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.
DECLARATION OF JONATHAN GOULDING, Page 7, Para 18:
On October 10, 2011 [D.I. 8780], this Court appointed the Honorable Raymond Lyons, United States Bankruptcy Judge, as mediator (the “Mediator”), and ordered the following parties to participate in the Mediation: (i) the Debtors, (ii) the Creditors’ Committee, (iii) the Equity Committee, (iv) Aurelius, (v) Appaloosa, (vi) Centerbridge, (vii) Owl Creek, (viii) the TPS Consortium and the TPS Group, (ix) the WMB Noteholders, (x) Normandy Hill, (xi) The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A., (“BNY Mellon”), in its capacity as Indenture Trustee for the Senior Notes, and (xii) the WMI Noteholders Group (as such term is used in the September Opinion) (collectively, the “Mediation Parties”); provided, however, that Normandy Hill and BNY Mellon were not required to attend the Mediation.
http://www.kccllc.net/wamu/document/0812229120213000000000024
Based on all the indicators and conduct of several, including Willingham, I bought-in post-BK, knowing the risks, but instinctively knowing there was a buried body that someone would have to dig up someday. I have always bet my recovery would be in WMIH (I am already made whole+), with mild hopes that a dead body would surface, because the value of WAMU was simply too big to disappear the way it did.
Kudos to boarddork and others who found the dead body of WAMU in the Mortgage Pools. Knowing where WAMU buried the dead body is almost as good as the day the Trustee appointed the Equity Committee or the date of Nate Thoma.
Now that we know there actually is a dead body, it would be good to know other things about it. Such as its value, the date someone (FDIC-R?) will return it to us, and will the recipients be escrow or WMIH.
Does the highlighted section of DECLARATION OF JONATHAN GOULDING shown below mean WMIH, or does it mean the debtors own both WMIH and escrow? Does the word “property” mean desks, chairs, and pencils, or does it include the dead body? Many have long thought the debtors have never (maybe cannot until closure of PA&A) severed the umbilical cord, attaching WMIH to escrow. The biggest indicator to me that the value of the dead body will go to escrow is that the four hedge funds of insider trading fame valued the dead body more than jail time, more than equitable disallowance, and more than owning WMIH. If the value of the dead body does go to WMIH, watch for the uproar!
Notice the word "estates" is plural.
DECLARATION OF JONATHAN GOULDING located at this link:
http://www.kccllc.net/wamu/document/0812229120213000000000024
DECLARATION OF JONATHAN GOULDING, Page 15, Section 1123(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Code: The Seventh Amended Plan and the various documents and agreements set forth in the Plan Supplement and other related documents provide adequate and proper means for implementation of the Seventh Amended Plan, including (a) the creation of a Liquidating Trust, pursuant to Article XXVII of the Seventh Amended Plan, (b) the transfer of certain property of the Debtors’ estates to JPMC, the FDIC Receiver, and the Liquidating Trust, as set forth more fully in the Seventh Amended Plan and Global Settlement Agreement, (c) the issuance and distribution of Cash, Reorganized Common Stock, Runoff Notes, and Liquidating Trust Interests, as set forth in Articles XXXI and XXXII of the Seventh Amended Plan, (d) the retention by the Reorganized Debtors of all remaining property of the Debtors’ estates, (e) the cancellation of all documents, agreements, and instruments evidencing Claims or Equity Interests in the Debtors, except as provided in Section 32.4 of the Seventh Amended Plan, (f) the surrender of all instruments or notes, pursuant to Section 32.6 of the Seventh Amended Plan, (g) the curing of defaults with respect to assumed executory contracts and leases, pursuant to Article XXXIV of the Seventh Amended Plan, and (h) to the extent applicable, the adoption and filing of the Reorganized Debtors Certificates of Incorporation and the Reorganized Debtors By-Laws, as set forth in Article XL of the Seventh Amended Plan and the Plan Supplement.
Mostly opinion.
Best regards,
David West
I have not looked closely at this, but Google "WMALT 2007-0C1". It is dated from 2008, and may be a starting point for DD on the subject of Mortgage Pools. Keep in mind my speculation that WMI would not wait until the last minute before filing bankruptcy to design the entire plan.
