It's not a done deal.There are cases Judge rule against UST motion to appoint an examiner before.
But after all, EC is in a much more favorable position.

Thanks.I remeber in one of the WSJ artical Quinn said they are happy about the proposed settlement.
I will try to find the doc you mentioned.

"Now Carlinsky of Quinn has publicly said "he did not agree with the decision to settle, but they started out a long time ago with the goal of getting recovery for the creditors"

Are you sure about this Fish?I could be wrong but my memory tell me a different story.

Em.. Strake havn't updated his financial report about wamuq yet? Still stick to the old info?poor u.

I always doubting about this ..A non-shareholder can vote the BOD?Can anybody confirm it?

Correct me if I am wrong
But I think any settlement reach to eliminate FC claim will dismiss the case without prejudice , means no parties will be committed fraud.In that case,it's highly unlikely distinguish between pre /post shareholder.
The shareholder lost earning will have to pursuit their lost in other avenue such as , class action.But their chances are slim coz JPM/FDIC will get a release order from being sue twice for the same claim.

The logic is very simple
Fraud = pre/post different pay out
settlement = no fraud committed
No fraud = pre/post equal pay out

So simple and straight forward ,why some people just not get it.

Look at the scope of examination in the motion.
And if we don't believe in justice, then this is no point to invest in this stock anyway.

I saw the site and the number there is totally BS.Seriously ,a settlement news leaks out will draw more attention than update yahoo finance website "enterprise value" #. ..

Enough about that,he is just a pumper and yahoo's data mean nothing here.Yahoo's 1 year est price of wamuq is 1$ at 2009 you will know this is all BS.

No IT's not if you are referring current POS POR.

The bigger one is ,THJMW truly concern about the "settlement" without any shareholder input" More bargin power is not clearly abuse".
I can see no POS will fly without EC involved.THJMW will shot it down that's a clear and powerful message address to all of the parties.

JD is a liar.
"This would be the "low risk" deal to catapult them ahead of RBC to be Canada's largest company + plays to their retail power alley. I don't think 10 is a problem 2- starts to get big"
In the email they talking about TD Canada bid @ sep 24 I believe.

I believe there is no such motion to stop ruling of the turnover SJ. The most likely is in the 9019 they reqeusted dismiss all the Adversary proceeding.
IMO.

"Motion by WMI to stop a ruling of the SJ. "
Do you have a link for that motino?

Yeah right.where is the wmb junior bonds stand right now.;)..lol

I don't trust Weil will do us a big favour in these short 10 days.
"For the reasons stated in the Motion, which are incorporated herein as
though set forth in full, the Debtors believe that they are insolvent, and, therefore, there will be
no meaningful recovery to equity security holders in these chapter 11 cases. As equity security
holders lack any economic interest in these chapter 11 cases, the Debtors believe that the
retention of a financial advisor and/or consulting expert by the Equity Committee will be costly
to their estates without any corresponding benefit."

They made this statement at Mar 17 in Debtors' Reservation of Rights with Respect to the Application of the Official Committee of Equity Security Holders for Order Authorizing the Employment and Retention of Peter J. Solomon Company and Its Financial Advisor Don't expect anything good from these crooks.We must fight for it.

That's some great DD ,Plus if THJMW already had the SJ decision in her mind,she won't prove this shame settlement simply giving money to JPM/FDIC in exchange of 4bln deposit.

EC and wamu docket?man you crack me up

"Called the number listed. The DE court just changed as of March 1st, the way that transcripts need to be ordered. In response to a specific question, the gentleman said that this is not in response to any particular case or a particular request in a particular case. It is just a change in the way the court is doing business."

From ghost by WAMU_day1_long,nothing to see here.

I bet in the POR Weil will put equity in one pool and say if anything else left for the equity will flow in this pool. We might still not know how much we could get!!That's their tricks always and EC will sure fight for this uncertainty.

