after Order), the bulk of the entire day's volume hit, approx. 10k shares traded.
We will have to wait and see if there is any selling pressure there in the coming days.
Thanks.
imo
The order also came out about an hour before the close today. So the market may not have absorbed its impact. Like I said before, the 'good' news is that shareholders can relax and enjoy the holidays without fear of a surprise POR approval.
Since this Order has been filed, lets see if WAHUQ starts dropping in the coming days. That will be a decent indicator. imo LOL buh bye hedge fund bishes!!!!
http://www.ghostofwamu.com/documents/08-12229/08-12229-6376.pdf
If things go well (settlement), I would guess March/April 2011. imo/eom
My guess is that Mary wants the GSA to be intact (hence the request of extension to parties), however, with modifications. To me it seems that Mary wants some sort of settlement and does not want this to be litigated, which in my opinion, could be doing "us" a favor (in terms of waiting on an out come from litigation, example Dimes).
I just think that being the holidays, the courts are working with a skeleton staff and there is just NOT enough time to render an Opinion without being rushed or careless.
The main thing I saw in the Order was: multiple unresolved objections, which to me is favorable to "us".
Another good thing NOL or tax implications favor "us" more in 2011.
imo
Why am I not feeling happy about this. Why is the judge even getting involved in keeping the GSA "alive"? If "those parties" wanted to keep the GSA alive, they could.
Why isn't the judge saying "I can't issue a decision before Dec 31st now {Time, conflicts, objection, whatever reasons}"... and that's it... Period.
Why have that other piece about "keep the GSA open until Jan 31st" -- I mean, maybe I'm reading too much into this... but that's not really her problem, right? (I'm inferring bad juju I know. For her to APPROVE the POR, that requires a viable GSA would definitely need to stay "open".)
Or is this just dot-eye-cross-t stuff... the "maintain status quo" as she states.... To make sure that somehow that GSA expiring isn't "blamed" on the judge for appeals, etc.
I don't know. I just didn't get warm fuzzies when I read this.
Yes, still holding on the sub bonds of LBHI. I don't know any group, etc., trying to negotiate. I believe it is a loosing position, especially there are tooo little funds in the pot and there are no hedge funds owning them (at least it is not known).
People have to absorb information, good and bad, to be objective and not only look through rose colored glasses as they do on the "other" board. I do not think a certain person on the "other" board is objective. You should know that, that certain person was on the Wamu board as well, but most of the seasoned Wamu DD people there have that person on IGNORE for a reason.
We won't know if this lotto will pay out until approx 5 years. This is going to be a loonnnggg and drawn out to make the attorneys and A&M money, etc. This is a cash cow for them.
imo
SC is not a common practice in BK. Subordinates are generally subordinated to senior creditors in any BK. I don't believe that any senior would give up any contractual subordination provisions, especially when there is so little in the pot to share amongst the creditors.
Not all SC are the same.
CTs have a better chance in SC, however, it is not guaranteed. There must be money in the pot. CT = Lotto.
Diversify, always.
imo
What I have said is that it is my understanding based on the articles on substantive consolidation I have read that all unsecured creditors are treated equally or fairly equally.
Best advice: use paragraphs. Eom
eztrade: No comment at this time. Need to wait until Dec. 17th Hoffman hearing.
imo
No problem, not offended at all. We are all in the same boat, sharing the same paddle.
Thanks.
With all due respect that is absolutely BS! You pay big gun attorney fee for a big gun you should see that big gun working IMO...you hire Mickey mouse for your child's b-day party and you get Pluto (still Disney, lots of b-days to attend) you would stand for that? Outrageous and just plain inconceivable in my mind! Peoples lives were ruined. Not to sa JN is not a fabulous attourney, but that is not ok. Aimo
People need to understand that Susman cannot personally represent every individual client.
Each client retains the Firm. The Firm assigns an attorney (or team) to each individual case. The assigned attorney divies out work to associate attorneys and law clerks. Susman (along with other managing partners) may oversee all cases of the Firm.
That is the way it works.
Do NOT get hung up on, "Where is Susman?"; "Why isn't Susman working on the case?"; "Why isn't Susman in Court?"; etc.
