Linda is biotch...! LOLz JayKay
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.
Yes. CT's got nothing (however, in the end, I do believe Wamu senior will be paid in full and there be enough distributable funds to trickle down to wamu CT)
Commons got something as a result of a settlement.
imo
Well, Basha, Wamu Capital Trusts have received ZERO so far even with a guarantee. So what you said is incorrect, not everyone in Wamu received something.
Right now Wamu Cap trusts' distributions are being reallocated to Senior creditors. So that Guarantee is WORTHLESS. Get it?
Once the senior creditor is paid in FULL, then it will flow to Wamu Cap trusts.
imo
Onco: You of all people should know that the Guarantee is WORTHLESS because you and I are from Washington Mutual.
Washington Mutual has a guarantee on their capital trusts as well. That guarantee is WORTHLESS.
imo
Long story short: My communication with Seaport Group ended with they are NOT interested in any capital trusts nor sub bonds of Lehman Brothers Holding inc. because they do not feel they will have recovery. CT Guarantee = WORTHLESS.
Don't believe me, call them yourself. If you do call, MAKE SURE YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.
imo
If memory serves me, affiliates claims, etc. It is in the POR. imo/eom
Answer: there are other creditors who claimed debt and guarantee and are getting paid on both.
Imo
(Not directed at you, I just do not want to re-word/type it) Here is my post that *cough* disappeared from the board :
I honestly do not see anything positive unless the liabilities comes way down from expungment/reduction/dismissed/etc.
or...
The assets recover substantially.
Lehman is just tooo far out of the money when you have holding creditors only recovering 18 cent on the dollar. Too much spread.
You have to remember, Lehman borrow $44 for every $1 dollar they had and then the market/economy tanked. It is almost like a margin call.
Coincidentally, there is a movie called "Margin Call" is it fit Lehman story very well.
For all I know, it was about Lehman with the names changed.
www.imdb.com/title/tt1615147/
Survive discharge? No offense, sub bonds and CTs are in the same boat. One sub bond is discharged, so are the rest. Remember? They are all in Class 10. One gets paid, they all get paid. One gets discharged, they all get discharged.
How can you get paid on a worthless guarantee if Class 10 gets discharged? If that happens, then there is no debt to guarantee.
If they pay on the guarantee, then the distribution gets reallocated to senior creditors.
You think you know more than the high paid layers who practice in the field of BK. You think the subject of guarantee never came up. Why do you think there was no claim on the guarantee? Because it was worthless.
The guarantee subject has been discussed way before you came on this board.
People have already contacted the attorney for BNY and CT trusts. Guarantee is worthless.
Don't believe me, contact the attorney yourself and ask.
Last week was, "we get paid because we are equity", yesterday, it was "because we have NOLs, today it is "we have guarantee", tomorrow is what? Time to face reality.
Keep drinking the koolaid.
imo
Guarantee on subordinate issues are worthless. Only guarantees payment IF the Trust receives payment from Lehman.
Any payment to CTs, must go though the sub bond FIRST and BEFORE it can get to the CTs.
If no payment to sub bond, then NO payment to CT as far as the Guarantee is concerned. It is as simple as that. Worthless.
If there is a payment to CTs, it goes though the sub bond first, but guess what? That distribution gets reallocated to senior creditors. Once again, Guarantee is worthless.
Subordinate guarantee or no guarantee, all distribution to sub bonds are reallocated to senior creditors.
Have a nice day.
imo
When you are faced with getting shareholders "nothin'" with an uphill fight or give up and be part of the new re-organized WMIH, you are put in a rock and a hard place.
MW took advantage of that and consequently got a salary, employment, bonuses, etc. AND shareholders "something".
Had this the "fight" progressed, shareholders would have gotten nothing. There were no unicorns.
While I agree, I am not MW, MW got the better deal. Shareholders got the shaft from ALL directions, not just MW.