Fish is FBRC selling wamuq belongs to the ex-wamu 401K plan? How is the size? To my understanding the plan manager won't force selling the wamuq before mar 22. It all on ex-wamu employee's own to sell bedore next monday

I think the more accurate statement is no matter in POR or chapteer 7 preferred always get a more favorable treat than common unless A iS significant more than L.
There is no way common can get 5-8 and P only receive 300 .there is nothing wrong hedge with preferred.always hope for the best and prepare for the worse

Weil's gamble is failed. JMW gave out a clear signal. If 9019 motion doesn't stand, POR will fall apart.
They are ruining their own reputation.

"The EC may not have a legal reason to intervene"? Obviously you don't read the sticky post or have no idea how this work.Rosen state "9019 motion is hand and glove with POR" now EC intervene SJ/AP and they have leagl stand to object or veto POR. Their are legal reason is much stronger than WMB Bondholder in this case.

Order Granting the Official Committee of Equity Security Holders' Motion to Intervene in Adversary Proceedings. (related document(s) 180 ). Order Signed on 3/18/2010. (MDE) (Entered: 03/18/2010)

Only fraud committed can make pre/post share payout different.JPM/FDIC committed fraud?you are out of your mind.

So your time stay in last week or you just don't see the transcript of last Friday?

Yeah..Motion of Intervene is critical here.

SlyOne ,pretty good .
Only a point here is ,if everybody can foresee EC's attempt will be overruled by the Judge, then there is no point ever invest in this stock from beginning . Most of people here have some belief in the Legal System.

BTW, anybody has a thought on the LEHMQ POR? something similar might happen in Wamuq that new share will be issued and common and PQ/KQ will convert into one big pool?
Some info about NOLs also

"
Practically, it can be very difficult to avoid an ownership change under Section 382. If a corporation needs new equity to survive, the bargaining position of the parties contributing that capital may be so strong that it is impossible to prevent them from obtaining a majority equity stake, triggering a 50% ownership change. In addition, at the time that a new equity party is brought into a company, various creditors may have the right or may be forced to convert their debt
to equity, and in combination, an ownership change may be triggered. Furthermore, because the test is performed over a rolling three-year testing period, a corporation that may have had a prior equity offering within that three-year testing period may find that in combination with the current equity round, an ownership change can not be avoided."

That's why they might not want to cancel the common in Wamuq as well to keep the NOLs.Otherwise all the settlement talk might collapse.

Mordicai, here some info ,can you tell us how you think of it?
Practically, it can be very difficult to avoid an ownership change under Section 382. If a corporation needs new equity to survive, the bargaining position of the parties contributing that capital may be so strong that it is impossible to prevent them from obtaining a majority equity stake, triggering a 50% ownership change. In addition, at the time that a new equity party is brought into a company, various creditors may have the right or may be forced to convert their debt to equity, and in combination, an ownership change may be triggered. Furthermore, because the test is performed over a rolling three-year testing period, a corporation that may have had a prior equity offering within that three-year testing period may find that in combination with the current equity round, an ownership change can not be avoided.

NOLs will be canceled and "proposed settlement" will collapse.

From the MOR and Rosen's outline,that's just some simple calculation.There are some variable exists but even we won't get a great offer,I hardly see this offer is the final offer.

So you didn't see the script and do the calculation? Pension fund goes to JPM and JPM assume all the L . Chance looks good P can recover from 120-240$.
But that's outrage offer and should be shoot down by EC anyway.

I never had a good feeling about his post even before Mar 12.

Again."Then on Friday, one of the EC members actually posted on the Ghost board, telling people to stop contacting Venable - they were being overwhelmed by calls from shareholders."

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Business_%26_Finance/Investments/Stocks_(A_to_Z)/Stocks_W/threadview?bn=86316&tid=390409&mid=390409

I saw the post on ghost board too it's legit.

Is it possible this post can be sticky and let EC just do their job?

No disrespect , but I think we better leave EC alone if they already complain about it.
GLTY.

from yahoo
"Then on Friday, one of the EC members actually posted on the Ghost board, telling people to stop contacting Venable - they were being overwhelmed by calls from shareholders."

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Business_%26_Finance/Investments/Stocks_(A_to_Z)/Stocks_W/threadview?bn=86316&tid=390409&mid=390409

"WMI’s investment in subsidiaries represents the book value of WMI’s subsidiaries, including WMI Investment Corp.
(“WMI Investment”). This balance does not represent the market value of these entities." Note 3