Do we have to wait to see if she'll sign the order allowing them to depose the EC BOD. If we dont object, can we expect that will be moving forward on 4/5?

Will

I think we need to move on to confirmation in any case. The debtor is not going to give up on the tweeks of the DS and they choose not to add the info requested by the judge. It would be put up or shut up time for everyone, and it seems like the first confirmation hearing was just practice. The next one should be totally different.

Let's get it on!!!

Thanks Blue,

That is the most complete answer I have ever received on a message board.

I am not a chart person, what does this mean?

Question...What if Rosen comes back and says JPMC lost the information requested in the shuffle to transfer everything.

Wouldn't that just leave us to present what we have with no way of verifying what was taken.

I know we can show what was owned, but wouldn't that solve the problem of them presenting a bombshell and allow them to just refute our findings. JPMC has done this in the past with other bonds (stealing), and I wouldn't put it past them now that desperation is about to overtake them.

One side of me wants the DS to go through just to lock Rosen into this POR and objections, the other side of me see's an opening in the debtors response about the subs and how they sold them. I am wondering if he finally opened the door to valuation or a least a list of subs sold. Either way, he has problems and it clearer to me now then a couple of weeks ago.

Bad thing about this, it will probably work. I mean they are going after his family and there is insurance. And if he admits fault in a settlement, doesn't that put us in a bad position in DC?

Will,

Thats why I am wondering about TPG's appeal process, I dont know when that is suppose to be heard, but that could help the commons if they come out on top.

When is TPG appeal to be heard?

I dont think we will see any valuations from pre-bankruptcy assets or actions until we get to DC, and thats if we make it there alive.

Limey

A friend turned me on the NSS (Naked Short Sale) board and it has so much info then I ever knew existed. I'm not getting into no debate about this over here, but I understand what your saying.

If one penny flows to commons, its game set match for many hedge funds. The new FINRA rules doesn't allow the cover they need to just walk.

And this is the reason why all the talk has gone from pre-value of assets, to what we see now. Everyone is only talking the value of the new company. Rosen's goal can still be met if he can get commons deleted. Yesterday was the first time we heard the judge say that she had no juridiction over pre bankruptcy matters, which sounded like she wasn't going to touch a valuation of the assets pre bankruptcy...even-though her own rulings contradict themselves.
Blackstone mentioned not cancelling the preferreds for this very reason...it was strong language, but it still sounded like a small compromise. IF Rosen can get this thing passed with commons cancelled, he wins.

Is it possible the releases were a head fake? We'd have to jump through hoops for about 7 years of appeals and everything just to be heard.

Fsshon

What are we hoping for in the next hearing? been gone for a little while.

4kids

Do the new computer systems coming up in June effect the OTC market?
Their confusion on my part in regards to if the new FINRA rules apply to which markets?

Jest, this is what we've been debating. NOTICE the line about cover or bankrupt the company.


SR-FINRA-2010-028
34-62288 Jun. 11, 2010 Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, to Adopt NASD Rule 3210 (Short Sale Delivery Requirements) as FINRA Rule 4320 in the Consolidated FINRA Rulebook
Comments due: July 8, 2010
See also: Order: Rel. No. 34-62533



'In reality, FINRA and the SEC gave abusive short sellers an ultra-generous seventy (70) months from the effective date of Reg SHO (1/7/05) to clean up their naked short positions in NON-REPORTING “THRESHOLD SECURITIES” before mandated buy-ins occur. A non-reporting “threshold security” is a security with 5 consecutive days of having delivery failures at “registered clearing agencies” (RCAs) totaling at last 10,000 shares AND $50,000 worth in value. Any delivery failures older than 13 consecutive days is subject to a buy-in. Note that it is expressly forbidden to “cross” a delivery failure via an illegal “wash sale” to a co-conspirator after 12 days in order to reset the time clock.

