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.
After re-reading it, I think he his referring to the July 20th hearing, both in court and in chambers, as well as any hearing that took place that discussed Mr. Hoffman. Interesting.
I think Mr. Hoffman is talking about the meeting where Susman said something that forced them all into chambers. If it was decided at that meeting that documents be sealed, Hoffman wants entire transcript of meeting to prove it. Otherwise, according to his response, there is no right for those documents to be sealed.
Ptolomeo -- IMO if this goes to trial, we would have to hope that Susman believes he already has much of what he needs and can keep costs resonable while taking a major chunk of any award a jury would hand out. Other than that, it might be difficult to find someone competent enough to start over and at the same time not make a win meaningless because all money would be spent.
If someone can just send the Hoffman, Benson and McCurry document pointers as well as link to this ihub board, hopefully this can then get the coverage it deserves. Thnks for all the email ID's Kensei
Wonder how much time the attorneys spent on this. It is definitely clear that the debtors have virtually unlimited resources to fight us on everything.
Catz -- Your comments made me think of a question. Since TPS does have all these P's, are they going to vote on them?
rockie -- I think if this had gone to trial, it would be over already!
nranger -- It seems like at leat TPS is ready for a fight. The fact JMW told TPS everyone will be riding your coattails would hopefully now begin to play with what I am praying will be a who's who of depositions to get this thing rolling again.
Thanks knick for the correction. It's been a long 2 years and now I've lost 80% of my money too. I don't trust anyone any longer related to this case, yet I still have to believe in justice until the very end.
jellogan --I agree that this digs very deep. My question is, that if Susman has any documents should Hochberg have had to use them in his examiner's report? Why would Susman not provide information?
Using the same logic that Rosen is using for the voting of our shares, I guess Obama is only President of 1/2 the U.S., since everyone didn't vote for him, they get no President, since their vote apparently to Rosen has no value.
Not to be criticizing here, but JMW has on many occasions in this case, either forgotten something she said or ignored it, so IMO her decision on a shareholder meeting could be based on anything. I remember she said something about there would be no confirmation hearing without an asset list, yet here we are.
NASCOW -- Can you elaborate on item 32?
STRIKE -- While I agree that Susman has PLENTY to litigate, the tone of Hochberg appeared to me that litigation would not be fruitful, basically throwing us under the bus. That is going to be IMO a major point of contention for JMW --- What she believes Hochberg was doing as opposed to what is in black and white. If she disregards taht entire report (which I hope she does), then she is allowing even more millions to be taken from the estate when her whole point of an examiner was to wind this thing up.
She needs to make some rulings on many things quickly if this thing is ever going to end this case. IMO, she has everything she needs to rule for both sides on enough matters that they will be forced to settle or this case could go on for years.
Is there any chance JMW will retire before this thing ends??????
Steel -- This seems to be against what JMW was looking for from examiner. Without going back to get exact quotes, I thought that since there were so many roadblocks to discovery being completed, she decided to appoint examiner and demand that everyone give him what was needed. Using that train of thought, wouldn't it be safe to assume that JMW is not expecting this case to go back to basically square one (fuller version of the debate)? I think she expected to look at report and see if equity was/could be in the money. If so, make a settlement. If not, approve POR. So the question begs, where does JMW think this report leaves us? I am now of the opinion that law doesn't even matter in this case anymore. No prediction of what will happen, but whatever it is, it will be because JMW has had enough. Either she will say there is no proof equity is in money so stop trying or she will say that she has not gotten cooperation, so get something done very soon.
Thanks UZ -- That report from Hochberg was at best an incomplete picture. For me the fact that he stated numerous times that he didn't have time means that there is still a lot more out there to find. Since the asset list still hasn't been presented, either one needs to be, or JPM payed 1.8 billion for nothing, which we all know isn't true.
