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.
Why are you amazed? Nobody claims to know the value of the assets. However, It is clear (to me at least) that the final purchase price is the book value of the assets, not the purchase premium.
Anybody speculating/investing in distressed equity knows that there is risk, that he may lose his shirt. What's your point?
Why so rude? Why are you so frustrated? Can't you just wait?
Some payments are made in installments. If you don't know what that means, you should stay away from all financial matters.
Dude: you cannot "prove" something that has not happened yet.
I guess you haven't studied enough. In the past few weeks/months, many posters have presented very credible DD, together with links to support their positions. Pay attention!
Can you explain why expenses would be so high (~100B out of 150B)?
Unfortunately baseline is not zero. Baseline is book value. You add or subtract from book value, not from zero.
I agree: You can't get them. But only because you didn't sign the release.
$1.88B for everything ( I.e. All assets and liabilities )
A little correction:
$1.88B for purchasing everything ( I.e. All assets and liabilities )
A little more detailed information:
$1.88B for purchasing everything ( I.e. All assets and liabilities ) at book value.
The longer this goes on the LESS chance we will ever get paid....that's a fact.
It's not fact (hasn't happened yet). It's also not logical (chances are the same).
Hope I'm wrong....looks like escrows are going to get paid....they were given to us not only as a pacifier.
Documents are records of past events. If you like to use rear view mirror to guide you when you drive forward, be my guest.
...escrow returns will be limited.
Good to know that you are more positive than most bathers, who think escrows will get nothing. I would be more than happy to receive something, however limited the amount may be.
BK may be right. The quoted text clearly refers to the repurchase obligations "as the servicer". The previous agreement expired; JPM needs to repurchase the rights, in order to service the loans. Nothing to do with assets.
Don't tell me that you didn't see the "off-balance sheet" item in JPM official document. This has been cited many times on this board. Unless your definition is different, there is nothing wrong in saying that an OBS item is a hidden item. No claim or complaint doesn't mean that the hidden assets do not exist. Some credible theories have been advanced to address the issue on this board.
Your statement is wrong from the beginning. As several posters pointed out, the WAMU story started WAY before POR 7. The missing or hidden assets are clearly mentioned in JPM official documents. Just because something hasn't happened does not mean that it won't happen in the near future.
Who cares what you believe. Just show us the arguments against. And no, citing the fact that my account is currently showing zero is not going to do it.
Why? Are you afraid that secret will be revealed? What topic? Can you even pruduce one?
What did Katz say, really? Documents are records of facts, of what has happened in the past? True. We all know that.
But documents or facts won't tell you what will happen in the future. If you only rely on facts, you can yell every day like this: hey I am writing now, so it is a fact that I am alive.
Indeed you can yell all you want, and it will ring true every time. Until the day you die.
WHat kind on nonesense is that? Someone just gave you a documented explanation of premium vs. book value, and here you are claiming that premium is book value? How gullible!
Too funny. LOL!
And how do you explain the fact that bonds issued by BB now carry symbols starting with DISHxxxx?
I don't believe Daisy really exists. Her role is to show up at the beginning of the pump-and-dump cycle, trying to drum up buyers. When enough buyers have purchased shares, the dump cycle starts and she disappears.
The problem with you is that you do not try to write clearly. No, English is not an excuse, because that is not my native language either.
If you were talking about the "joint venture" that involves lbhi2, Elliot, KS, etc., then yes, it is closed. But I entered this particular conversation because of #55169, where edbk46 was mainly talking about lbhi2:
>>
if this arrangement/parternship has been close / i stand correct / please post the final agreement if possible
however lbhi2 lbie are active and thru cayman formula one are getting ready for "new" ventures
imho this is longterm
<<
Then you replied immediately:
>>
Also you dont know the termination date, but you know that it long term and that you are correct.Fine.
Anyway, termination date was allready posted, and partnership is allready closed.
<<
So, which is it?
Read it yourself. I gave you the link. I even gave you the page, For some reason, I could not copy-paste. Otherwise, I would quote the whole paragraph.
You said it was already closed. Apparently not true.
On p. 3 of LBI2 progress report (3rd link), dated 12 August 2014:
"The court has granted an extension until 30 November 2015."
Thanks for the links. I'll do some reading...
Just so you know, at the very end of the first article:
"There can be no assurance that the Joint Venture will be completed. Even if completed, the final terms of the Joint Venture may differ from the terms described above."
When you make specific statement like that, you should show responsibility and post some links to relevant documents.
I hate to argue, so let me make it short. I would only be worried if the PR is about:
certain OF the escrow cusips issued...
not
certain escrow cusips issued...
How can I be wrong? I am only quoting the PR. It is the sentence immediately following the one you quoted.
BTW "a certain group of people" is the same as "a particular group of people".
"Certain Escrow CUSIPs issued to eligible former shareholders of WMI" can mean:
those (or those particular) Escrow CUSIPs issued to eligible former shareholders of WMI
>>The word ELIGIBLE could mean pre-seizure or it could mean post-seizure those who signed releases..<<
You were not paying attention. The following sentence clearly states:
Eligible former shareholders are those who timely submitted relevant documentation, including the release required under Section 41.6 of the Plan.
Joe's leaving is the best indication that the saga is finally coming to an end.
>>No, i don't know for sure. However, i would rather error on the side of 'expecting nothing and then receiving something' compared to 'expecting something and then receiving nothing'.<<
That's fine. Just remember that your "i" doesn't and shouldn't represent everybody.
>>Our escrow's success is a "no brainer" ONLY if there's something to come back to our escrows.<<
Do you KNOW for sure that NOTHING is coming back to our escrows?
>>What's being questioned is "if" there's anything coming back from the FDIC.<<
Do you KNOW for sure that NOTHING is coming back from the FDIC?
Cotton forgot to highlight this part:
"A reorganization plan... allows the debtor to reorganize debts without resorting to asset liquidation in order to resolve issues with creditors."
Go back and read my old posts. End of conversation.
At the very least, it owns valuable NOLs.
What's wrong with 20% discount?
>>In Fenwick & West’s 2011 Seed Financing Survey (the “Fenwick Survey”), the percentage of convertible note seed financings that granted a discount to investors was 67% in 2010 and 83% in 2011; and the median discount was 20% in both 2010 and 2011.<<
You said:
>>It's dead money now, as evidenced by the price and lack of buying, even in the low trip zeros.<<
My question is the opposite: why no dumping? You can sell anything if the price is right.