Now put yourself in his shoes and make a decision: Continue the fight and get Nothin' for shareholders or face reality and get "somethin'" while you still can (including his nice employment package)?
BTW, I am on the shareholder's side. I share the same feeling about MW. There is no bigger critic than me on MW, well maybe there are a few more critical on him.
imo
Yes. eom
Can you post the docket no. or link to the motion so that I may review it.
I skimmed though it and only saw the US trustee motion. I did not see any other creditors.
imo
EDIT: After a little more research, I did find what I think you are referring to : Commonwealth of Kentucky/Dept Natural Resources.
imo
The problem is you are bringing "other" information into the mix, when the topic is what happens in Bankruptcy.
Like I have said before, everything is irrelevant, UNLESS it is in the context of bankruptcy. That includes what the Feds, prospectus, etc.
Once you have entered BK, everything changes. The sooner you are able to understand that, the sooner you will "get it".
If anyone has EVER played a BK, they know CT's are considered DEBT, period. There is no question about it.
imo
All we know, is he gets a salary for his "various" positions w/ expenses paid, and a percentage of the proceeds from the litigation proceeds for at least 3 years plus extensions.
So, just an example (Just throwing a number/% out): If Proceeds were $500,000,000, just 1% would be a $5 million commion. WOW
I am sure his initial cost of $170,000 to $200,000 will payoff in multitudes.
As Mastercards says: "Priceless..."
Congratulations to him. Hell, if I was in the same position, I would have done the same thing, too bad I am not.
imo
Bloomberg Law: Creditors vs. Union, etc.
Bloomberg Law has a very good audio excerpt (it is short, but very on point) on Creditors vs. Union, etc.:
NY = better for creditors.
WVA = Better for Union.
That is what it boils down to. Union believes WVA stand a better chance in that venue as opposed to NY it is more creditor friendly.
I know debtors used the NY as "less expenses etc" (attorney, etc located in NY venue, debtors pay expenses/travel to WVA if venue is changed).
Can you post where you got "various people who PCX owes money to, join with the miners union in requesting a venue change"?
I ask because it benefits creditors to have NY as the venue because the more the Union gives in/looses, the more creditors can recover.
That is why I say it is creditors vs. the Union and equity is just the audience.
imo
This BK is really about the creditors vs. the Union and Patriot taking advantage of the bankruptcy code to cancel unprofitable contracts (out of the money) contracts/reorganization/deal with the Union/Union liabilities/bounce some liabilities back to Peabody, the original parent who spun off patriot.
Equity is just the audience and not a player in this BK. The longer this BK drags, equity is as good as toast.
I only see equity surviving in some form if this is a SHORT bankruptcy proceeding, otherwise... don't bet your lunch money.
The army of lawyers and restructuring firms/advisers are burning through equity as we speak. It is in THEIR (Attorneys & Co) best interest to drag this out. $$$$
imo
Dimeq made a settlement for a portion of Class 12, 18 and 21. They are getting distributions as Class 12.
It think you are referring to the most recent distribution for Class 22, which was something other than what Monica was referencing.
imo
Class 21 got a partial payment before Class 16 and 19, as a result of a settlement. imo/eom
A ton of us have waaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyy more than the Chairman. eom
Heaven: Meant to supplement my post re: your PM, earlier (from another board), but i have been busy.
RE: PM. Briefly, because I have time constraints:
Q1. Hard to speculate, but I believe that there is something on the table, however, the question is, is it executable and terms/conditions are acceptable to both parties (meeting of the minds) within that time frame. There is no guarantee that it will even proceed this year or next because it can just fall apart, no agreement.
2. Depends on the above, term/conditions, meeting of the minds.
3. I don't read his posts because I do not agree with a lot of his posts. So that should answer the other questions. (No disrespect to him).
2 years: Best option in terms of someone taking WMIH over. The other alternative is organic growth in combination with WMIH buying other companys which takes a while, but do enough of them, WMIH may be surprised at the results.
