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.
Hope is eternal. However, I recommend you learn-up on how things actually work, watch as the saga unfolds, and be prepared to buy or sell at the best time.
WMIH is in control of all cash and assets not included in, or governed by, the bankruptcy court. That includes the value on any trusts and their income streams - if any. If there is a disbursal from the trusts or income streams to those of us who signed releases, not including those WMIH shares purchased after our release, WMIH will be in control of that event and not the WMILT or any other entity within the realm of the bankruptcy.
Whatever WMIH is doing, it is within the realm of being legal - even though we do not know what they are doing and do not like most of what we do know. If there is cash or assets returning to WMIH, they will disburse their value to us or not, according to law.
From my previous post #520509 2018-05-29
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=141152171
If person Y files a chapter 11 bankruptcy, there may be some trusts involved. Take some time and read-up on revocable and irrevocable trusts during bankruptcies. Some of these trusts (usually irrevocable trusts) are exempt from the bankruptcy proceedings and are exempt from the outcome. During the bankruptcy of person Y, the court ignores these trusts, refusing to allow them any consideration by anyone during the process. Meanwhile, the status, ownership, and management of the trusts remains the same – person Y. During the bankruptcy process person Y submits a plan of reorganization (POR) that the court approves and, except for some housekeeping entities, such as a liquidating trust that liquidates only assets allowed in the bankruptcy and distributes their liquidated value to the appropriate entity, the court declares the bankruptcy finished. Person Y now emerges as reorganized person Z. Person Y is the same person as person Z, only - reorganized. The best part is that the exempt trusts that belonged to person Y during the bankruptcy now belong to person Z. The court never allowed them in the bankruptcy, never will and therefore, the liquidating trust cannot liquidate and distribute their value.
Although the trusts involved here are different and have multiple owners or investors, this type of scenario also applies to WMI – now - WMIH. The management of the relationship between WMIH, the trusts, the accumulated value of the trusts, and any income stream from the trusts, that WMI protected from creditors and protected from the bankruptcy with securitizations and safe harbor, now belongs to the reorganized WMIH – not the former WMI, not the current WMILT, and not the former shareholder.
Also, I think the key to your argument is that any value in WMI or in WMIH ultimately rests in the value of the share, and has nothing to do with shareholders before or after the bankruptcy. If there is a mechanism for keeping a disbursal separated from those shares purchased after our WMI shares and all of our WMI rights affiliated with those shares was cancelled, WMIH has it figured out.
... Could Be Considered' ...
Even though your statement is 100% accurate, good luck on getting anyone to see the light on that point. It is amazing that so many cannot keep the correct separation between the assets registered by WMI to be considered in the bankruptcy and those that WMI kept legally sequestered from the proceedings.
Willingham’s initial post-bankruptcy investment of $200k
03/27/2012 conversion 1,000,000 times 0.03349842 = 33,498.42
08/03/2012 conversion 1,000,000 times 0.00076346 = 763.46
08/03/2015 conversion 1,000,000 times 0.00056612 = 566.12
Total: 34,828
mypennys -
Login to your TD Ameritrade account and click on 'Shareholder Library'. You will find the proxy statement there.
WMI Liquidating Trust
Case Number:
08-12229
http://www.wmitrust.com/WMITrust
Chapter 11 Case No. 08-12229 (MFW)
Proposed Disclosure Statement 9 January 2012
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229120109000000000015.pdf#page=170
III. General Overview of The Seventh Amended Plan; subparagraph B, Significant Features of the Seventh Amended Plan; subparagraph 4:
Liquidating Trust:
The Liquidating Trust will receive, manage, and liquidate all assets belonging to the Debtors that are not directly distributed to creditors under the Seventh Amended Plan, apart from the assets allocated to the Reorganized Debtor. These Liquidating Trust assets include potential litigation claims that have not been resolved (by settlement or otherwise) against a number of entities and individuals who may have contributed to WMI’s failure, including accountants and underwriters. Distribution of any money obtained as these assets are liquidated will follow the priority scheme in the Bankruptcy Code, and creditors will be made whole before any money can be distributed to WMI preferred or common shareholders.
Apparently, to many, the first sentence in the paragraph above simply means that WMILT has not received the assets belonging to the debtor, and will receive them at anytime during the life of the WMILT - during or after the court declares the bankruptcy as ended.