I have scanned POR 7 again, and nothing jumped out at me. Another angle is that WMB and not WMI had something to do with originating any action to protect the mortgages from bankruptcy. If so, it happened before the seizure and sale of WMB, and before bankruptcy of WMI.
Best regards,
David West
Looks like good DD, and would confirm my statement that it is sometimes legal to hide assets in plain sight.
Both are good points:
Two equal sides, "WithCatz on the far left, Large Green on the far right" ~ IMO, they are not equal; one is supported by all that exists while the other is based only on what can't be proven.
You have described “the unity of opposites”, first suggested by Heraclitus (ca. 535–475 BC).
Two opposite sides are never equal; they are opposing parts of a single entity. Physical reality and non-physical reality are opposing parts of the same entity, with the mind being located at the exact union of the two. A more usable example of this concept is how our voting process works. In an election the “center”, which is comprised of people who cannot decide if they are conservative or liberal, determines the outcome. The liberals on the far left are the close opposite of the conservatives on the far right, and both groups have already made up their minds before the election. WithCatz and Large Green have opposing viewpoints. When our fate removes the escrow markers from our accounts, the winner will be whichever of the two that ends up with the most toys. Due to facts in plain evidence, it currently appears WithCatz will be the winner of the opposing viewpoints, and the outcome for all of us will be the value of WMIH.
Keep in mind, fact is stranger than fiction, and we do not yet know our fate.
Regarding the "owner of the money to fund the mortgages" ~ wouldn't that be the "depositors?"
As a depositor, what part of your bank do you own, other than your deposit?
A parent company owns all of its subsidiaries and all of the value of the subsidiaries. The corporate veil protects the parent company (WMI) from the actions a subsidiary (WMB) might commit during its business life and in certain legal situations. For example, because of the veil, the bank (a corporation) is responsible to its creditors and its creditors cannot sue the parent (WMI) if the bank fails or is seized. The part of the seized and sold bank that is nonreturnable to the parent is the deposits, the buildings, and the pencils, etc. The part that is returnable to the parent is the difference between the assessed value of the bank minus anything owed to its creditors, and minus anything owed to others as an expense incurred due to the seizure and sale. In the case of WMB, there are good mortgages and bad mortgages owned by WMB (not the depositors). The bad mortgages are subject to recourse by WMB. The OTS seized the bank after the FDIC had warned WMB multiple times in many lawsuits to clean up their act. The danger was that WMB was foisting bad mortgages onto FNMA and others, and did not have the cash to pay the recourse. The closest cash to use for the recourse payments was the deposits, and FDIC could not allow that to happen. There is more detail than we will ever know, but that is the simple version. Legal or not, ethical or not, the rest is irreversible history.
Mostly fact,
Best regards,
David West
Psssttt!!
I agree with your assessment of the use of the '363 sales'.
The denial of TARP and other bailout methods, which our government could have used, will always be questionable in the eyes of the WAMU and WMB investors, as will be the true value of the mortgages. The one thing that is clear, is that the WAMU and WMB BOD and other managing executives did not disagree with the decision of OTS and FDIC as vehemently as the common shareholders.
Perhaps the closing of the P&A will allow more information to come to light.
Don't count on it.
An accurate report on the WMB Mortgages. WMB, and several subsidiaries owned by WMB, originated, sold, and/or serviced all of the mortgages in question. The biggest factor that made WMB insolvent was that most of the mortgages were bad and when sold to agencies like Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, had recourse to WMB, meaning WMB would have to buy them back. Unfortunately, they did not have the cash reserves to stay the course, and were seized and sold.
A good report on the mortgages at this link.
http://t.ritholtz.com/bigpicture/#!/entry/jpm-the-washington-mutual-story,51407524d7fc7b567067d06b
The nemesis of WAWU, Jamie Dimon, has been diagnosed with curable throat cancer.
Congratulations!
You're on a roll!
Your reasoning is exactly on track again!
Your reasoning is exactly on track.
The settlement came about because the debtors, the creditors, and the EC got as much as each group could get without prolonging the bankruptcy and without losing a great deal of money (the NOLs). The debtors wanted to distance themselves from the questionable conduct of WMI executives and the many ongoing lawsuits as regards the mismanagement of the mortgages, and they wanted the new company started within a timeframe which could capture as much of the NOLs as possible.
