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 thought I read here on Friday night from a poster that this news or posting was not for this company but another company with similar name???
Had some time tonight so I thought I would look around at some of the reminders nasty and otherwise. Some good stuff in those old articles though. Life is Change.
BAD NEWS FOR JPM-----COULD THERE BE JUSTICE FOR WAMU AFTERALL?
Email this to a friend Print this article
Goldman Sachs' Alumni and JP Morgan Potentially Conspire to Bring Down Washington Mutual
Published 11/20/2008 - 10:55 a.m. EST
(PressMediaWire) Houston TX- It has been discovered after an in-depth investigation that there is reason to suspect a number of Goldman Sachs' alumni in potentially instigating the seizure of Washington Mutual bank along with Sheila Bair and JP Morgan.
As reported by Rami Grunbaum of the Seattle Times, two months prior to the start of this event, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson warned then-CEO Kerry Killinger that he ought to sell the Seattle-based thrift before it deteriorated further. This apparently confused officials of the bank as they had recently raised $7.2 billion in capital from investors led by private-equity fund TPG, and they thought that they had raised enough money to weather the worsening mortgage crisis. To these shocked bank executives, Paulson gave the following piece of "advice", 'You should have sold to JPMorgan Chase in the spring, and you should do so now. Things could get a lot more difficult for you.' Later on, as the stock came under further attack from naked shorts, Killinger pleaded to have the stock placed on a no short list, but was rebuffed by Secretary Paulson.
Let's now fast forward to a few days before the seizure of WAMU. It was claimed by Sheila Bair that a media leak forced the FDIC's hand in this event. It has not been clear who leaked this information until now. As reported by the Associated Press on September 23rd, Roy Smith, a professor of finance at NYU, was quoted as saying the following, "The government doesn't want to take them over; no question about that. The thrift's future is largely left to the bidders in the auction that is being organized for it."
But wait. How did Roy Smith, a humble professor, know about a "secret" government organized auction days before the general public and stockholders knew about it? For this answer, this reporter can only come to one conclusion. According to Professor Smith's website, he is a former president of Goldman Sachs International Corp. This is the same Goldman Sachs Secretary Paulson was CEO and employee of for many years.
However, this appearance of collusion is not the first that occurred in this sordid affair. Reuters reported on October 22, that inappropriate contact between the SEC's enforcement director and JPMorgan's general counsel occurred while the investment bank was mulling a bid for Bear Stearns, which may have affected its collapse. It is suspected that the same inappropriate contact may have occurred between the SEC and JPM with regards to Washington Mutual.
The bankruptcy hearings in this case have also been very unusual. JPMorgan has been withholding funds from Washington Mutual in the amount of 4.4 billion dollars that were located in a Washington Mutual Holding Company account at their bank. In fact, the Washington Mutual Holding Company has had to ask the bankruptcy court to intervene to allow them access to their funds. JPMorgan has also been accused of freezing 17 billion dollars in funds of Lehman brothers that resulted in its immediate collapse. Finally, in the most outrageous claim of all, JPMorgan and the FDIC have filed a claim with the bankruptcy court that JPMorgan should receive the billions of dollars in tax benefits due to past losses that are the rightful property of the Washington Mutual Holding Company. Since when is it the business of the FDIC, whose job is to protect American taxpayer's deposits, to get involved and file briefs in public bankruptcy cases in favor of an uninvolved party? This only strengthens the argument of the amount of collusion that is occurring between JPMorgan and the federal government.
On the face of it, the "failure" of Washington Mutual seems to only affect shareholders, but in reality, about 268 Billion Dollars was lost by large institutions that held about 62 percent of WAMU stock at that time. Amazingly, institutions now hold 78 percent of WAMU stock. When all these businesses and individuals write off their 268 Billion dollars in losses on their Federal Tax Returns, who is going to pick up the tab then? Of course, the answer is the American taxpayer. With such a high price to pay, certainly the people of this country deserve a comprehensive and unbiased investigation of everything leading up to this seizure, including possible market manipulation. There are a lot more villains out there than the Washington Mutual executives, and we deserve to know just who they are, and whether their actions in this were legal or not.