VI. Summary of the Seventh Amended Plan; subparagraph D, Liquidating Trust; subparagraph 3:
Liquidating Trust Assets
The Liquidating Trust shall consist of the Liquidating Trust Assets. On the Effective Date, the Debtors shall transfer all of the Liquidating Trust Assets to the Liquidating Trust. The Liquidating Trust Assets may be transferred subject to certain liabilities, as provided in the Seventh Amended Plan or the Liquidating Trust Agreement. Such transfer shall be exempt from any stamp, real estate transfer, mortgage reporting, sales, use or other similar Tax, pursuant to section 1146(a) of the Bankruptcy Code. Upon delivery of the Liquidating Trust Assets to the Liquidating Trust, the Debtors and their predecessors, successors and assigns, and each other Entity released pursuant to Section 41.6 of the Seventh Amended Plan shall be discharged and released from all liability with respect to the delivery of such distributions. In addition, the Liquidating Trust shall assume all of WMI’s rights and obligations pursuant to Section 2.4 of the Global Settlement Agreement, and WMI shall have no further liability or obligations thereunder, to the extent that the transfer to the Liquidating Trust shall not impose any additional obligations or liabilities on JPMC.
The second sentence in the paragraph above clearly states:
On the Effective Date, the Debtors shall transfer all of the Liquidating Trust Assets to the Liquidating Trust.
The debtors (WMI) transferred any asset not exempt from the bankruptcy process to the Liquidating Trust on the effective date of POR 7.
The effective date of POR 7 has passed.
A swap for value or an increase in our share count may be the way we see value returned to us. It is not out of the question - yet. Any value returned to us will not come from any entity within the boundary of the bankruptcy, including the WMILT.
Treatment of Financial Assets Transferred in Connection with a Securitization or Participation
https://www.fdic.gov/news/board/2015/2015-10-22_notice_sum_c_fr.pdf
FDIC Issues Proposed Clarifications to Securitization Safe Harbor Rule
https://www.structuredfinanceinsights.com/updates-news-112.html
The thing to remember about the rules governing securitization and safe harbor is that the rules are slightly different for a corporation in chapter 11, and a seized bank. These rules were different on the date of the seizure of WMB and on the date WMI filed for bankruptcy. There have been several changes since 2008 and, as of the most recent change, the rules are different as of 2015. It would be nice to know all the ins and outs of how the rules work for banks and holding companies - but we do not; and we will never clearly understand the ins and outs without being on the inner circle of the reorganized WMIH.
I think of the seizure of WMB and its sale to JPM as I would one of the many cars I repossessed in my lifetime. If I loaned person X $1k on a car that was worth $10k and later repossessed it, I owed person X some money. If I sold the car for $10k, the law required me to pay person X the difference between the $10k minus what he still owed on the loan and minus my expenses. Although I do not have a link for you to read on this subject, a bank is unlikely to be much different than a car in this respect. If there is value due to us, though we can only guess at what that value is, some entity will return that value to us. Other than the hope that a value exists – forget WMB and all its subsidiaries. It is a done deal and there is absolutely nothing we can change about what happened or about how FDIC-R manages the receivership.
If person Y files a chapter 11 bankruptcy, there may be some trusts involved. Take some time and read-up on revocable and irrevocable trusts during bankruptcies. Some of these trusts (usually irrevocable trusts) are exempt from the bankruptcy proceedings and are exempt from the outcome. During the bankruptcy of person Y, the court ignores these trusts, refusing to allow them any consideration by anyone during the process. Meanwhile, the status, ownership, and management of the trusts remains the same – person Y. During the bankruptcy process person Y submits a plan of reorganization (POR) that the court approves and, except for some housekeeping entities, such as a liquidating trust that liquidates only assets allowed in the bankruptcy and distributes their liquidated value to the appropriate entity, the court declares the bankruptcy finished. Person Y now emerges as reorganized person Z. Person Y is the same person as person Z, only - reorganized. The best part is that the exempt trusts that belonged to person Y during the bankruptcy now belong to person Z. The court never allowed them in the bankruptcy, never will and therefore, the liquidating trust cannot liquidate and distribute their value.
Although the trusts involved here are different and have multiple owners or investors, this type of scenario also applies to WMI – now - WMIH. The management of the relationship between WMIH, the trusts, the accumulated value of the trusts, and any income stream from the trusts, that WMI protected from creditors and protected from the bankruptcy with securitizations and safe harbor, now belongs to the reorganized WMIH – not the former WMI, not the current WMILT, and not the former shareholder.
The number representing the beneficial markers in my TD Ameritrade account is 500,000. The only thing that qualifies me to know is that I would like the process to be like many here envision - that $300B plus will come back through the WMILT and the WMILT will distribute lots of cash to all of us that signed releases. It will not happen that way. It may happen another way, but I doubt that too. If we the shareholders see any value returned to us, it will be an infusion of that value into the reorganized WMIH, increasing its value proportionately.
If you decide to read this, think about the WMI (not WMB) assets that the FDIC attempted to seize, and failed.
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=4dd1d778-021d-42ff-9bab-e77b6989d941
Commercial mortgage-backed securitization investors given “safe harbor” protection
How far do the Bankruptcy Code’s “safe harbor” provisions extend in the commercial mortgage-backed securitization (CMBS) market? Do these safe harbor provisions protect financial institutions that act merely as conduits for CMBS payments? These questions were addressed recently by the Northern District of Illinois District Court, and the court’s decision provides ammunition for CMBS investors in clawback claims brought by a bankruptcy trustee.