The (insider trading) creditors influenced other creditors to accept Susman’s offer for the same reasons, and to avoid criminal charges. Keep in mind that many of the creditors owned various investment instruments in WMI, which included everything from bonds to common shares. The settlement guaranteed them to be part of the owners and managers of the new company, and promised the avoidance of criminal charges, which the EC and Susman Godfrey and Partners could make in a different court.
The EC had three options. Only one would keep them alive. (1) The debtors would cancel equity, while the EC kept mum about the insider trading revelation, (2) The debtors would cancel equity, while the EC filed charges in a different court, or (3) accept the settlement offer, which they did.
Best regards,
David West
Large Green,
My escrow marker is 500,000. None want you to be right more than me.
Time will tell.
Looking forward to the closing of the P&A.
Best regards,
David West
Well, well. Finally! A 100% accurate statement.
The Equity Committee were the ones who agreed to the 'final plan', etc. NOT SUSMAN GODFREY.
However, "It ain't over till it's over!" - Yogi Berra
Which means Large Green's theory will continue to dangle and tantalize until the escrow markers are deleted from each trading account.
Simultaneously, your post is factual and accurate, which indicates WMIH is the way to the surest positive potential if those invested know how to read the signs, indicating when to buy or sell.
Good post!
Excellent report.
Item 3 is of the most immediate interest and importance.
The prosecution of former WAMU executives for violating their fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders would be great, and I do hope that is the purpose of the depositions.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_pmsg.aspx?message_id=50890712
Complaining is justifiable, but futile, when someone simply wants to complain. In other words, if someone wants to complain about anything at all - do it. However, complaining is not justifiable, and is still futile, when it will not change the status quo. In other words, why complain if the target of the complaint is not required to listen, not required to make any changes that appease the complainer, and when the complainer cannot convince others to massively take up arms and slay the dragons of the BOD and the market? If anyone is a Don Quixote, go for it.
The best way a shareholder can prevent personal failure in the stock market is to attend classes (education) on the intricate details of how the market and trading stocks work. The majority of people who are cocky enough to buy into the market without having sufficient knowledge lose their money (80%). Then, because they are not educated in how the market works, nor educated in the futility of complaining, complain that the system is not fair. In essence, this is what Jesse Jackson did when he attempted to win the Democratic nomination for President of The United States. His complaint was “I cannot win with the rules the way they are, we need to change the rules so I will have a better chance of winning”. The complaint was absurd, no one listened, the rules were not changed, and he failed to achieve his goal. If he had educated himself on how the electoral system works, he would have stayed home, or had a better chance of winning. The same is true for investors or traders.
Three of the best ways (in reverse order) to be successful in the market are (3) continuously educate yourself on trading - not investing, (2) be a well-educated trader who earns millions in commissions while working for a broker, and (1) be a well-educated trader who has access to insider information (the best but illegal).
The BOD and officers of WMIH receive “free” shares from time-to-time in lieu of a salary, but cannot buy or sell WMIH without permission because they are “insiders”. We would know if any member of the BOD requests permission to sell before the event, giving us time to make a better decision on buying or selling. Of course, owning shares gives them incentive to manage the company well, causing the PPS to go up. Regardless of what anyone thinks, the BOD is managing WMIH with a plan. They are not required to make the shareholder privy to the plan, except as required by the rules, which they follow. Like all plans, their plan is in stages and the stages are on a timeline. The PPS will go up when the part of the plan comes to term, which the BOD designed to make it go up. Until then the market, and not the officers of WMIH, is jerking WMIH (the stock) around. The BOD is following their plan; the market is not following any plan, except to trade the stock. The BOD is mostly not yet concerned with the PPS because they are insiders and know what the plan calls for. When the time is right, they will begin to help manipulate the PPS of the stock to where they want it to be. Shareholders cannot rush the plan by complaining, however, the plan will produce whatever the BOD has planned for it to produce. Shareholders can accept that and stay in, or accept that and get out. In the meantime, they should educate themselves and learn how to recognize the signs, which will be the indicators they need to make good decisions.
The market is not a huge warm, friendly, loving family designed to make sure everything is fair to the investor, educated or not. There are no refunds to anyone and the investor cannot say, “Oops! I did not know about that. Give me my money back and let me try again.” Additionally, the market rarely has to explain anything to anyone. Investors should know that, and trade accordingly.