The Washington Mutual seizure was a shot heard around the world. This event caused untold worldwide distrust of the US Banking system. It eroded people's faith in the markets resulting in record losses for every worldwide stock. Many people took a big "hit" in their retirement plans, which will take countless years to repair. Taxpayers will wind up picking up the bill in the form of the tax write-offs businesses and individuals will undoubtedly have to take. It's time for US citizens to get answers, but all they have gotten from the FDIC and the government to date is "no comment." Taxpayers deserve an explanation and transparency. For this reason and many others, Washington Mutual shareholders demand a full and immediate investigation of ALL parties immediately.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This article is the first in a series of investigative articles regarding the unprecedented seizure of Washington Mutual Bank. Please submit any additional investigative tips to Mike@wamucoup.com. Also, we are currently working on the formation of an equity committee. If you are a large stockholder in the company, please contact us.
Reply Forward
April 2010 JPM Best Suitor for WAMU.
Banking News: J.P. Morgan Chase (NYSE: JPM) “Far and Away the Best Bidder” for WaMu
April 23rd, 2010 • View Comments • Filed Under • by Christopher
Filed Under: Banking News Tags: Citigroup Inc. (NYSE: C) • J.P. Morgan Chase (NYSE: JPM)
According to regulators, J.P. Morgan (JPM) may not have received the sweetheart deal it was reported to have received after submitting its winning bid for Washington Mutual.
Pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act request, the Wall St. Journal received a previously unreleased document from federal regulators. The details of the transaction appear to weaken claims that the FDIC bent over backward to award Washington Mutual’s business to J.P. Morgan.
The document shows that Citigroup Inc. (C) was the only other bank to bid for Washington Mutual as part of the auction process for insured U.S. banks and savings institutions that fail. Under federal law, the FDIC must accept the “least-cost” offer from potential acquirers.J.P. Morgan, now the second-largest U.S. bank in assets, unsuccessfully tried to buy Washington Mutual in early 2008.
Citigroup initially considered buying Washington Mutual after being approached by the beleaguered thrift, according to people familiar with the matter, but didn’t make an offer.
Shortly before Washington Mutual was seized, FDIC officials sought bids from potential buyers. The day before the failure, Citigroup submitted what it called an “indicative” bid.
Terms of the offer by the New York bank previously were kept secret by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., which sold the failed banking units to J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. for $1.88 billion in September 2008.
In a letter, Edward Kelly III, now chairman of global banking in Citigroup’s institutional-clients group, wrote that the offer did “not conform to the bidding instructions for Washington Mutual.” Still, the letter added, “our suggested approach will in fact provide greater systemic stability and lower losses than would any conforming bid.”
Citigroup Inc.’s unsuccessful bid for the teetering banking operations of Washington Mutual Inc. offered no upfront cash as part of its bid and didn’t want to assume Washington Mutual’s uninsured deposits.
Citigroup also wanted the FDIC to cover 80% of “first losses” on the thrift’s loans, including mortgages battered by declining real-estate values. Losses by the New York bank on the remaining 20% would have been capped at $10 billion, the document shows, with the FDIC stuck with any additional loan losses.
In comparison, J.P. Morgan sought and received no loss-sharing agreement from the FDIC. It also took control of all deposits held by Washington Mutual, whose collapse was the largest bank failure in U.S. history. “It would appear from publicly available documents that J.P. Morgan was far and away the best bidder,” said Kevin Starke, an analyst with CRT Capital Group LLC in Stamford, Conn. “In hindsight, Citi’s bid was too conservative.”
“The FDIC was able to sell WaMu through an unassisted transaction that protected all depositors and resulted in zero exposure to the government,” an FDIC spokesman said. “No other bid accomplished this.” Citigroup, J.P. Morgan and the Washington Mutual holding company, now in bankruptcy proceedings, declined to comment.
Former Washington Mutual Chief Executive Kerry Killinger told a Senate subcommittee last week that the seizure was unnecessary, accusing regulators of helping only financial institutions deemed “too clubby to fail.” The old parent company has contended the banking operations were worth more than the $1.88 billion paid by J.P. Morgan, while bondholders have accused J.P. Morgan of fostering the conditions that led to the seizure. The FDIC, Washington Mutual’s old parent company and J.P. Morgan are battling in a federal court over billions of dollars in deposits, pension benefits and tax refunds. A tentative settlement would split the assets among the three parties.
Another one from Bloomberg September 20, 2008.
