is making moves.
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.
I have a feeling that Susman doesn't have the patience to play BR's games. I believe there will be no adjournment. Tomorrow we can expect an examiner but hope for settlement. If I were a JPM shareholder I would be furious right now. JPM (and our other adversaries, of course) is taking a pretty bet by not settling with us right now.
IMO, the culpable paries (Dimon, Bair, Rosen, etc.) crossed the line a long time ago. Their reluctance to quickly settle this is evidence of their hubris and it will be the cause of their professional and financial undoing. If we don't get a valid settlement tomorrow then I think we should proceed with (1.) an investigation by a court-appointed examiner; (2.) thorough discovery with depositions of the above-referenced individuals and other key personnel involved in the sham settlement, Project West and the WaMu seizure; (3.) shareholder meeting to oust the current WMI Board of Directors; and finally (4.) trial on the merits to obtain a full recovery for the estate's creditors and more importantly - its shareholders.
**EDIT**
In the absence of a settlement announcement tomorrow, I would also like to see Susman and the U.S. Trustee (5.) press for an all-out criminal investigation by the SEC and Department of Justice.
I sure hope so. The chances aren't too bad. Check out some of my previous posts/theories.
I honestly don't know whether we can expect a halt.
I'm not sure, Uzual. Given our experiences in the past, I wouldn't be surprised if the settlement is announced the day of the hearing - though something happening over the weekend would make 07/19 the most amazing monday morning ever.
You're absolutely right. PJS has been hard at work and I'm glad they were retained for the job as they're a premier outfit and very capable of the task.
PM me with your email address and I would be delighted to send you a copy of it.
This supports my theory on what was brought to Walrath's attention and discussed with parties in chambers. I am feeling even more optimistic after seeing the time PJS has (and is continuing) to put into this. This filing - and the lack of any hostile/adversarial filings between the parties - only makes me even more anxious to see what the parties will present to the court on Tuesday morning.
My pleasure, JMac.
Damages are only awarded upon judgment - which means the case must go through trial. Damages are awarded by the court, but settlement is reached by the parties. In my opinion, this case will never get to trial because it will be settled beforehand - and the motivating factor for settlement is JPM/FDIC's reluctance to reveal the skeletons in their respective closets by virtue of discovery, depositions and/or an examiner's investigation.
I hope that clarifies it for you.
There will be no award because this will never go to trial. The strong likelihood of a damages award will be brought up by Susman and discussed by all relevant parties over the course of the settlement negotiations (which we hope have been going on throughout the course of this week). Accordingly, the damages - both compensatory and punitive in nature - will be considered and reflected in whatever number the parties agree upon.
IMHO, the settlement we are going to see from JPM (and the FDIC) is going to dwarf that of GS. If any of you read my paper you might agree that the SEC is strongly lacking in it's reputation for adequate investigation/enforcement. In our case, however, we have very strong equity interests demanding not only justice - but fair compensation.
Thank you, William. I hope our speculation is accurate and we are offered favorable terms for settlement next week.
I wouldn't be surprised if that is currently going on behind the scenes right now. It would be interesting to see how many minutes JPM is being billed for telephone/teleconference time with the FDIC this week.
P.S. I love the Glengarry Glen Ross photo you have there. That Pacino rant is one of my all-time favorites.
I believe so.
I wish I could be present to hear the back-and-forth discussions going on during negotiations.
The FDIC is going to be liable for the lion's share - but remedies awarded from the tort claims are going to come from JPM as I suspect we will be able to prove their malice in contributing towards WaMu's demise.
I hope a settlement comes into play on the 20th - with the examiner as a contingency.
It's all speculation at this point because we have no idea what went on in chambers or during the 07/12 meeting. Moreover, we have not seen any hostile or adversarial filings of substance since the hearing (which could be interpreted as a very good thing).
I am leaning towards the belief that the parties are seriously negotiating a settlement to get a new DS/POR filed and shield our adversaries from future civil/criminal liability while paying off equity. The imminent appointment of an examiner is almost a certainty - and while the results of his or her investigation are not guaranteed to fall in our favor, the likelihood that they would is very much on our side. Accordingly, there would have to be something of great significance being discussed to motivate Susman into delaying the hearing for the examiner - and I doubt it has anything to do with discovery as the examiner (and possibly even discovery) is already in the bag.
If JPM is forced to disclose everything to an examiner as well as submit to depositions by the equity committee, then I think Dimon and his minions might just have a change of heart. This is exactly why this period of time (before the appointment of an examiner and/or ruling on discovery) gives Susman the most leverage in negotiating a settlement - especially if the document(s) filed under seal reveal A>L and/or support our fraudulent conveyance claims.
Looks like things have been extremely quiet since the last hearing. I think this is the calm before the storm and I sure hope I am right. These next five days are going to be the longest five days of my life.
Settlement is brewing and I smell it. Lets see if it's on the menu on or by Tuesday morning.
That is exactly what is getting me anxious - in a very good way, at least.
My WAG says to expect a Stipulation or Joint Motion for Settlement to be filed by 07/20, followed by an amended DS/POR to be heard at the following hearing.
Mark this post and say your prayers. We need to finish off the summer of 2010 in peace and comfort.
Correct - not to spread fraudulent or misleading information. As I stated earlier, if you are going to make a statement or challenge the well-established facts that have been tirelessly discussed on this forum you should conduct your own due diligence and/or bring in facts of your own.
I think the settlement agreement would have to be a prerequisite to an amended DS/POR - unless the new amended DS/POR was to include a comprehensive settlement therein.
Me too, brother. I think I will have to excuse myself from the office the second that pops up on PACER so I can run laps around battery park like some kind of lunatic. Well, that and make some phone calls of course, lol.