There are numerous traveling classes offered to investors and traders to increase their knowledge of the stock market process. If an investor were going to invest $100k in the market, it might be to their best interest to spend $5k for a weeklong course on how to do it, and do their own investing or trading, taking responsibility for making more money, or losing the money they started with. Why pay a local investment firm to lose your money?
Each shareholder should do their own DD, make their own decisions, and accept the responsibility for their actions. The difference between any two individuals on earth is what is in their mind and what they do with it, not what they think they can do with it. Life (in the market) is about survival, and survival (in the market) is about making good decisions. To date, I am made whole+ on this investment because I follow that basic rule. When the time comes for me to exit this position I will do so, ahead or not, and without complaint.
Absolutely correct.
The BOD is following their plan. Just because shareholders do not know the details of their plan, or because the plan is unfolding without shareholder consent is too bad. That is one of the I-do not-like-it aspects of an OTCBB stock. The BOD does not have to reveal as much detail as they do for a stock listed on a major exchange.
However, the BOD (Willingham I think) did reveal two major aspects of the plan that posters on this board conveniently ignore as they whine, moan, complain and stamp their feet because the BOD is not conducting business to suit them. (1) It is not that the BOD does not know the stock is trading, they simply do not care that the market is trading the stock, and do not care that the market jerks the stock up and down. (2) Shareholders should watch carefully for signs indicating the BOD is about to list the stock to a higher exchange. If that happens it will mean the plan is to expose the stock to the 80% of the market that loses their money, and it will mean the BOD is going to make a serious effort to be a real reinsurance business. If they have already decided not list the stock to a higher exchange, it probably means the common shareholder is about to be royally shafted again. Diluting the stock and keeping it low profile is the most obvious way to do that, which is what is going on already.
If shareholders fail to do their DD, they will not be ready for either of these two events, and will not be ready to buy or sell when the appropriate time comes.
Absolutely on track, including the lack of a full deck by some.
Investors in WMIH should be looking for information that will give a clue about plans the BOD has about listing to a higher exchange or not. Both are key bits of information for decision-making by investors to buy or sell.
Exactly. Fear, greed, and the lack of knowledge of how the market works are what causes 80% of all investors to lose money.
Visit the link below. There, you will see a message below the WaMu logo, which clearly states:
This board is for discussion of Washington Mutual Inc. old ticker WAMUQ now (WMIH)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/WMI-Holdings-Corp-WMIH-11133/
WithCatz -
As an investor in any stock, if there is only $1 that can be made, I use all of my experience, resources, and knowledge to make sure the $1, all of it, comes to my investment only. I expect all other investors to do the same. Accordingly, I am not my brother's keeper unless I choose to be, and believe that no relationship between me and any other investor exists.
80% of all investors lose their money. Those in this category live in a fantasy world of investment of all for one and one for all.
Just as board members owe a duty of care and duty of loyalty to the corporation, they owe the same duties to shareholders because they are considered to be fiduciaries of the shareholders. In North American Catholic Educational Programming Foundation, Inc. v. Gheewalla, 930 A.2d 92, 99 (Del. 2007), the Delaware Supreme Court described the duties of directors to shareholders: It is well established that the directors owe their fiduciary obligations to the corporation and its shareholders. While shareholders rely on directors acting as fiduciaries to protect their interests, creditors are afforded protection through contractual agreements, fraud and fraudulent conveyance law, implied covenants of good faith and fair dealing, bankruptcy law, general commercial law and other sources of creditor rights. Thus, the source of the directors’ responsibility to shareholders is the fiduciary relationship.
A few points are important to note. Delaware courts, do not describe the directors as agents of the shareholders. Nor do Delaware courts state that the shareholders’ interests take primacy over all others. As Professor Lynn Stout of UCLA Law School astutely explains, the common belief that the board must always strive to maximize shareholder wealth is not supported in corporate law.