In Krol v. Key Bank, N.A., the chapter 7 trustee filed preference and fraudulent transfer claims against Key Bank and LaSalle Bank. At issue were payments made by the debtor on a loan (the “Loan”) extended by a trust (the “Trust”) to an entity related to the debtor. Prior to the bankruptcy, the note evidencing the Loan had been transferred to the Trust as part of a securitization process. Key Bank was the master servicer for the Loan, and held the payments temporarily before transferring them to the Trust. LaSalle Bank was the trustee under the Trust
The defendants moved to dismiss the bankruptcy trustee’s claims arguing, among other things, that the payments were shielded by the safe harbor provisions of section 546(e) of the Bankruptcy Code. Section 546(e) provides a safe harbor from preference and constructively fraudulent transfer claims where the transfers (1) were made by and to a financial institution, and (2) were made in connection with a securities contract. The purpose of these safe harbor provisions is to minimize the displacement caused in the commodities and securities markets by a bankruptcy filing affecting those industries. The safe harbor does not extend to intentionally fraudulent transfers (those transfers made with an actual intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors).
The first question before the court was whether Key Bank was a “financial institution” for purposes of Section 546(e) since Key Bank acted as a mere conduit for payments on the Loan. The bankruptcy trustee argued that Key Bank’s status as a mere conduit required the court to determine whether the Trust, the ultimate recipient of the money, was a financial institution. The court rejected these arguments and refused to read into the statute an additional requirement that the financial institution receive some financial benefit or acquire the funds for its own use. This reasoning is consistent with the approach taken by most of the federal circuits that have addressed the issue.
The second question was whether payments made to Key Bank on the Loan were made in connection with a “securities contract.” The bankruptcy trustee argued that the payments were made in connection with the Loan which was not a securities contract. However, looking to the economic realities of the transaction, the court found that the Loan had been securitized as a CMBS. In a CMBS, securities are collateralized pursuant to a pooling and servicing agreement (PSA) by a pool of mortgages on commercial real estate in which all principal and interest from the mortgages flow to certificate holders in a defined sequence or manner. Here, the Loan had been transferred to the Trust and that the Trust had issued certificates representing investors’ interests in multiple bundled loans. Writing that “in connection with” as used in Section 546(e) should be construed broadly, the court held that the payments to Key Bank, which Key Bank then transferred to the Trust, were made “in connection with” the PSA. The court rejected the bankruptcy trustee’s “novel proposition” that any two-tiered transaction precludes a finding that a securities contract is involved.
Based on this analysis, the court dismissed the bankruptcy trustee’s preference claims and recommended dismissal of the constructive fraudulent transfer claims.
The Krol decision is an important decision for participants in the CMBS market. First, the decision is further support that Section 546(e)’s safe harbor provisions apply where financial institutions act simply as a mere conduit for funds. Under the majority approach, as adopted by the Krol court, a financial institution does not need to acquire any ownership interest in the funds in order to qualify for the safe harbor protections. Second, the Kroldecision recognizes the economic reality of CMBS transactions, and brings within the protection of Section 546(e) loan payments where the loan has been collateralized. Third, the decision provides more security for CMBS investors since it increases the scope of the safe harbor protections of Section 546(e).
Who or what entity is the successor-in-interest to Washington Mutual Bank (WMB) and the former subsidiaries of WMB, wholly-owned by WMB?
Reading comprehension is the ability to process text, understand its meaning, and to integrate it with what the reader already knows. ... An individual's ability to comprehend text is influenced by their skills and their ability to process information.
...if, and only if, the Trust is able to monetize Liquidating Trust Assets...
What assets, required by the court and agreed to by the debtors to be included in the bankruptcy, are the WMILT going to liquidate?
Post a list of these assets.
As I stated several years ago, it is futile to guess at dates and amounts. The BOD and their compatriots will lead us to wherever we will end up. My goal is to be prepared to make the decision to sell at the best time - before the big guys cause commons to be totally worthless again.
I reposted the press release as a reminder that billions of dollars will not be coming back through the WMILT. Some did not get that message, and others choose to ignore it.
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/wmi-liquidating-trust-issues-statement-on-escrow-cusips-300425225.html
WMI Liquidating Trust Issues Statement On Escrow CUSIPS
WMI Liquidating Trust
News provided by
Mar 16, 2017, 17:30 ET
SEATTLE, March 16, 2017 /PRNewswire/ -- WMI Liquidating Trust (the "Trust"), formed pursuant to the confirmed Seventh Amended Joint Plan of Affiliated Debtors under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code (as modified, the "Plan") of Washington Mutual, Inc. ("WMI"), today issued a statement regarding certain Escrow CUSIPs issued to eligible former shareholders of WMI. Eligible former shareholders are those who timely submitted relevant documentation, including the release required under Section 41.6 of the Plan.
