Individual Investor
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.
Facts are fine.
You have to know how to apply them correctly.
I've been thinking about this, cotton.
After reading the new Balance Sheet & Cash Flow Estimates, I'm not sure how to reconcile this market finance opportunity with the Derivatives business or the CMB or CDS businesses, if the Lehman Estate has anything in these businesses at all.
I'm not against a Consumer Finance entity, especially if it can benefit from FED operations and regulations.
But, the Derivatives business on the same balance sheet seems like it would be a tough one.
Do you agree?
kittycat...
Are you saying the $314B in claims subject to compromise is a non-dischargeable amount that doesn't change from report to report?
Or that the CTs are non-dischargeable as claimed in their prospectus?
The only issue with the discharge clause is that the subordinated debentures are settled in the POR for 21% - 29% according to what I've seen.
So, the tender becomes appropo...
hesthegoober has class 15?
WHOA...
I'm just a shareholder trying to understand how a legacy can exit this BK.
I don't know the answer to your question exactly as I don't feel 100% confirmation by any of the data or legal provisions presented to date.
Others may feel differently or just be hoping.
I don't know why some would use this board to post anything intentionally false or misleading.
I'm not saying anyone has, but I'm trying to confirm some claims.
Thank you.
The $80B is the income or revenues collected in 5 years of bankruptcy.
And, much of this has been paid out in claims outlined in the POR.
It is good to know they have the cash to pay the claims, but what is the cost?
The debtor controlled asset total is more like $111B.
There is a Cash Flow estimate provided that shows the income the Estate expects from existing assets.
So, in a nutshell, the Estate is planning to settle $314B in Claims Subject to Compromise with $111B in Debtor Controlled Assets that produce maybe $5B in Annual Revenues.
LBHGP and all Preferreds have gone to an escrow account supposedly.
So, depending on your broker, you can go to your account history page and set a search for "all transactions" and search all credits & debits.
It should show the removal of the shares with a place holder should they be paid or settled.
At least this is how my broker is accounting for it.
I don't know, stockbum.
I called a claims search company and am requesting the claims pdf be sent to an e-mail.
Thanks.
still nothing through Epic Claim Search.
$1.7B looks better.
But, I don't like the 4/01/2013 filing date.
66455?
Nothing is coming up...
Thanks, stockbum9.
I couldn't tell if you searched $1.5 billion on the balance sheet or if you know of something more at JPM, but the search tool does come up with interesting points when it works.
In this case, though, I'm not sure we are 100% certain.
Also, from Page 11:
"Balances with Lehman Brothers Inc. ("LBI") have been adjusted to reflect amounts as per the settlement agreement (refer to LBI Settlement Agreement for additional information). LBHI's General Unsecured Claim against LBI of $1.5 billion, related to the subrogated claim of JPM against LBI, is reflected in Subrogated Receivables from Affiliates and Third Parties."
And from Pages 22-23:
"Non-Controlled Affiliates:
o On February 26, 2013, the Company entered into an agreement with LBI to settle all intercompany claims (Docket No. 5784 filed by LBI). The Company’s customer claims against LBI were allowed at an agreed amount of $2.9 billion (valued as of March 31, 2013). The Company’s general unsecured claims were allowed at an agreed amount of approximately $13.6 billion (including $1.5 billion relating to a subrogated claim by JP Morgan against LBI);
o On March 27, 2013, the Company executed a settlement agreement with LBF (Docket No. 36300) to settle the claims between LBF and LBHI and other Debtor and Debtor controlled entities. The agreement is not yet effective, and the timing as to when it will become effective is uncertain subject to a number of conditions precedent. 22 08-13555 jmp Doc 38955 Filed 07/23/13 Entered 07/23/13 17:26:32 Main Document
Pg 22 of 39
o Prior to the third Plan distribution, LBHI entered into agreements with certain creditors to reduce the reserves required to be retained in accordance with the Plan and subsequent order of the Bankruptcy Court on account of disputed claims against LBHI and certain other Debtors."
This might be a specific claim to bring to JPM for an ID. But if they haven't ID'd this claim as the CTs in this document, why would they ID the claim to a shareholder and what would be their motivation to do so?
guster0,
If claims in allowed classes are settled from 9% to 100%, are we at a figure yet where we know what those Liabilities Subject to Compromise are paid down to?
Is that figure of Liabilities Subject to Compromise decreasing at all in your view?
From the 7/23/2013 Balance Sheet:
Total Debtor Entities Assets - $111.179B
Liabilities Subject to Compromise - $314.026B
Total Liabilities - $320.270B
The Cash Flow Statement shows the Estate has Income or Revenues of $80+B since Bankruptcy Filing.