To understand what was going on, you have you have a good working knowledge of how the mortgage industry sells mortgages back and forth to each other. The link below is a good start on increasing your knowledge. There would have been no problem if lenders made loans to people who could make the monthly payments. The crash came because lenders saturated the industry with mortgages made to borrowers who simply could not make their payments. In many instances, the federal government put pressure on lenders to make it easy for the less fortunate to buy homes, but the true culprit is the greed of the lenders. WMB was guilty of making these loans on a vast scale. In the end, they were stuck with the high-risk mortgages; no one would buy them. The scenario is identical to the payday loan industry where the lender knowingly makes a loan to a borrower who is a high credit risk, and eventually defaults on the loan.
http://home.howstuffworks.com/real-estate/buying-home/mortgage16.htm
Although I have seen several different versions of the list of subsidiaries, I am now in agreement with the statement that many of the subsidiaries, including the ones in my most recent post, belong to WMB. If you care to research and study the paper trail generated by the entities involved in managing the mortgages, you will also come to the conclusion that WMI is fortunate these subsidiaries were a part of WMB at the time of the seizure.
It is futile to discuss 'how everything would have transpired' if one thing had been one way, and another thing a different way. It is also futile for anyone to continually vent their emotions against anyone or any part of the past proceedings. It is best we concentrate on keeping abreast of the information we need to decide when to buy or sell WMIH.
Best regards,
David West
Don and Royal Dude,
Thanks for the information.
It is still unclear how the OTS could seize the WAMU subsidiaries of WAMU Asset Acceptance Corporation, WAMU Capital Corporation, WAMU Mortgage Securities Corporation, and Long Beach Securities Corporation and place them in receivership with FDIC-R. According to the subsidiary list, they were not federally chartered banks, were not banks at all, and were not subsidiaries of Washington Mutual Bank. They were subsidiaries of WAMU; their veil of incorporation should have protected them.
The fact remains the OTS (or someone in power) did seize them and sold them to JPM. This fiasco is the reason JPM is still servicing the loans, while the paper trail of (mortgage) ownership is faint.
The officers of WAMU apparently did nothing about the (wrongful?) seizure and sale, which is a strong implication they did not want their conduct brought into a criminal court. A study of the tangled web of how WAMU originated and managed the mortgages, before and after the bankruptcy, is an eye opener for anyone truly interested in what happened to Washington Mutual Bank, and WMI.
Legal or not, the most obvious reason the OTS seized the subsidiaries and placed them in receivership with FDIC-R is because the criminal conduct of all parties involved caused the mortgages to be at high risk. The apparent scapegoat was FNMA. That being the case, the taxpayer is fortunate things turned out the way they did (bailouts with repayment), and the common shareholder of WMIH is fortunate beyond belief.
Best regards,
David West
Definition of 'Pass-Through Certificate'
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/passthroughcertificate.asp
Fixed-income securities that represent an undivided interest in a pool of federally insured mortgages put together by the Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae).
Explanation of ‘Pass-Through Certificate' by Investopedia
Mortgage-backed certificates are the most common type of pass-through, where homeowners' payments pass from the original bank through a government agency or investment bank to investors.
********
One of the unanswered questions is who owns the subsidiaries of WMI, which were on the books at the time of the OTS seizure and the FDIC receivership. More specifically, who (now) owns WaMu Capital Corporation, Long Beach Securities Corporation, and WaMu Asset Acceptance Corporation? These three subsidiaries were major players in manipulating the management of the mortgages JPM still services. You can get a good idea of what is going on behind the everyday scene of ‘business as usual’ by Googling ‘WaMu Asset Acceptance Corporation’ and each of the items on Exhibit A of the document at this link: http://www.fdic.gov/about/freedom/plsa/rmbs_jpmorgan_et_al.pdf
The important thing shareholders of WMIH should know is does (the new) WMIH own the three subsidiaries that were involved and are still involved in the manipulation of mortgages with the list below, or did FDIC-R seize them due to their involvement in the mortgage scandal.
JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.
J.P. MORGAN MORTGAGE ACQUISITION CORPORATION
J.P. MORGAN SECURITIES LLC (f/k/a J.P. MORGAN SECURITIES INC.)
J.P. MORGAN ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION I
EMC MORTGAGE LLC (f/k/a EMC MORTGAGE CORPORATION)
BEAR STEARNS & CO., INC
STRUCTURED ASSET MORTGAGE INVESTMENTS II INC
BEAR STEARNS ASSET BACKED SECURITIES I LLC
*WAMU ASSET ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION
*WAMU CAPITAL CORPORATION
*WASHINGTON MUTUAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORPORATION
*LONG BEACH SECURITIES CORPORATION
CITIGROUP GLOBAL MARKETS, INC
CREDIT SUISSE SECURITIES (USA) LLC
GOLDMAN, SACHS & CO.