The Trust has received inquiries regarding the status of "Escrow CUSIPs" issued on the Effective Date in accordance with the Plan. As has been stated in the past, such Escrow CUSIPs were issued solely to facilitate potential future distributions, if any, to eligible former shareholders of WMI if Claims involving Disputed Equity Interests are disallowed.
By way of background, as of the Effective Date of the Plan, the Depository Trust Company ("DTC") established and maintains positions in the aforementioned Escrow CUSIPs. These Escrow CUSIPs represent nominees' positions that would be used to make future distributions, if any, of common stock issued by WMIH Corp. (formerly known as WMI Holdings Corp. ("WMIHC")). Pursuant to the Plan, such shares of WMIHC's common stock were deposited in the Disputed Equity Escrow established in accordance with the Plan and are to be maintained in the Disputed Equity Escrow until such time as Claims involving Disputed Equity Interests are either allowed or disallowed.
Upon resolution of those Claims, the related portion of the shares maintained in the Disputed Equity Escrow will be distributed to claimants holding the newly allowed claim or, if the claim is disallowed, the related portion of the shares will be redistributed to beneficiaries of the Trust in accordance with the distribution mechanics set forth in the Plan. In the event any future distributions of WMIHC common stock are made from the Disputed Equity Reserve, DTC will be instructed to allocate such common stock to each of the Escrow CUSIPs on a pro rata basis.
In June 2015, several Claims were disallowed and 1.4 million shares were subsequently distributed to holders of Escrow CUSIPs on a pro rata basis; however, a holder received such a distribution solely to the extent such holder's ownership position resulted in a distribution of at least one share. Since that date, no additional disallowances with respect to those relevant Claims have occurred. On that basis, former positions represented by the Escrow CUSIPs are not currently entitled to receive any distributions under the terms of the Plan.
As stated above, the Escrow CUSIPS were established solely to facilitate potential distributions, if any, of shares of WMIHC common stock. The only source of common stock available for any such a distribution would be from the 1.5 million of shares remaining on deposit in the Disputed Equity Escrow. Specifically, the Escrow CUSIPS do not, in and of themselves, represent an entitlement to any possible future cash distributions from the Trust, WMIHC or the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (either in its corporate capacity or as the receiver for Washington Mutual Bank), as the case may be.
In accordance with the Plan, the Trust will issue Liquidating Trust Interests to WMI's former shareholders if, and only if, the Trust is able to monetize Liquidating Trust Assets in amounts sufficient to pay-in-full claims held by beneficiaries of the Trust who are senior to members of Classes 19 and 22, and then, only if a shareholder had satisfied timely all conditions applicable to receiving any such Liquidating Trust Interests. There can be no assurances that the Trust will be able to monetize assets in a manner sufficient to give effect to the foregoing.
The Trust regularly discloses the status of its operations (including the status of pending litigations) and unaudited financial information in a Form 10-K filed annually with the Securities and Exchange Commission. In addition, the Trust files a Quarterly Summary Report with the Bankruptcy Court and under Form 8-K with the Securities Exchange Commission.
Capitalized terms used and not otherwise defined in this Press Release have the meanings given to such terms in the Plan. The Plan and additional information about WMI Liquidating Trust can be found at www.wmitrust.com.
Contact
Andrew Siegel / Aaron Palash
Joele Frank, Wilkinson Brimmer Katcher
(212) 355-4449
SOURCE WMI Liquidating Trust
Related Links
http://www.wmitrust.com
If there is a value in the trusts, and a value in the income stream from those trusts, we are going to find out some time between now and ever that WMIH is already in control of the value, and apparently using it behind the scene of our limited knowledge of the master plan.
The WMILT is the successor in interest only for the value of those assets recognized as part of the bankruptcy of WMI. The value of the trusts and the income stream from those trusts have never been part of the bankruptcy and their value will never pass through the WMILT.
I am not an expert on embedded derivatives, but the embedded derivative certificates you refer to, that POR7 cancelled, belonged to WMI – not WMIH. It is possible that WMIH has its own embedded derivative. AZCowboy is the expert in that area.
It is likely we will never know for certain all the facts that Willingham and others know about the seizure and sale of Washington Mutual Bank (WMB), or the subsequent bankruptcy of Washington Mutual Incorporated (WMI) and its subsidiary. However, we can collect and analyze the facts that are available to us and come to a possible conclusion. The first premise is that before the seizure of WMB and the bankruptcy of WMI, WMI reported it was worth more than $300B dollars in value (assets). This did not include the deposits (liabilities) of WMB. The FDIC-R accounted for those deposits and so stated. The reported pre-bankruptcy value of WMI should have included the value of all its subsidiaries – but not those subsidiaries of WMB. Forget WMB, forget its value, forget redacted statements, forget closed-door meetings, forget everything else and keep your mind concentrated on the reported value of WMI. If there was a value to WMI before the bankruptcy, that value (less paid debts) still exists.