The bad news is that not only do you have to qualify as cited above but you also have to be on the FINRA Threshold List. You qualify for this list via the 5 straight days of 10,000 or more shares worth of delivery failures worth at least $50,000. The problem is that abusive MMs have not had to label their naked short sales as “short sales exempt” (SSE) in the past. This ends on 11/11/10. The combination of these two rules is very good. The next question is will the law be enforced? I’m guessing yes because Bob Khumazi is now the head of the SEC’s Enforcement Division. He’s a hard @@@ ex-U.S. Attorney.

For the average corporation with a gazillion delivery failures out there they’ll do quite nicely. They survived the 70-month “hands off” period. The companies that will excel are those with gigantic preexisting naked short positions that can make breakthroughs that generate large amounts of sustained buying. As a wave of buying comes in the shorts will now have to decide to cover immdiately or naked short sell into these buy orders in order to keep manageable their daily collateralization requirements. This is a lose-lose prospect. If they elect to naked short sell into this buying then they’ll be subject to buy-ins on day #13. Buy-ins are ultra-painful for abusive short sellers. It is the clearing firms of the crooks that will be executing the buy-ins. They won’t care what they pay for the shares they just don’t want to be found in violation of the law or they’ll lose business from their other clients. Finally we have a law aimed at the clearing firms facilitating these thefts. The umbilical cord between corrupt MMs and corrupt clearing firms is now cut. Before these laws corrupt clearing firms loved the business thrown at them by corrupt MMs and their co-conspiring corrupt hedge funds.

The good part is that when a clearing firm hits the 13 day time limit NONE OF ITS CLIENTS INCLUDING MMs CAN EFFECT ANY MORE SHORT SALES in that security without a borrow or arrangement to borrow having occurred. In other words out goes the universally-abused “bona fide” MM exemption which is the foundation for these crimes. When this occurs the hedge funds lose their leverage. These crooks had all of the time in the world to either cover these open naked short positions or bankrupt their target.

Share repurchase programs followed by cash dividend distributions will be much more effective from here on out. Pulling certs out of the DTCC is no longer a way to keep the DTCC honest because brokerage firms will block you from reinserting your certs when you want to sell. The solution to that is a share repurchase program BY MANAGEMENT followed by their demanding for delivery and cancellation because they have no intent in reinserting certs back into a brokerage account.

The buying by management will no doubt be naked short sold into by many crooks which is just fine. Firstly, it will allow management to buy that many cheap shares. Secondly, it will help keep the company on the protective “threshold list”. Thirdly, it will decrease the # of shares outstanding which will increase the % ownership of all shareholders and the per share size of any cash dividends and/or cash tender offers made by suitors. Medinah’s assets are either going to get promptly taken out by a tender offer or the company will become a cash dividend ATM machine for its shareholders. The key is to aggressively budget for a share repurchase program with the funds available right from the get go. You only have one shot at buying back shares inexpensively in order to undo some of the dilution caused by having to pay your monthly burn rate by selling shares at ridiculously low share price levels.

It’s a little bit complex but since all clearing firms in the U.S. are technically “registered clearing agencies” being that they are “participants” of the NSCC this new law also addresses that black hole for hiding delivery failures known as “ex-clearing”.'

Jest,

This gets into the new FINRA rules starting next week. My friends and I have been debating all week the possibilities of an NSS covering and what happens if they dont cover come next week or by June when new electronic system is in place for the MM's.

The new GSA is basically the old one, even the wording is the same. The GSA is still based on the work of the noteholders. IF we can show improper trading of the noteholders, then we have a chance to kill 2 birds with one stone.

AIMHO

I accidentally found this board after reading about the new FINRA rules...great info.

The one question I have is "What happens to those shares that are not covered by March or June?" Sorry if its been asked and answered, just don't know where to go to find the answer.

I dont expect they will hand over the documents, but that should be enough to order FJR against them. I mean would you knowingly give up the info that could put yourself in jail? Or give them info that would have the judge order that you get your original investment back and leave. I think they'll fight it, take the bite and share in the spoil with the preferreds but try and get commons out.

What does this stay order mean?

Uz,

Do you still have that Thoma objection laying around?

I want to do a little research after reading the objection.