Sept. 20 (Bloomberg) -- Four banks that may bid for Washington Mutual Inc., the Seattle savings and loan that put itself up for sale this month, have another $110 billion to spend after the biggest two-day global rally in 38 years.
JPMorgan Chase & Co., Citigroup Inc., Wells Fargo & Co. and Banco Santander SA all jumped more than 18 percent, swelling their market values, after the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission banned short sales of financial firms and federal officials unveiled a plan to bolster bank balance sheets. Talks to pick a WaMu buyer will continue this weekend, and the four lenders are mulling bids, said a person familiar with a matter.
``Everybody now has a much more valuable currency,'' said Michael Kao, a money manager at Akanthos Capital Management in Woodland Hills, California who invests in WaMu securities such as preferred shares. ``It increases the likelihood of a deal dramatically.''
Bank stocks rose worldwide after U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke proposed removing troubled assets from the balance sheets of financial companies. The program may involve government purchases of devalued assets, helping lenders such as WaMu, which by its own estimates may have $19 billion in mortgage losses during the next 2-½ years.
Shorn of the mortgage portfolio, WaMu would be left with the asset bidders covet most: a network of 2,300 branches, mostly on the West Coast, and $143 billion in retail deposits. Howard Shapiro, an analyst at Fox-Pitt Kelton Cochran Caronia Waller, said there have been ``minimal'' withdrawals, based on visits to about 30 WaMu branches, where his team spoke with more than 100 depositors and several branch managers.
``The impediment is, who wants to buy the distressed mortgage portfolio?'' Shapiro, who rates the stock ``overweight,'' said in an interview yesterday. ``If the Treasury is going to take it off their hands, an acquisition is going to be that much easier.''
WaMu yesterday added $1.26, or 42 percent, to $4.25 as of 4:02 p.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading, inflating its market value to $7.2 billion -- more double what it was worth at the close of trading two days earlier. Two of yesterday's biggest trades occurred just before the close, lifting the stock by more than 50 cents, Bloomberg data show. They accounted for about 8 million of the 204 million shares that changed hands yesterday.
Merge to Survive
WaMu spokesman Brad Russell declined to comment, as did JPMorgan spokesman Joseph Evangelisti and Wells Fargo's Julia Tunis Bernard and Citigroup's Shannon Bell. A Santander spokesman in Madrid declined to comment and wouldn't be quoted by name, citing company policy.
Banks may have to merge to survive after the credit crunch led Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. to bankruptcy, Merrill Lynch & Co. to a buyout and American International Group Inc. to a government takeover. Morgan Stanley, meantime, is weighing an alliance with Wachovia Corp., a person familiar with the matter has said.
WaMu, led by new Chief Executive Officer Alan Fishman, 62, removed an obstacle to any sale last week when TPG Inc., its biggest shareholder, agreed to waive a $1.5 billion payment it had negotiated if the lender is sold. WaMu accepted a $7 billion TPG infusion in April after rebuffing a takeover offer by JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon. JPMorgan
Fitch Ratings cited the waiver on Sept. 18 in placing WaMu's credit rating on watch, saying the move removed an ``important hurdle'' to a potential sale. ``Any feasible buyer would more than likely have much stronger credit ratings,'' Fitch said in a statement. Morgan Stanley analyst Betsy Graseck wrote in a Sept. 14 report that JPMorgan would benefit from a presence in the West and Southeast, home to most of Washington Mutual's branches. ``A potential acquisition of WM would be a strategic positive for JPM,'' wrote Graseck, who rates the shares ``overweight.''
``JPMorgan is in a position of pretty good strength,'' she wrote. ``It would be a market expansion for their branch footprint.'' WaMu is being advised by Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs Group Inc., a person familiar with the talks said. Goldman, which advised WaMu on the TPG investment, declined to comment through spokesman Michael Duvally.
To contact the reporters on this story: Ari Levy in San Francisco at alevy5@bloomberg.net; David Mildenberg in Charlotte at dmildenberg@bloomberg.net
To contact the editors responsible for this story: Otis Bilodeau at obilodeau@bloomberg.net; Rick Green at rgreen18@bloomberg.net.
Worth the Repost JPMorgan Buys Wamu, Key points here in Bold and Underlined.
JPMorgan buys WaMu
In the biggest bank failure in history, JPMorgan Chase will acquire massive branch network and troubled assets from Washington Mutual for $1.9 billion.