It is important to keep in mind that the value of WMI pre-bankruptcy was greater than the value of WMI after they filed bankruptcy. WMI claimed approximately $32B as a value for the bankruptcy and could not claim the massive $300B plus value located in the trusts and exempt from the bankruptcy. So, we have WMI in bankruptcy with a value and, separately, we have WMI participating in the trusts with a value and that value exempt from the bankruptcy. The original WMI no longer exists, and the WMILT, as successor in interest of WMI, manages any residue of the value (assets) allowed in the bankruptcy. The trusts and the income stream from those trusts still exist and WMIH now owns any value in those trusts that WMI formerly owned because WMIH is the reorganized WMI.
If the value still exists and WMIH now owns that value, why is the PPS so low? It is low because WMIH wants it low. See posts by AZCowboy discussing embedded derivative.
Like playing pachinko, keep your eye on the ball (value). It matters little the route the ball makes to get to the end of the maze, it only matters that it lands on a winning spot.
Best regards,
David West
GT - As I stated, we are on the outside looking in. My guess is that there are one or more events pending that will bring the process to a level of clarity most of us will accept. Until then - we wait and speculate.
LG – As we know, during the bankruptcy negotiations, and in a deposition or statement by one of the managers of WMI, he stated that the original plan was to not reorganize. This path would have allowed them to cancel equity and to divide all the value of the trusts amongst the shareholders rated above equity. When WMI failed to cancel equity, it changed everything for the holders of WMI shares at all levels, and the more profitable path for the large investors was to reorganize. This process allows many of them to recoup those lost gains by shorting and/or buying the common shares of WMIH. The mom and pop investors are not knowledgeable enough about the market to not lose; statistics say that 80% of them will lose their money.
When someone on this board discovered the trust funds that were off-limits to the bankruptcy, it became clear where the real value of WMI had been all the time. The value is still there – whatever that value is. For example, if trust A, B, and C each have 27 loans assigned to them, some of those loans will incur a default and the value of the trust will change. Additionally, all three trusts may have the same single loan assigned to each. This process also screws up the value of the trusts. My guess is that WMI has two sources of value in relation to the trusts. In some trusts they own the loans and part of the income stream, which is the best scenario for us. In other trusts they simply own part of the income stream generated by the trusts. The important thing to know is that because the trusts were off-limits to the bankruptcy – they are still off-limits to the bankruptcy. WMIH now owns all the value of the trusts, and in that respect, the beneficial/escrow markers are moot. Something may be afoot that will involve the markers, but the value of the trusts will end up with WMIH. At that time shareholders may hold, sell, or buy more shares. How WMIH will transfer value, based on the markers, to a shareholder who has sold all his shares and closed his trading account will be a mystery until it happens.
We are on the outside looking in. We often think things are simple and that they should move faster. It will not happen that way. We have no choice but to rely on the BOD to make better decisions than those shareholders who did not release in 2012.
Good luck to all!
WMI and WMIH have never been about shareholders. They are about the various grades of the shares only. It does not matter who owns the shares. Shareholders own and hold shares until they sell them or they are cancelled. The shares owned by shareholders that did not sign releases were cancelled; end of story for them and for their cancelled shares. They have no further rights unless they now own shares of WMIH.
AZCowboy - Do you have a link to the testimony?
Thanks!
AZCowboy - when you state “a common share evaluation”, are you referring to the beneficial interest, or escrow markers?
Tranche 6 Class 22', The Original Common Share owners of The Washington Mutual Inc., (The Parent Corp.), ... I align with D. Beck, (WaMu Capital Corp.) and his testimony, with a common share evaluation of between $12.00 and $15.00 Dollars (WMI' said NO' to JPMC's offer of $8.00)
Don - nice to hear from you after so long.
This list depicts the much-touted Institutional holders of WMIH common stock. It is interesting to note that 88 of these institutions own less than 100k shares, and that there are a number of familiar names in the top ten. Those in the top ten should embody the greatest level of institutional knowledge about WMIH; several actually increased their positions. Ranked at 114, JPM Morgan Chase has now almost sold out of their position. That may not be an indication of anything in particular, as they use other investment vehicles for investing in stocks. Of the positions that sold out, I see no names that are familiar to me, which may indicate that their institutional knowledge is lacking, or they found a greener pasture for short-term returns.