Hopefully Susman will use information you linked to show Hochberg's shoddy work (retroactively using laws), then based on that convince her the shareholder's meeting is needed, which IMO, if that is granted, a settlement will not be far off which will include equity. Short of that, Susman better be there in person to a) present a competing POR which should have a list of assets, if one exists, or b) demand the list of assets.
Climber -- Is the question HIDDEN assets or assets? Most of us here think that by now, there should have been a listing of exactly what was given to JPM for 1.8 billion and the worth of such assets. That's the problem we are having. There should be NOTHING hidden. It should all be out in the open for the public to see (If not us, then at least attorneys). So where is it????? That is what we want answers to.
Question for the board:
The information about the accepting/rejecting/releasing of the plan -- Let's say there is a competing plan. If I vote to reject Rosen's plan, does taht prevent me from voting on the other plan while we are waiting for all votes to come in? Or does one plan have to be denied before another one can be voted on?
Nash -- I honestly don't see anyone getting taken by "pumpers" in this stock at the present time. Those of us that have been here over 2 years have most likely made the decision to either get out or hold to the end. The pumpers as you call them have been doing doing massive amounts of DD for this board. THe only mistake most of us have made to this point is assuming that common sense and basic math would lead to justice. Most of us never thought the entire legal system could be corrupt, though some here are now leaning that way. The simplest of requests was an asset list, which has still not shown up.
I can't sell a car without a title, buy one without insurance or drive one without proof that I am supposedly capable of doing so (license). Yet a multi-billion company can be sold in the middle of the night for less than a penny on the dollar wih no documentation to say what actually was sold. When those of us that have invested in this company want justice and refuse (maybe stupidly) to believe that justice is dead, you say they are pumping the stock.
I agree that if flippers can make some money, more power to them, but to call those that honestly believe they are entitled to fairness pumpers, is IMO out of line.
Climber -- Do you know if the examiner's report can be called into question at the confirmation hearing? With TPS slated to go first, what happens if they win? Isn't this when Susman could produce evidence that examiner was wrong, not thorough, whatever, by coming up with information that would in essence be a competing POR? If Susman can find $30 billion or at least prove that there was conspiracy to prevent WAMU from staying solvent, doesn't JMW have basically the responsibility to look out for maximizing of assets, regardless of POR.
islandcat -- IS this it?
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229100907000000000002.pdf
2 new subpeonas for California Attorney General
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229101101000000000028.pdf
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229101101000000000029.pdf
I like note 957 on pagee 250 of report (257 of PDF), that examiner interviewed everyone at meeting but 2 people. Considering there were 4 people at the meeting, I think it is safe to say examiner did a half-***ed job.
DM57 --- This from Fitzpatrick's article --- quote of Hochberg:
The facts don't suggest an "unfair process," the examiner said "or that a different process would have changed the outcome." FDIC's bidding procedures, he said, "have to be viewed in the context of the uncertainty and panic that gripped the financial system in Sept. 2008.
Isn't that like saying if my house get foreclosed on , then I can just live in yours because of the uncertainty in my life? I guess if things don't improve, I can then take all your things with me and find a better house.
What a joke.
Susman had better attack every bit of the report from both the billing aspect and the orders the judge gave Hochberg to get the valuation.
NHGUY -- A few of us here have been asking the same thing. The most important question is: Will Susman be able to convince JMW that Hochberg has basically done the same thing as Rosen and hoodwinked her? If so, this will go on for many months and victory will eventually be ours. IF not, it's pretty much over, IMO
Don -- haven't been able to read all the entries on the board, but has this question been answered. How can this report have so many "There wasn't time" statements? Shouldn't Hochberg or whatever that clown's name is ask for more time in order to get a complete report?
WAMULICIOUS -- It never has become legal. THat's why those of us here took a chance. We counted on justice. I just hope I never need a lawyer to keep me out of jail. I can't trust them. Susman better come forward with something at the next hearing.
It'd be interesting to hear what Willingham is thinking right about now.