So, what are the Liabilities Subject to Compromise?
About 50 dockets posted today.
A lot of Debtors filing the right to inspect.
Many from JPM transferring claims.
Some to an Alden Global Distressed Fund.
Lots of reading to do.
We're all here with our nose against the glass...Why don't we get the puppy?
BTW, kudos on Detroit CBD sale last year...ROTFLMAO!
Excellent, caught on!
Any undocumented income or non-amo loans and they'll be busted.
The CTs were de-listed by the Exchange and re-listed.
Every week, the Exchange has a list of any Exchange changes and the CTs were listed as re-moved then re-listed by the Exchange.
They usually require some notification from the Company or Estate Administrators to remove then re-list an issue as they don't make unilateral changes regarding issues.
robigus, I'm not sure of your posting, but I hope this helps you.
So, what is the Lehman legacy that will exit-BK and have the best chance of succeeding on the market including, but not limited to, the "optimal currency and market position" that keeps together the best assets, administered by the best Lehman executives, to continue to pay necessary debtor & creditor instruments, existing & anticipated, going forward?
There are many parts of the CT prospectus relating reaffirmation, priority and non-discharge that describe the utility of CTs in a potential reorg of assets in the legacy.
So, if there will be a post-BK Lehman, the CTs must be reaffirmed, reinstated with priority and it is least expensive to do this with back divvies with interest after the 20 quarters.
If Lehman doesn't exit BK as an IB with business units in tact, it will be less certain the CTs will play a role.
But, much has been posted on this topic already.
Yes, agreements were made to pay back 9% to 100% of claims.
Hopefully, these payments go towards principle.
Regardless, the payments leave a debt structure.
How much of this can be left behind as a legacy exits BK is not clear.
And, neither are the creditor positions.
However, we get closer to knowing what can leave BK once the POR is paid off and the post-BK structure is identified.
My position has always been the debtors/creditors who will benefit from the legacy may have to agree to restructure their interests if not allocate more resources and services in new roles.
This does not mean their contributions pre-BK are written down to zero in many cases, but we will just have to understand how the Estate & Court proceed.
It depends on what opportunities the Estate sees for a post-bk entity and if they are capatilized enough for the opportunity.
At this point, no plans have been presented with the known time frames or deadlines.
If they want a REIT, why are they selling RE positions in France and not the Aircraft LLC?
Is there anything left in Aurora Financial for a US Bancorp that wasn't sold off or an unprofitable undocumented income product managed by a Lehmanite now working at Barclays?
Barclays states in Court they did not buy or assume debt. But they have assumed Liabilities connected with the transaction.
From Barclays Lehman Acquisition Clarification Letter:
"3. Assumed and Excluded Liabilities. Clause (a) of the definition of "Assumed Liabilities" consists solely of all Liabilities incurred by Purchaser and arising after the Closing in connection with the Business. Clause (d) of the definition of "Assumed Liabilities" in the Original Agreement is understood as though it read as follows: "accounts payable incurred in the Ordinary Course of Business of Seller after, with respect to each entity comprising Seller, the date on which such entity commenced a voluntary case or cases under Chapter 11 or Chapter 7, as the case may be, of the Bankruptcy Code, associated with the Business (other than accounts payable arising out of or in connection with any Excluded Contract), including, for the avoidance of doubt, to the extent arising after such date (i) invoiced accounts payable and (ii) accrued but uninvoiced accounts payable)." Consistent with the other provisions of this Letter, no Liabilities described in clause (i) of the definition of Assumed Liabilities shall be "Assumed Liabilities." For the avoidance of doubt, any Liabilities of Seller or its Subsidiaries under the $15.8B tri-party repurchase facilitiy dated on or about September 18, 2008 funded by JP Morgan Chase shall be "Excluded Liabilities.""
Has anyone a compelling reason that the Liabilities Barclays has assumed do not in fact include the CTs that are not a part of the BK and simply not paid by former-Lehmanites who want to accumulate them on the cheap during a 20 quarterly payment period when no coupons are paid?
The Barclays transaction included $2.5B in securities to be assumed by Barclays "intended as compensation to ex-Lehman employees who went to employment at Barclays relating to the transaction."
Would anyone happen to know what securities these would be?
If the Barclays payment was $1.7B & assumed $2.5B is Lehman issued securities, the Lehman Balance Sheet could change differently.
However, I'm not sure from the statements I've read that the $2.5B in securities can be moved from the Lehman Balance Sheet as Shareholder Equity or that they are moved from the Lehman Balance Sheet as Current Assets.
Is there a reason we cannot believe these securities include the $1.2B CTs?