Institutional Ownership Summary reported in NASDAQ 13F filings (9-30-2017)
Institutional Ownership 40.52%
Total Shares Outstanding (millions) 207
Increased Positions 34 2,777,804
Decreased Positions 45 4,305,423
Held Positions 59 76,681,501
Total Institutions 138 83,764,728
New and Sold Out Positions
New Positions 6 487,732
Sold Out Positions 15 2,956,573
Owner Name Shares Shares % Value In
Held Changed Changed 1000s
1 GREYWOLF CAPITAL MGMT LP 10,600,333 0 0 10,706
2 BLACKROCK INC. 10,021,592 311,821 3.21 10,122
3 NUMINA CAPITAL MGMT, LLC 9,367,040 481,361 5.42 9,461
4 VANGUARD GROUP INC 8,465,035 77,704 0.93 8,550
5 APPALOOSA LP 7,600,000 0 0 7,676
6 SCOGGIN MGMT LP 5,729,015 720,782 14.39 5,786
7 STATE STREET CORP 3,495,025 66,659 1.94 3,530
8 LAKEWOOD CAPITAL MGMT, LP 2,769,100 0 0 2,797
9 CENTERBRIDGE PARTNERS, L.P. 2,603,867 0 0 2,630
10 NORTHERN TRUST CORP 2,225,717 35,211 1.61 2,248
11 WITTENBERG INVESTMENT MGMT, INC. 1,817,159 -21,787 -1.19 1,835
12 FRONTFOUR CAPITAL GROUP LLC 1,791,724 -12,100 -0.67 1,810
13 GEODE CAPITAL MGMT, LLC 1,751,855 4,855 0.28 1,769
14 DALTON INVESTMENTS LLC 1,300,000 0 0 1,313
15 CREDIT SUISSE AG/ 1,265,208 175,060 16.06 1,278
16 LEVIN CAPITAL STRATEGIES, L.P. 1,078,207 25,000 2.37 1,089
17 SCHWAB CHARLES INVESTMENT MGMT INC 873,565 -59,261 -6.35 882
18 BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORP 801,007 -338 -0.04 809
19 683 CAPITAL MGMT, LLC 690,826 0 0 698
20 TIAA CREF INVESTMENT MGMT LLC 524,986 -17,700 -3.26 530
21 OLD WEST INVESTMENT MGMT, LLC 482,198 -6,618 -1.35 487
22 FSI GROUP, LLC 438,306 438,306 New 443
23 FLAHERTY & CRUMRINE INC 391,952 0 0 396
24 NEW GENERATION ADVISORS, LLC 391,638 0 0 396
25 SELZ CAPITAL LLC 361,472 0 0 365
26 EVANSON ASSET MGMT, LLC 339,408 0 0 343
27 TEACHERS ADVISORS, LLC 336,212 -19,231 -5.41 340
28 SWISS NATIONAL BANK 326,500 0 0 330
29 DIMENSIONAL FUND ADVISORS LP 325,491 -97,248 -23 329
30 PROXIMA CAPITAL MGMT, LLC 320,000 0 0 323
31 BALTER LIQUID ALTERNATIVES, LLC 312,500 160,441 105.51 316
32 CALIFORNIA STATE TEACHERS RET SYS 305,152 -37,743 -11.01 308
33 WELLS FARGO & COMPANY/MN 284,661 79,883 39.01 288
34 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC 280,028 27,220 10.77 283
35 PALOMA PARTNERS MGMT CO 273,100 -334,550 -55.06 276
36 MORGAN STANLEY 250,555 67,451 36.84 253
37 REDWOOD CAPITAL MGMT, LLC 233,649 0 0 236
38 RHUMBLINE ADVISERS 220,720 1,470 0.67 223
39 NEW YORK STATE COMMON RET FUND 206,200 0 0 208
40 DUPONT CAPITAL MGMT CORP 196,172 0 0 198
41 DEUTSCHE BANK AG\ 181,715 -87,327 -32.46 184
42 S. MUOIO & CO. LLC 171,499 0 0 173
43 MANUFACTURERS LIFE INS CO 164,234 8,763 5.64 166
44 ALLIANCEBERNSTEIN L.P. 149,900 -14,300 -8.71 151
45 AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL GROUP INC 129,779 9,703 8.08 131
46 MILLENNIUM MGMT LLC 114,821 -48,986 -29.91 116
47 CHEYNE CAPITAL MGMT (UK) LLP 110,000 -110,000 -50 111
48 VOYA INVESTMENT MGMT LLC 109,284 -12,420 -10.21 110
49 NATIONWIDE FUND ADVISORS 108,019 -8,769 -7.51 109
50 UNITED CAPITAL FINANCIAL ADVISERS, LLC 100,000 0 0 101
51 AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK 99,171 0 0 100
52 ROYCE & ASSOCIATES LP 77,742 0 0 79
53 AMERIPRISE FINANCIAL INC 75,633 1 0 76
54 HSBC HOLDINGS PLC 73,759 -1,990 -2.63 74
55 BLACKSTONE GROUP L.P. 68,897 0 0 70
56 STRS OHIO 65,200 0 0 66
57 FLORIDA RETIREMENT SYSTEM 57,930 0 0 59
58 D. E. SHAW & CO., INC. 54,981 6,926 14.41 56
59 SAMLYN CAPITAL, LLC 53,420 0 0 54
60 LEGAL & GENERAL GROUP PLC 47,545 -8,214 -14.73 48
61 SQUAREPOINT OPS LLC 47,421 -12,379 -20.7 48
62 CITADEL ADVISORS LLC 45,519 -232,502 -83.63 46