Biz -- It seems more and more like the powers to be want this to end quickly. Our last chance is Susman. If he doesn't contest anything in examiner's report, he will just idly stand by and let judge rule agains SH meeting and then kind of disappear. Will TPG fight on at this point?
Byrddog -- Unfortunately, if we didn't sell prior to EOD today, then we are stuck holding until the end. Don't know what will come next. If Susman doesn't object to something in that report, then there is definitely something wrong. A very expensive lesson learned for me at this point.
Stock Goddess -- I like your theory, but this report was the last chance of a paper trail for evidence of wrong doing and if there is none, even if there was a setlement, Rosen would just ignore it and screw the EC. I don't care if Susman said they wouldn't challenge the report, they had better.
Can confirmation hearings begin/end with Trustee still having to do work?
Don -- Can you sum up very briefly if examiner's report in REFCO was beneficial to a party like us trying to recovery equity?
Also, I think we will see a page in our report very much like this one (page 12 on report -- page 18 of document)
b. The Examiner, as did the Creditors Committee, provided advance notice to the
USAO of proposed interviews to allow the USAO an opportunity to object if the USAO believed
an interview would compromise its criminal investigation. As noted above, out of deference to
ongoing governmental investigations, the Examiner was unable to interview certain witnesses
believed to have valuable knowledge of the facts underlying the fraudulent schemes. Because of
the ongoing criminal investigation, it is also likely that some participants would have refused to
be interviewed or to testify. The witnesses unavailable to the Examiner included high-level
Refco officers and directors, key GT principals and employees, and a few of the third-party
participants in some, but not all, of the Round Trip Loan transactions. The Examiner was also
unable to review certain reports provided to the USAO by Latham & Watkins regarding the
internal investigation performed at the request of Refco’s Audit Committee immediately prior to
the bankruptcy filings.
William48: I agree Rosen does not seem to be concerned about the examiner's report. I am now starting to believe this case will never end. I think it was gophilipgo's post that said he has to act confident. I am now back to thinking about 1 of 2 things.
1. Either Rosen knows how this case is going to turn out (in his favor)--- Which if he does, then he better have to pay back all the money he used to fight against the examiner, as well as not producing documents that would have proven him right when everyone asked for them months/years ago. Or in this scenario he bought enough people off to get his result, which is even more dastardly.
or
2. Rosen is like the rest of us and doesn't know much. His confidence is the way he had been the entire proceeding except when Susman got them all dragged into chambers and a few hearings around appointment of examiner.
I've asked this question before, but let's say examiner's report comes out in favor of Rosen, other than saying something like their is slight possibility of litigation gettting some money -- Can EC pursue that even after confirmation or is all then forgiven? Maybe we can't get JPM of FDIC, but someone else? Who wouold pay for anything like that.
I can't remember the quote either, but it seemed like he referred to the examiners report as something like window dressing to validate alll that has happened (his version of everything of course)
This has a vaguely familiar feel to the run prior to 3/12, except for the fact that at that time, the run was indicating a settlement, only to have Rosen screw us royally. This time, it will take a while to decipher the examiner's report and see if this case stays on the triple path or whatever THJMW called it, so I see a lot of daytraders coming in making their profit and getting out, therefore slowing the momentum of the run, unless a leak one way or another materializes.
Yanik -- Do you think they will cut a deal? By the time the 30 days expire, they will have at least some of examiner's report in hand and know better their chances of winning.
put in buy for a few thousand at .165 just to see if I can get them.
Shareholders' Meeting: Can anyone with time go to the following link and look at Subchapter VII to see if we as shareholders are entitled to call for a shareholder's meeting. Thanks.
Delaware Corporation Statute
I got the letter also. Haven't read it in it's entirety, but it seems like there is a very strict method to object that must be followed exactly or objection will not be heard. I want to make sure I can work my way around all Rosen's tricks before I reply. Maybe if there is an astute lawyer who can eloquently object, we can all model the same letter.