If they are the CTs, it could explain why they are considered "not to be a part of the Bankruptcy."
But, I don't know why Barclays could keep them without paying them.
Lastly, I would have to re-think the NOL contribution if they are related to the CTs trading.
Ivanavi:
<<it is best to sit back and let the company work through this process"
The Lawyers have gotten everything they've wanted for the last 5 years!
What have they wanted that they haven't received?
Yet, they still don't have the Company out of BK and markets are at all time highs.
The attorneys are paid more than any other BK in history.
If they receive the stay continuation, they haven't presented how it will benefit a post-BK entity.
devils goober says they'll possibly form a REIT-type legacy, but no plans have been presented or approved, and they keep Aircraft assets on the balance sheet while they're selling premium positions in the top commercial RE markets in France and elsewhere to pay off creditors.
The Estate has been afforded all the secrecy and privacy they've wanted, yet what they can tell about their operations remains little, as though nobody else needs to know.
I feel the valuation of the company is at a minimum.
And, they're trying to get out!
Are you with us or against us, devils?
Come on devils goober!
None of their info builds revenues, markets or sales!
All the attorneys are doing is administrating and tracking A & L and P/L!
Company Execs build markets, create growth opportunities, execute development plans and service customers.
None of this is done by the attorneys.
Then what we need to hope for is to exit the POR as soon as possible selling as few assets as we can and paying off the attorneys with thanks as they leave.
The attorneys are not putting out information as to what the legacy is post-POR repayment or post-BK and this leaves nothing for the market to consider and nothing for the market makers.
I'm not faulting the attorneys for their strategy. I'm just saying that as a shareholder it is not enough and I don't want to pay more in attorney fees than is reasonable.
Furthermore, how can creditors deem what is reasonable for attorneys when attorneys provide no information that benefits the creditors interests?
Enough is enough!
No doubt, devils da coca cola goober, you and cotton, coca jersey and hesthegoober and many others have been very hopeful with good DD from the prospectus, dockets, POR, etc...
We'll just have to see how the Estate & Courts decide to move forward.
But, what is their motivation to work with existing Creditors and Creditor issues on the greys or in escrow?
I don't believe a lot of attorneys care about any direction for the Creditors unless they can stay on the clock and get paid.
This also means if a new issue in a legacy can move ahead without paying half to compensate old creditors by just the stroke of a pen in the Courts, I think that is likely very tempting to the Estate and legacy Company Managers.
Am I wrong?
The price action continues to be bad, but with some plausible explanations.
Its going to come down to a one day move. The stock and trust holders are going to be either in or out for a move up or down.
If we overcome the Automatic Avoidance stay this week, would this mean we are now above 12-step recovery programs of most addicts, debt, gambling or otherwise?
Just the response I'd expect from devils goober...
We could all be waiting for pigs to fly...
Thanks, camaro.
Had 26K CTs.
Sold some to dollar cost average lower.
I continue to hope this POR gets paid off and we are brought current with enough good assets that an IPO at $20 to $25 will bring in about $6B in new capital.
Would be happy to take a 1 for 2+ reverse split for my Preferreds in the new issues.
This option still makes the most sense to me.
But, the Courts, Attorneys & Estate are not letting out any post-BK structure information.
Good luck.
A 48M float is nothing in this secular bull market.
What King Kong are you talking about?
I doubt this is going to dominate like an Apple with new i-Phone coming out that leads the market on low volume.
I can't believe I'm hearing the fixed income market is having trouble rotating into equities!
How often do you get to buy ABX/FCX/NEM at a 5%+ dividened with Gold down 40%?
And, then be able to put some in high risk greys or junk bonds like the CTs & FnF?
The rotation is going on and we (the CTs) are way behind.
DOW at all time highs.
Bernanke continues accomodation and easy money.
Why aren't the CTs up further?
Link: http://www.forbes.com/sites/steveschaefer/2013/07/09/fairholme-fund-sues-uncle-sam-over-fannie-and-freddie/
I see the GSE as much different than Lehman.
However, they are similar in one respect: both opportunities present asset recovery opportunities for preferred & common shares.
In this regard, the asset valuation can ultimately result in the cost of their market exit as opposed to more fundamental A > L valuations or RV.
In both instances, the assets valuation have suffered from the valuation and market position of the parent company as well as the utility of the asset issue.
Just announced on CNBC:
Bruce Berkowitz of Fairholme Investments is preparing a suit against FnF as a Preferred Shareholder.
FnF may decide to discontinue the Preferred issues in the restructuring.
Thanks, jersey.
Gold is another attorney trying to make a living.
If they have business for the Court, get it done.
If not, get out of the way.