63 VIRTU FINANCIAL LLC 39,723 -17,532 -30.62 40
64 UBS GROUP AG 37,884 4,549 13.65 38
65 SG AMERICAS SECURITIES, LLC 26,492 -44,913 -62.9 27
66 LORBER DAVID A 26,176 0 0 26
67 UBS ASSET MGMT AMERICAS INC 26,000 0 0 26
68 RAYMOND JAMES & ASSOCIATES 25,089 25,089 New 25
69 LINSCOMB & WILLIAMS, INC. 25,001 0 0 25
70 AMALGAMATED BANK 24,532 1,771 7.78 25
71 NATIXIS 23,770 23,770 New 24
72 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO /CAN/ 22,900 0 0 23
73 FMR LLC 22,189 0 0 22
74 SUSQUEHANNA INTERNATIONAL GROUP, LLP 22,090 -110,435 -83.33 22
75 RAYMOND JAMES FINANCIAL SVCS ADV, INC. 21,258 49 0.23 21
76 BANK OF AMERICA CORP /DE/ 19,957 -7,275 -26.72 20
77 BNP PARIBAS ARBITRAGE, SA 19,705 -1,525 -7.18 20
78 ZURCHER KANTONALBANK 18,975 0 0 19
79 ROYAL BANK OF CANADA 18,144 10,216 128.86 18
80 ARTHUR ZASKE & ASSOCIATES, LLC 18,080 0 0 18
81 TEACHER RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF TEXAS 17,143 641 3.88 17
82 TWO SIGMA ADVISERS, LP 17,100 900 5.56 17
83 ARBITER PARTNERS CAPITAL MGMT LLC 16,712 0 0 17
84 AMERITAS INVESTMENT PARTNERS, INC. 15,822 0 0 16
85 STIFEL FINANCIAL CORP 14,372 0 0 15
86 PROSHARE ADVISORS LLC 13,304 -3,796 -22.2 13
87 BROWN ADVISORY INC 12,699 -607 -4.56 13
88 BARCLAYS PLC 10,964 10,811 7,066.01 11
89 PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL INC 10,650 0 0 11
90 PROFUND ADVISORS LLC 10,622 235 2.26 11
91 HIGHLAND CAPITAL MGMT LP 10,310 0 0 10
92 LADENBURG THALMANN FIN SVCS INC. 7,936 0 0 8
93 NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL 3,481 0 0 4
94 MEEDER ASSET MGMT INC 3,196 0 0 3
95 PINEBRIDGE INVESTMENTS, L.P. 2,586 0 0 3
96 TCI WEALTH ADVISORS, INC. 2,427 0 0 2
97 CITIGROUP INC 954 169 21.53 1
98 TRUST ASSET MGMT LLC 953 0 0 1
99 REGIONS FINANCIAL CORP 565 565 New 1
100 PNC FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP, INC. 439 420 2,210.53
101 CUTLER GROUP LP 240 0 0
102 IFP ADVISORS, INC 213 -6 -2.74
103 VANTAGE INVESTMENT ADVISORS, LLC 86 0 0
104 PARALLEL ADVISORS, LLC 62 0 0
105 US BANCORP \DE\ 42 0 0
106 ESTABROOK CAPITAL MGMT 37 0 0
107 VALLEY NATIONAL ADVISERS INC 33 0 0
108 HANSON MCCLAIN, INC. 29 0 0
109 FIRST MANHATTAN CO 26 0 0
110 MOSAIC FAMILY WEALTH, LLC 25 0 0
111 ADVISOR GROUP, INC. 22 0 0
112 NORTH STAR INVESTMENT MGMT CORP. 16 0 0
113 HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK 15 0 0
114 JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 8 -19,291 -99.96
115 TOMPKINS FINANCIAL CORP 8 0 0
116 CHICAGO PARTNERS INVESTMENT GROUP LLC 7 -7 -50
117 TRADEWINDS CAPITAL MGMT, LLC 4 0 0
118 BESSEMER GROUP INC 3 0 0
119 M&R CAPITAL MGMT INC 3 0 0
120 PEOPLES FINANCIAL SERVICES CORP. 2 0 0
121 COVINGTON CAPITAL MGMT 1 1 New
122 FINANCIAL MGMT PROFESSIONALS, INC. 1 0 0
123 THRIVENT FINANCIAL FOR LUTHERANS 1 1 New
124 AKANTHOS CAPITAL MGMT LLC 0 -429,405 Sold Out
125 AKRE CAPITAL MGMT LLC 0 -1,460,000 Sold Out
126 AQR CAPITAL MGMT LLC 0 -199,250 Sold Out
127 BRIDGEWAY CAPITAL MGMT INC 0 -338,900 Sold Out
128 CREATIVE PLANNING 0 -11,591 Sold Out
129 D.A. DAVIDSON & CO. 0 -3,073 Sold Out
130 GRADIENT INVESTMENTS LLC 0 -20 Sold Out
131 LMR PARTNERS LLP 0 -37,160 Sold Out
132 MARATHON ASSET MGMT LLP 0 -527 Sold Out
133 MASCOMA WEALTH MGMT LLC 0 -18 Sold Out
134 METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE CO/NY 0 -134,980 Sold Out
135 MPS LORIA FINANCIAL PLANNERS, LLC 0 -156 Sold Out
136 NEXT FINANCIAL GROUP, INC 0 -5 Sold Out
137 RESOURCES INVESTMENT ADVISORS, INC. 0 -4 Sold Out
138 TRISHIELD CAPITAL MGMT LLC 0 -341,484 Sold Out
Thanks BigAW. “Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.” ? Mark Twain.
