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.
I guess I should qualify that remark by saying "I will gladly wait 2 to 3 years VERSUS BEING CANCELLED OUT WITHOUT A CHANCE OF GETTING PAID LATER"
I think you are reading it wrong. They are giving us a right to the new company (LAMCO) consistent to what we held in preferreds and commons. That is how I read it anyways.
Class 9 Equity Interests in LBHI -- No Distributions (unless all other creditors have been paid in full). All Equity Interests will be cancelled and one new share of LBHI common stock will be issued to the Plan Administrator which will hold such share for the benefit of the holders of the former Equity Interests consistent with their former economic entitlement.
I don't see how this is bad for us. The only downfall is we get frozen from trading our shares. That sucks but if that means we get paid, who cares. I can gladly wait 2 to 3 years for a full payout or even a 10% payout.
isn't that what the verbage in the POR says? Let me see if I can find it.
Our interest isn't being cancelled out, just the shares. We will hold a new interest in LAMCO. So if LAMCO ends up being better than sliced bread, we will see it. At least that is how I am reading it. Am I wrong?
More good news.
Lehman is a huge couch that has so much money jammed up into every crevice, that it will take years of shaking and shaking to get all the money out of it.
I think we have much better days ahead of us. I would never tell anyone else how to invest but I am not selling at these levels. If it happens to drop to the 3 penny range, I will be buying more. Good luck everyone.
I would think it is good news. No more dumping of our assets at pennies on the dollar. LAMCO is going to want to maximize every dollar brought in to give themselves credentials so that other companies will look to them to liquidate assets. As long as we get some type of interest in LAMCO this is great news imo.
that was my assumption.
Would be nice to find. Good luck to you also.
looks like the shake is almost over. The ask is back to .065. I am still waiting for a B/S. Does anyone know if that is soon to be released?
I am not sure that preferreds are considered unsecured debt. I think that is incorrect. Would love to have someone prove me wrong on that.
It may only be a matter of time before Ernst & Young gets in trouble in its role as auditor regarding the disintegration of Lehman Bros. The New York Times reported today that “In the years before its collapse, Lehman used a small company — its ‘alter ego,’ in the words of a former Lehman trader — to shift investments off its books.”
The smaller firm was called Hudson Castle. Some of the trading between Lehman and Hudson were more than $1 billion, the Times reports.
The Examiner, Anton R. Valukasfor, who authored the 2,200 page report for the bankruptcy court handling the dismantling of Lehman, mentioned E&Y’s role with respect to Lehman’s bankruptcy but did not levy any specific charges against its work as Lehman’s auditors.
It appears that E&Y was aware that Lehman moved money on and off its books using Repo 105 instruments. In reaction to concerns that it had been negligent, E&Y said “Our last audit of the company was for the fiscal year ending Nov. 30, 2007. Our opinion indicated that Lehman’s financial statements for that year were fairly presented in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), and we remain of that view.”
While E&Y may effectively defend itself against the information in the Examiner’s report, the information about Hudson Castle may be much harder for the accounting firm to explain. The fact that E&Y may not have known about Hudson Castle could be due to the inadequacy of its audit – or it could be due to fraud carried out by Lehman executives dealing with the accounting. A careful review of the transactions between Lehman and counter parties should have discovered any fraud in the disclosure of relationships between Lehman and the smaller company.
E&Y is not out of harm’s way.
Douglas A. McIntyre
http://247wallst.com/2010/04/13/more-hot-water-for-ernst-young-with-new-lehman-allegations/
can anyone post a link or copy and paste the text for us? TIA
Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc (Other OTC:LEHMQ.PK - News) has sued the U.S. government, asking for the return of some $110 million that the bankrupt investment firm said it overpaid in taxes and penalties in 1999 and 2000.
Tax refunds paid to a bankrupt company usually become part of the estate and can be allocated to creditors. Representatives for Lehman were unavailable to comment on how any possible tax returns might be allocated in this case.
A U.S. Internal Revenue Service spokesman said the IRS can not discuss or disclose information about a U.S. taxpayer.
Lehman, which declared bankruptcy in September 2008, said it is entitled to a refund of federal income taxes and penalties they overpaid for dividends paid for borrowed stock.
The case is In re: Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, No. 08-13555.
(Additional reporting by Santosh Nadgir in Bangalore)
very good news. every turn you take, Lehman was wronged it seems. Peck seems like a fair judge. This will bode well for us imo.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Lehman-Channeled-Risks-nytimes-2294070446.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=3&asset=&ccode=
Interesting article. Is Hudson Capital still around?
no prob. felt terrible even mentioning it lol.
I don’t believe it is unreasonable to request and accurate accounting of where ‘our’ equity went and proper consideration in any plan of reorganization.
should read
I don’t believe it is unreasonable to request an accurate accounting of where ‘our’ equity went and proper consideration in any plan of reorganization.
Great job Troy. We all owe you for this.
I wouldn't think so but I am not familiar enough to answer. This is an question for Coach Tequila to answer.
Hey Troy....I appreciate everything you have done for us fellow shareholders. You have gone above and beyond what anyone should be expected to do. I tip my hat to you.
Developments are looking great. I dont think we could ask for a stronger case against Barclays. I find it hard to believe we don't get a ruling in our favor. Keep them fingers crossed.