See all CNNMoney.com RSS FEEDS (close) By David Ellis and Jeanne Sahadi, CNNMoney.com staff writers
Last Updated: September 26, 2008: 12:18 PM ET
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- JPMorgan Chase acquired the banking assets of Washington Mutual late Thursday after the troubled thrift was seized by federal regulators, marking the biggest bank failure in the nation's history and the latest stunning twist in the ongoing credit crisis.
Under the deal, JPMorgan Chase will acquire all the banking operations of WaMu, including $307 billion in assets and $188 billion in deposits.To put the size of WaMu in context, its assets are equal to about two-thirds of the combined book value assets of all 747 failed thrifts that were sold off by the Resolution Trust Corp. - the former government body that handled the S&L crisis from 1989 through 1995.
In exchange for scooping up WaMu, JPMorgan Chase (JPM, Fortune 500) will pay approximately $1.9 billion to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Separately, JPMorgan announced Thursday that it plans to raise $8 billion in additional capital through the sale of stock as part of the deal. The bank expanded the offering to $10 billion on Friday.
The acquisition is JPMorgan Chase's second major purchase this year following the mid-March acquisition of investment bank Bear Stearns, a deal that was also engineered by the government."We think it is a great thing for our company," JPMorgan Chase Chairman and CEO Jamie Dimon said in a conference call with investors late Thursday night.
As a result of the acquisition, the New York City-based JPMorgan Chase will now boast some 5,400 branches in 23 states.Federal regulators, who helped shepherd the deal, stressed that the transition for WaMu customers would be "seamless."
"There will be no interruption in services and bank customers should expect business as usual come Friday morning," FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair said in a statement.
WaMu is the 13th bank to fail so far this year and earns the title of the nation's biggest bank failure by assets on record, ahead of Continental Illinois, which had about $40 billion in assets ($67.7 billion in 2008 dollars) when it failed in May of 1984.
The FDIC, however, was quick to point out Thursday evening that the WaMu-JPMorgan Chase deal would not have any impact to its insurance fund which covers customer deposits when banks fail.
"WaMu's balance sheet and the payment paid by JPMorgan Chase allowed a transaction in which neither the uninsured depositors nor the insurance fund absorbed any losses," Bair said.The FDIC insures the assets held by 8,451 banking institutions with a total of $13.4 trillion.
A road to collapse
WaMu had been one of the most hard-hit banks during the financial crisis after it bet big, like many of its competitors, on the strength of the U.S. housing market -- only to see its fortunes sour as housing prices fell.
Following several ratings agency downgrades this week and a freefall in the company's stock, many analysts were speculating that the endgame for the embattled savings and loan was imminent.
WaMu (WM, Fortune 500) shares were close to worthless Friday, falling 90% to just 16 cents a share. JPMorgan Chase shares gained more than 2.5% in midday trading.
In a press conference held late Thursday, Bair said regulators deemed it was necessary to act as the company had come under "severe" liquidity pressure. Regulators said that WaMu was experiencing a "run on the bank", as roughly 10% of WaMu deposits were pulled on Monday.As a result, regulators saw the need to act this week, even as Congress and the White House continued to hash out a bank bailout plan.
Bair added that the company was on the FDIC's latest so-called "problem bank" list for the third quarter, which has yet to be published.
All told, Bair said four banks made bids for WaMu but JPMorgan Chase ultimately won out when the auction was held Wednesday. Several other large institutions, including Wells Fargo (WFC, Fortune 500), Citigroup (C, Fortune 500) and HSBC (HBC), were poring over the company's books, according to news reports last week.
JPMorgan Chase won because they were "the highest bid and the lowest cost resolution," Bair said.
"It was our cheapest option," she said.Analysts were largely encouraged by the news even as JPMorgan Chase absorbs WaMu's toxic subprime and option-ARM mortgages as part of the deal.
"My initial impression is that this deal is 'generally OK'," wrote Nancy Bush, managing member at investment advisory firm NAB Research LLC, adding that there would be questions about whether the loan losses that JPMorgan took as part of the deal would be sufficient.
All told, JPMorgan Chase said it would recognize projected losses on the loan portfolio upfront by marking down the value of the loans by a whopping $31 billion.
Questions remain
Quite possibly the biggest losers in Thursday's deal, however, are WaMu's stock and debt holders, who were effectively wiped out.