Most fund managers are paid for advice, and charge a percentage of the return on investment (ROI) not on the principal outlay, or value of the investment. If, as many hope, there are hidden billions, what is being earned on the hidden billions might be $100M, and the 2% fee would be around $2M (using the previous formula). If true, it gives new hope to all that there are hidden billions.
In other words they are managing 100 million to get a 2% fee of 2 million. They are not managing billions.
100,000,000 x .02 = 2,000,000
8k is out dated Aug 21, 2017.
During the bankruptcy, and before the confirmation of POR7, an attorney, director, or officer stated in a deposition that Washington Mutual Inc. originally had no plans to come out of the bankruptcy and reorganize. Can anyone provide a link to that document?
Thanks!
When the dust settled after conversion for others to Qs, there were approximately 1.4 billion shares to consider.
Per the 25% rule and excluding the incorrect 2.5% to the liquidation trust (I seem to recall that number is applied to litigation trust, and applies to any whole amount recovered):
Per old WAMUQs
10mln = 0.00178$
100mln = 0.0178$
1B = 0.178$
10B = 1.78$
100B = 17.8$
Willingham bought 1 Million former WAMUQ shares at $0.20 per share ($200,000 invested) before he started getting blocks of (earned?) shares as a member of BOD.
TD Ameritrade has the worst smartphone App on earth. The number error is due to an upgrade.
Shorting and Covering.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_(finance)
Below is an excerpt from POR7. Where in this document or what other document references that 2.5% will go to WMIH?
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER CONFIRMING
THE SEVENTH AMENDED JOINT PLAN OF AFFILIATED DEBTORS
PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 11 OF THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY CODE……..
ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, DECREED, AND DETERMINED THAT:
ORDER……..
8. Treatment of Preferred Equity Interests . Commencing on the Effective Date, and subject to the execution and delivery of a release in accordance with the provisions of Section 41.6 of the Plan, each holder of a Preferred Equity Interest, including, without limitation, each holder of a REIT Series, shall be entitled to receive such holder’s Pro Rata Share of seventy-five percent (75%) of (a) subject to the right of election provided in Sections 6.2(b), 7.2(b), 16.1(b)(ii), 18.2(b), 19.2(b) and 20.2(b) of the Plan, the Reorganized Common Stock, and (b) in the event that all Allowed Claims and Postpetition Interest Claims in respect of Allowed Claims are paid in full (including with respect to Allowed Subordinated Claims), any Liquidating Trust Interests to be redistributed.
9. Treatment of Common Equity Interests . Commencing on the Effective Date, and subject to the execution and delivery of a release in accordance with the provisions of Section 41.6 of the Plan, each holder of Common Equity Interests shall be entitled to receive such holder’s Pro Rata Share of twenty-five percent (25%) of (a) subject to (i) the right of election provided in Sections 6.2(b), 7.2(b), 16.1(b)(ii), 18.2(b), 19.2(b), and 20.2(b) of the Plan and (ii) the rights of holders of Dime Warrants pursuant to the LTW Stipulation, the Reorganized
Page 56
________________________________________
Common Stock, and (b) in the event that all Allowed Claims and Postpetition Interest Claims in respect of Allowed Claims are paid in full (including with respect to Allowed Subordinated Claims), any Liquidating Trust Interests to be redistributed.
Does anyone have the link to the document that outlines the 75-25 ratio?
Thanks!
KKR posts first-quarter loss as choppy financial market bites
Mon, 25 Apr '16 | 4:27 PM ET
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/25/kkr-posts-first-quarter-loss-as-choppy-financial-market-bites.html