Equity is in good hands...
Try to be realist people.
=)
imo
Don't forget your tape recorder and batteries! LOL eom
Agreed, just because no one heard from from SS or Soloman, does not mean they are not doing anything behind the scenes, but I do understand that it is hard (emotionally) not to see everything out in the open.
People have to remember, do you want a dog that barks all the time with no bite OR do you want a dog that BITES!?! SS bites!
Reminds you of the "Beware of Dog" sign, but when you open the door, it is a little Taco Bell Dog. ha ha
imo
Agreed. My thoughts are that it won't be confirmed on Dec 1, only because it gives a disposition on preferreds and REITS, BUT the TPS trial starts on Dec 1st as well.
So that leads me to believe that the POR cannot be confirmed as it stands because of the fact that the TPS trial will give the disposition of the TPS and the POR will have to be amended.
This gives time SS and Soloman time as well as information extracted from the TPS trial.
imo
Jerel, just messin' with you. eom
Thanks! =) eom
Rocki, this is for you:
CASE STUDY: Mirant Corporation
Client
Mirant Corporation, based in Atlanta, Georgia, is a leading merchant energy company that produces and sells electricity in the United States, the Caribbean, and the Philippines. Mirant owns or leases more than 18,000 megawatts of electric generating capacity globally and operates an integrated asset management and energy marketing organization.
At the time of PJSC's engagement, Mirant was the second largest independent power producer in the U.S. with revenues of $5.2 billion
Assignment
PJSC was engaged in September 2003 as financial advisor to the Official Committee of Equity Security Holders to represent shareholders in the bankruptcy of Mirant.
In this capacity PJSC reviewed and analyzed the operations of Mirant to determine a valuation for the company and reviewed any strategic alternatives which might add value for the company.
Challenge
Many merchant energy producers suffered from deteriorating financial performance and overleverage in 2001 - 2002, following the collapse of Enron and the California power crisis.
Mirant Corporation had been downgraded to below investment grade in December 2001, with further downgrades in October 2002.
Facing impending debt maturities, unprofitable contracts and a difficult financing environment, Mirant had filed for protection under Chapter 11 in July 2003.
During the course of the bankruptcy, Mirant, as well as its Creditors' Committees, tenaciously argued for a valuation for Mirant that provided no value for the common stockholders of the Company.
Process
PJSC spent several months working closely with representatives of the company and the various other constituencies in developing a plan and determining a valuation. Eventually, however, it became apparent that PJSC and the other financial advisors, as well as the company, had different viewpoints regarding operational decisions and the valuation of Mirant Corp. These differences set the stage for an eventual valuation hearing to determine the proper valuation, the timeline of which follows:
In January 2005, the Debtor proposed a Plan of Reorganization that would provide shareholders with 5% out-of-the-money warrants based on a depressed valuation by the Debtor’s financial advisor.
In order to resolve the valuation dispute, the bankruptcy judge mandated that financial advisors for each committee file Expert Reports, Rebuttals and pursue discovery.
Following extensive discovery, a Valuation Hearing commenced in April 2005.
The hearing lasted 27 days in court, including a six day direct-, cross- and redirect-examination of PJSC Partner, Anders Maxwell, in defense of PJSC’s valuation.
On the strength of PJSC’s reports and testimony, the judge issued a letter adopting most of PJSC’s adjustments, implying a value for Mirant Corp. much closer to PJSC’s.
Results
Under the aegis of the court, the Equity Committee earned a tenable negotiating position as a result of PJSC’s victory in the valuation hearing.
PJSC analyzed potential settlement frameworks and advised the Equity Committee in negotiations with the Debtor and Creditors’ Committees.
In September 2005, a negotiated settlement was reached in which common shareholders retain a stake of about 14% in the reorganized common stock, as well as representation on the reorganized Mirant Board of Directors.
As a result of the settlement, Mirant’s stock price has risen over 250% since the beginning of the case, to an equity market value of approximately $550 million, a gain of over $400 million.
http://www.pjsolomon.com/transactions/330case_study_article.html
Lets just say, "The fat lady hasn't sung yet..." eom