I said nothing new, just re-hashed. There is just no information we have on what WMIH on the course they are taking other than Blackstone.
We can only speculate.
Sorry can't tell you anymore that is worth while.
imo
I was too "chicken" during the Enron day. Congrats on your killing. eom
Yes. It depends on where/when you bought. Your 20 bonds sounds like you may be PRE-BK??? There were other bonds, that got more, if I remember, but they were not of the actual holding company.
Over all, if my memory serves me, seniors of holding got about 10% to 12% face plus 2 sets of warrants. I had 2 different types of securities, but sold before the end.
I got in way low (I was post BK), so it was a profit for me.
imo
... and the Union made off like bandits at the expense of other creditors (those commons holders were toast anyways). I know because I had senior notes. Didn't make as much as I thought I would, but still made nice cheddar.
imo
withOUT* I mistyped it. eom
It should have said "equivalent" of an underlying security of a CT which is a sub bond. It is just the bond with the CT.
I had corrected myself long ago.
imo
Like I said, I never cared checked. It does not matter to me since they retain their economic priority in the totem pole.
If you are so interested, why don't you look it up?
It makes no difference if the sub debt placed wherever since it can only be paid after the senior is paid in full.
So in effect, it really does not matter.
Tell the board when you find the answer.
Why can't you answer this question so we can close the debate:
So tell us so we know once and for all and can close this debate: Is sub debt classed/reclassed as equity as you have been asserting this whole time????? or is debt? lol
Like i said, my security is not linked to any CT and sub bonds are not classed or re-classed as equity. debt is debt. LOL
The whole time you thought sub debt was classed/reclassed as equity. LOL That is the funniest thing.
The only position I had was sub bonds are not equity, they are debt.
At least you know that now.
Never mattered where my securities were held. It will always retain its priority in the totem pole. Why should it make a difference?
LBHI commons and pref are in 1 share. So, what does it matter? They are in the same priority in the totem pole.
So tell us so we know once and for all and can close this debate: Is sub debt classed/reclassed as equity as you have been asserting this whole time????? or is debt? lol
First question, i already answered 2 times already. Not a CT owner, nor is my security associated with any CT. Held through etrade/bnym for my benefit.
You do not have to have a CT to have a sub bond. LOL
Second, question, you edited after i read your post and ansered your post.
Trust/escrow, I never checked, however, they are not re-classed as equity as you stated. They are debt instrument. debt is debt.
imo
Do you even know how stocks and bonds work? You buy though your broker, i.e., etrade (or whomeever you have). etrade holds it for you as the beneficiary through BNYM (or whomever is the entity).
This is the same for stocks, you do not own the actual stock if you have a broker.
Come on, you should know this.
Like I said, my security is NOT associated with any CT.
You are the one who has CTs, not me.
imo
No CT involvement, thru etrade/bnym. eom
... because I have an interest in it just like you...and people reply to my posts... eom
I posted what I believe will happen within the last 2 days I believe, so i rather not retype it or look for it (because I am at work and have to get stuff done).
Very briefly, I agree that a debt for equity swap will be the ultimate path, but I disagree as to whom the new equity will be distributed to. (this is where other have their opinions that goes on to differing paths).
IMO, any and all distributions will be for the benefit of senior creditors because the change of ownership would have been persevered for 3 years in which it will benefit the seniors to take everything without losing any tax attributes.
Now, not wanting to start a debate with anyone/everyone, there are others who have their opinions as well.
I just happen to be more conservative when I play BKs, as opposed others who are more optimistic.
No comment on COD but I don't think it is going to make a difference in the end because Lehman is Chapter 11 liquidation worded as a reorganization plan.
I must get back to work.
have a nice day.
imo
You said:
I was in the middle of editing my post, and it was too late. Anyhow, I don't feel like re-typing it.
Point is: Sub debt is not equity, nor was it re-classified as equity.
debt is debt.
imo