The only document I would like to see filed right now is a Stipulation or Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement. Anything else will just indicate that the meeting was not as fruitful as many of us wanted it to be and a bit more litigation will remain before anything is settled.
The next filing should also confirm the speculation as to what was discussed in chambers and perhaps even at the private meeting. I think, in this situation, no news is good news because the parties might have readily filed something last night or early this morning if their "talks" went sour.
Regardless of whether or not Rosen pulls it (which I suspect he will soon after a new settlement agreement is filed) there is no way the Judge will approve it - especially before allowing the examiner to proceed with his or her investigation and even more so because of the lack of disclosure within the DS.
If the DS is approved by Judge Walrath, the various committees have an opportunity to vote on the POR. If they vote against it they will be able to file their own competing PORs.
The DS/POR is dead in the water - it is the farthest thing from my mind right now. Moreover, the Judge would appoint an examiner who would then conduct his or her own independent investigation before the DS/POR could ever go through.
In my humble opinion, we will either see a new settlement agreement filed or announced by the next hearing - with a new amended DS/POR filed soon thereafter - or an examiner appointed with the full force of the court behind it.
That would be a very logical conclusion to draw from (a.) it being filed under seal; (b.) it available only to WMI, the EC and PJS; and (c.) the parties' quick decision to move towards a "resolution" of the pending issues before the court.
I don't think it was documentation filed with the intention of further supporting the already certain and imminent appointment of an examiner - I simply said whatever evidence he brought would add further support to the already solid case for his/her appointment. As I stated earlier, this is the time that Susman and the EC have the greatest leverage over our adversaries to push them into a favorable settlement. I think whatever he filed and/or whatever was discussed in chambers before Judge Walrath merely pushed them over the edge and into serious negotiations.
Oh, and as for Judge Walrath stating that she wanted to "move things along," I suspect she was referring to wrapping up this case - not getting started with it by virtue of the examiner's investigation.
I'm wondering whether it could be the "missing" 3.1(a) statement.
I also agree with you. I don't think this was about a conflict of interest - the EC would have filed an open motion to argue that. I suspect whatever went on in chambers (as well as whatever was filed under seal) was enough to force negotiations on our behalf. I guess we'll see though - we do have until July 20th.
Haha, I think it's more like a hot cannon at this point.
I remember reading someone's theory that the comment was made in reference to WAHUQ shareholders and their $36/share settlement. If this is accurate I think it would make the most sense because it would indicate that the meeting in chambers not only sealed our fate for the appointment of an examiner but also demonstrated that there is sufficient money in the estate to put assets over liabilities and/or a significant value on the assets that were wrongfully conveyed to JPM sufficient to payoff creditors and equity classes. Moreover, it would be a major motivating factor for the parties to meet today and discuss a settlement immediately.
Any thoughts?
Even better, thanks!
I doubt the sealed document has anything to do with the scope of the examiner - though it may be a document further evidencing the need for an examiner. Even though the appointment of an examiner is almost an absolute certainty for the EC, I believe Judge Walrath must grant the motion before setting the scope of the examination.
We can speculate all day as to what was filed under seal. It could be incriminating documents that link Rosen to JPM; it can be the missing 3.1(a) along with a complete or incomplete valuation by PJS that support our claims; it could be the "smoking gun" or some evidence of wrongdoing by JPM/FDIC that highlights Weil's breach of fiduciary duty to the estate by failing to pursue valuable claims against our adversaries. Who knows?!
What we do know is that (1.) the debtors barely touched the tip of this massive, titanic-sinking iceberg in its investigation of claims; (2.) the DS/POR is groundless and clearly serves the purpose of buying more time; (3.) Judge Walrath has articulated her willingness the grant an examiner and recognized the fact that Rosen/Weil are hostile adversaries to the EC when they should in fact be aligned against JPM and the FDIC; (4.) the shareholder meeting and EC discovery are on the table - even though they might not even be necessary after the appointment of an examiner; and (5.) the events of the last hearing resulted in Rosen acknowledging that the parties would work to reach a "resolution" of the array of matters set for that hearing on or before July 21st.
I am very anxious and my expectations are very high. This is the moment of greatest leverage for the EC as it provides a clear opportunity for JPM and the FDIC to put this away by simply writing a check and fabricating yet another story to spin to the uninformed and/or ignorant public. I am hoping for settlement and I have a good feeling that we can expect one - but I have been disappointed too many times by the corrupt antics that have navigated this case through rough waters for the past two years. As I have said before, Susman has my absolute confidence and trust. I think he knows far more than anyone how to make this happen - and to date, he has been quite successful is getting us a seat at the table.
Excellent analysis, XOM.
I must admit I have never been as anxious over what to expect as I am right now (or will be until the next hearing on 07/21). Susman has my trust and confidence, and I believe he is making things happen for us soon. Rosen is out of rope while JPM/FDIC and their cronies know they are out of time.
That's damn good speculation Lebosco. Thanks for the insight.
Indeed. I think he should be more concerned with the fact that more angry shareholders have seen his picture and know what he looks like.
The EC isn't going to walk into the negotiations empty-handed. It's going to have estimates of potential claims against our adversaries as well as an assessment by PJS illustrating the value of the transferred assets. Naturally, the parties are going to go back and forth, but the real question is how much money will our adversaries be willing to pay to keep those skeletons locked away in their closet - because that is ultimately going to determine who is going to break and accept the deal first.
Exactly. The EC has a significant amount of leverage over our adversaries right now as they are in grave danger of the commencement of a thorough investigation by an unbiased court-appointed examiner. As much as I hate to admit it - given the number of emotional ups and downs I've experienced watching this case play out - I feel positive about today's adjournment and look forward to seeing what our adversaries bring to the table in the next two weeks.