Everyone is harking on the FJR, there is alot more at stake than just that. IF evidence is out there that proves this they can be bumped below commons if the judge wants. Then you can deal with the SEC. And the SEC seems to be inditing hedgies on a bi-weekly basis lately.

She maybe sick, but so far she is right. This report only confirms what we've known for 30months. The process to steal is simple, and everyone will work to keep it covered. "WAMU has been investigated to death", and no one is asking for an asset list.

How does Bear Sterns fraud help us. I know through another article that Bear Sterns admits shorting banks, but how does this situation help us?

They are worth what someone is willing to pay for em...that is still easily manipulated.

If we win discovery of the noteholders tmrw, we shouldn't have to worry about any version of a POR from the debtor. COI and fraud would be easily proven. This should cause all hell to break loose.

This is not only about buying the debt cheap, your about to find out who shorted the stock. This info cant come out. This is jailtime. I betcha the meeting tone has changed on the 20th now.

This falls into the "other issue", category!!!

Looks like the plan is to attack the claims first. Threaten the Noteholders and prove fraud, if she signs this, there will be a fight. And no revised POR until the TPS issue and now the noteholder issue are rectified.

According to what he has submitted, he is correct, equity is out in the cold. She has no other information to the contrary. She even mentioned about not having any evidence showing anything different.
But opened the door so the anyone show why this POR should not be approved if modified.

So I understand you want her to shut-up in regards to our value,
but we should also feel fortunate that one party has had her ear for 29 months and couldn't convince.

Hes,

Gotta disagree, For the judge not to give direction sets up a serious issue with respect to the debtor. You want a denial with no reason on how to fix it after 29 months? No direction, just shock them with electric and say "see ya"? No

We should be encouraged that it was so many issues that she stopped, and basically said, "take care of these, then come back and I'll give some rulings on the other issues". There was no reason why she couldn't rule in late December, but instead wait 6 days after the new year, and 3 weeks before the possible expiration of the GSA. It was a legal setup to get other voices heard and quiet the one's screaming.

Uz,

This is why I cant understand why everyone seems to act like they have been given judicial weggie.

The judge had 3 options with the plan

approval
denial pending modifications
denial

All 3 options take you in different directions. He was Denied...period. The only option Rosen has is to request a conversation. She laid things out to help him, but thats what she's here to do, end this process. And then she didnt even fully rule on other issue that effect the waterfall. She stopped at denial.

So Rosen requested to meet, but that's all this is, a conversation. He may have plans, but the process is defined and his time in the lead chair is just about up.

Uz

I think what she is saying is the decision would case another bank to go under, and the fact the the 4billion is basically better off with the entity that holds the money now, outweighs our right to hold it for increased PPS value, because basically that is the only benefit of moving the money to the estate. She also said she believes its ours and that will come up when trying to determine value when a valuation hearing takes place.

But a decision for the plan objectors would cause too much harm.
Right or wrong, just facts. I guess she's not in the business of putting others out of business, although JPMC actions with all the bonus money they pay says different.

If the decision goes into next year, wouldn't that be in our favor because of the new taxes. Rosen mentioned he wanted this confirmed by 12/24/10. The arguments about new tax benefits that would only help equity start on 1/1/11. Unless the decision can be backdated, I see this as only good news for us.

Not true, the taxes cannot go to either JPMC or FDIC, and she clearly asked about the analysis today.

He's gonna pay dearly if that happens. I believe alot of promises were made to different groups with no consequences. They cant let equity take over. AIMHO

Oh Hell, I think he's a Fan of the Ducks!!

Go Ducks!!!

I wonder if he sent you a shot-out Don.

Oh there about to water-board this dude...info will still get out, but his psyche is about to change forever.

Yeah but she can adjust her argument to negatively impact the JPMC lawyer with one statement, and therefore have the FDIC comeback and confirm that the P&A is not finalized.

If the POR is not denied outright, then this should be our goal.

That would trigger an offer, no doubt.

K did worse than this guy, we dont want it tossed, but perjury.