RBS SECURITIES, INC.
It is because of the fiasco of mortgage manipulation, or “who’s on first” that the 3.1a disappeared.
I would be interested in a seeing a verifiable list of subsidiaries now owned by (the new) WMIH. I have the copy from during the bankruptcy.
********
An example list of WaMu Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2007-OA5 Marketing Materials is at this link:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1317069/000127727707000382/fwptermsheetwamu07_oa5.pdf
Shorts covering. Hopefully good news coming.
He has 34,260 new shares (WMIH) converted from 1,000,000 old shares (WAMUQ - Escrow) plus several issues of free shares (WMIH).
Purchase and Assumption Agreement (39 Pages)
Dated September 25, 2008
http://www.fdic.gov/about/freedom/Washington_Mutual_P_and_A.pdf
ARTICLE III
PURCHASE OF ASSETS
3.1 Assets Purchased by Assuming Bank. Subject to Sections 3.5, 3.6 and 4.8, the Assuming Bank hereby purchases from the Receiver, and the Receiver hereby sells, assigns, transfers, conveys, and delivers to the Assuming Bank, all right, title, and interest of the Receiver in and to all of the assets (real, personal and mixed, wherever located and however acquired) including all subsidiaries, joint ventures, partnerships, and any and all other business combinations or arrangements, whether active, inactive, dissolved or terminated, of the Failed Bank whether or not reflected on the books of the Failed Bank as of Bank Closing. Assets are purchased hereunder by the Assuming Bank subject to all liabilities for indebtedness collateralized by Liens affecting such Assets to the extent provided in Section 2.1. The subsidiaries, joint ventures, partnerships, and any and all other business combinations or arrangements, whether active, inactive, dissolved or terminated being purchased by the Assuming Bank includes, but is not limited to, the entities listed on Schedule 3.1a. Notwithstanding Section 4.8, the Assuming Bank specifically purchases all mortgage servicing rights and obligations of the Failed Bank.
AFFIDAVIT OF [REDACTED],
REGARDING A CONVERSATION WITH
MR. [REDACTED], RECEIVER IN CHARGE
FOR THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION
AS RECEIVER OF WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK
http://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?seeMore=&split_page=2&type=member&item=91446930&gid=1966041&ajax=ajax
3.1a
Sometimes erroneously used as a generic term for "asset list", referring to a missing provision in the FDIC Washington Mutual Purchase and Assumption Agreement surrounding the bank's seizure in 2008. The document was generated from a standard boilerplate template file, which had in it a placeholder for an asset list of items to be purchased when a bank is seized. In the case of Washington Mutual, the "whole bank" was to be sold, thus eliminating the need for a section 3.1a of the FDIC P&A document. In the FDIC's haste to complete the document quickly, the internal references to section 3.1a were not properly omitted, thus creating confusion where some internal references to an "asset list" were still present, even though no asset list was required due to the inclusion of text indicating the seizure and sale of the "whole bank" along with all assets and liabilities. Not to be confused with an asset list of a bankruptcy proceeding.
A pullback is normal and allowed the big players a short pause to refine their consolidation. The pullback would have been more severe if the big players had not been consolidating as the PPS moved upwards each day. We will see it again.
You and Don have been here a while.
I look for a close @ around $2.84, which is in line to close the week @ $3.00, and end of year @ $4.00. The pattern is up daily around $0.17.
The fight between FDIC and JPM is just normal business.
What I want is to see some favorable results (to WMILT) of litigation between WMILT and any offending party in the WAMU scandal, beginning with Goldman Sachs, FDIC and JPM.
Exactly.
Sorry if my post was not clear enough to convey your explanation.
This document contains individual real names of shareholders and the names of groups (or brokers) who represent shareholders. My name, along with many others, is included in one of the listings for TD Ameritrade.
With effort, a reader can readily see that groups, such as JPM, own a lot of shares.
Shares owned and to be converted are in this document:
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229120213000000000026.pdf
Diamondguru-one:
Shares above the 200M were bestowed on various members of the BOD for their service.
No one bought them.
Put another log on the fire.
The transaction is expected to close before the end of the second quarter of Dell's FY2014.
Sound familiar??