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc (Other OTC:LEHMQ.PK - News) told a U.S. bankruptcy judge on Friday that Barclays Plc (LSE:BARC.L - News) should be forced to return certain assets it received in its 2008 acquisition of Lehman's core U.S. brokerage, because Barclays arranged a secret $5 billion discount.
In opening arguments at a hearing in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan, an attorney for Lehman Brothers claimed that Lehman and Barclays employees had hidden information about the discount from their lawyers and the court, amid intense deal negotiations in the darkest days of the financial crisis.
Lehman filed the largest bankruptcy in history on September 15, 2008, selling its flagship U.S. brokerage business to Barclays for about $1.85 billion less than a week later.
But Lehman is now asking Judge James Peck to make changes to the order that authorized the deal after months of investigation revealed that the sale described to the court was not the sale actually executed.
"Barclays planned on and insisted on the discount and they planned on the liability numbers being inflated," Robert Gaffey, a Jones Day attorney representing Lehman, told the court.
"It was not the wash described to the (Lehman) board, it was not the net benefit described to the estate," he continued, claiming that Barclays received an $11.2 billion immediate windfall profit on the assets it acquired, while the court was told that the sale would actually give Lehman a benefit of about $4 billion in terms of reduced liabilities and cash.
Gaffey showed the court emails from Lehman employees who had been offered new jobs at Barclays, revealing the conflicts they may have had as they were working to arrange the deal.
"They were on their way to new careers, they were serving their new master," Gaffey said.
He said the Lehman employees had arranged for Barclays to get a $5 billion discount on Lehman's $70 billion book of securities -- secretly reducing the values of the assets on Lehman's books, while their lawyers told the court that the markets had forced the change.
"It was not because the markets dropped, it's because the Lehman traders had instructions from Barclays to reduce the values to liquidation value," Gaffey said.
Gaffey said that whether the transfer of assets was a mistake or intentional did not matter, and that Lehman is entitled to the return of assets.
Barclays has argued that the deal was always intended to be positive to Barclays, that it was the best and only alternative for the failed investment bank, and that Lehman and its creditors are simply trying to "re-trade the deal" now that the credit markets improved.
Susheel Kirpalani, an attorney for Lehman's Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors, said in court that Barclay's arguments were "circular."
Lehman also has concerns about whether Barclays inflated liabilities it said it would assume related to Lehman's employees and whether a "clarification letter" tacked on to the deal after the court approved it materially changed the deal.
"This is not a case about seller's remorse," Kirpalani said." There is an even greater public policy issue at play -- that is transparency."
James Giddens, the trustee in charge of liquidating Lehman's brokerage and making sure customers receive their assets, has also joined the dispute against Barclays.
Barclays is expected to make its own arguments in the case later on Friday.
Lehman shares were down 4 percent at 11 cents in the over-the-counter market on Friday, while Barclays shares closed at 356.5 pence on the London Stock Exchange, down 0.2 percent.
The case is In re: Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, No. 08-13555.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Lehman-to-court-Barclays-rb-2783224255.html?x=0&.v=1
I forgot today was good friday was almost freaking out cause we had no volume at almost noon. LOL I will call it a day I think.
I am a little green under the ears when it comes to bankruptcy law but can't a debt be owed no more than once to the same party? If we are dealing with a ton of duplicate claims like this, we are in much better shape than any of us realize.
NEW YORK, March 29 (Reuters) - Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc (LEHMQ.PK) said on Monday it believes claims from creditors against its bankruptcy estate should be cut to $605 billion, according to a document filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
The bankrupt investment firm has been contending with more than 64,000 claims from creditors.
Last November, Lehman Chief Executive Bryan Marsal said the claims had a face value of more than $820 billion and that it was possible the claims could reach $1 trillion.
Over the past few months Lehman has objected to hundreds of claims, saying they didn't meet certain requirements.
"Based upon clear errors, duplications and non-controversial corrections that are appropriate, the aggregate total of the filed claims should be reduced," Lehman said in its filing.
Lehman filed for bankruptcy protection on Sept. 15, 2008, listing assets of $639 billion and debts of $613 billion. Earlier this month, it proposed a reorganization plan that would create a new company to continue managing Lehman's long-term assets outside of the bankruptcy process.
The case is In re: Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, No. 08-13555.
maybe the pinky MM's leaped a week forward instead of an hour and think today is Good Friday?
thanks for that. I will keep that link handy.
They aren't halted. Here is a link to show you currently halted stocks http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/trader.aspx?id=TradeHalts
Holy cow Batman! That is huge. We could potentially wipe out 40 billion or more in claims. Cha-ching. Awesome find. Thank you!
you are going above and beyond. This is terrific of you to do along with everything else you have done. We all owe you more than we can show on a message board. Will you be making your PR release a sticky?
Disclosure statement delayed until April
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Lehman-gets-OK-to-delay-rb-902860117.html?x=0&.v=1
My money doesn't clear until tomorrow. I hope these prices last until then. If you had a choice, would you be buying CT's or pref's at this point?
On one hand, I am bummed we are trading this low. On the other hand, I deposited money into my ST account yesterday and am willing to buy up single digit J's come tomorrow or Thursday when my money settles and I can buy more.
my first impression was to go buy some cheap bag-in-a-box wine and drown out my sorrows but I agree, this looks good for us. I may have to spring for some miller high life.