Among that group was the private equity giant TPG, which was part of a consortium of investors that acquired a stake in WaMu for $7 billion in April.
JPMorgan's Dimon said in a conference call with reporters Friday morning that his firm was in talks to buy WaMu earlier this year but that JPMorgan never made a formal offer.
When pressed about what might be next for JPMorgan following two massive deals this year, Dimon didn't close the door altogether on acquiring another commercial bank.
"This is still a big country and there are a lot of places we are not in," he said.
But he and other executives offered little insight about what would happen to WaMu personnel.
Neither Dimon nor Charlie Scharf, JPMorgan's head of retail financial services, were able to provide any estimate as to how many workers could lose jobs as a result of the deal or whether top execs at WaMu, including recently installed CEO Alan Fishman, would remain with the combined firm.
"It's just too early to know right now," said Scharf.
Tough times for banks
The fall of WaMu is the latest turn in a dizzying two weeks that have seen the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers, the acquisition of Merrill Lynch by Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500) and the near collapse of insurance giant AIG (AIG, Fortune 500).
The widening credit crisis has prompted President Bush to seek from Congress extraordinary authority to spend as much a $700 billion to bail out the nation's financial system by purchasing toxic assets from banks.
President Bush, in a televised address Friday morning, said the nation's economy is at risk, adding he believed that Congress will move quickly on a bailout proposal.
"We've got a big problem," he said.
Regulators acknowledged they were encouraged to get a deal done but Dimon stressed to investors that a potential bailout by the government was not a factor.
Do they happen to mention who their competitor was for WAMU in any of their statements to date? If not maybe they knew there were no other suitors here. Interesting.
You are correct when JPM saw the cash cow they could rape when they needed the cash the FDIC obliged them to get WAMU and all their money, then the following week they also got TARP to lessen their poor money manipulation schemes. AHHHHHH too bad for JPM.
Think I'll move my sell value up from $24.50 to $40.00 Monday.
No volume??? Has this been stopped trading???
I never got my free shares I'm a taxpayer where are they I thought we would all get some as we bailed out this elephant. What a freaking joke.
If Hockenburg got paid for his piece of s work then someone got ripped off and did not get what they paid for. I would ask for a refund and hire Mason.
"At No Taxpayer Expense" is the rub here JPM received TARP money from guess who, you and I. So don't tell me they shared us the expense of paying for WAMU losses here, that is not correct.
Should send this Mason objection to Sheila Bairs' wanna be so they can take Sheila to the wood shed on the takeover and then take her job too. Someone there is bound to want an upgrade postition eh Sheila any recommendations on where and whom we can send this to in your office that wants your job?
Atoms don't move but the spaces in between them do.
The firs week of December is coming for the news on the Military results and possible contract. News coming soon folks. Unless they don't put it out then of course, but that is what they lied about in the summer time errrr told us.
Sure hope the Seattle news lady or any major news source has a copy of Mason's objection letter and notes to spread more juicy news about this not being the end of anthing here. Mason I gew up with a big Mason family I hope you are one of em. Go get em. I knew a Ben Mason as well.
Does anyone here know the following: Do we need to await the outcome of the bankrupcy case prior to a criminal case moving forward against the FDIC and JPM for robbery in broad daylight, or fraudulent transferrence? Does anyone know which types of charges can be made against the FDIC one for taking over a secure concern (bank) and JPM for accepting the deal knowing full well the value was in excess of that amount? What types of charges are those? I understand that stupidity is not a defense against going forward with a deal that breaks the law, but what law was broken here? Anyone? It was a lie that it saved the finanical system of our country is that one charge? And what is that called?
Mike you are correct, none of us expect the company to react to any disgruntled message board cronies. But these same cronies who have invested their funds into this company expect that same company whom you claim through some osmosis is strong and well positioned for the future without ever seeing any numbers as to whether they are making any money or not from their supposed sales. We see nothing here, that is all we are saying albeit in different terms and words. Where are the sales numbers, cost of goods sold, I can get that at my local 7-11 but here seems an impossibility but it's easy math Mike. That's it, and no you do not need to respond to this disgruntled INVESTOR.
Thank you for your post, very nice. The marriage is over between JPM and FDIC. Oh well.
Richie seems to me the ploy is to get us all to hold further until July 2011 now.
These types of questions are as someone said here for the next trial to come not this bankrupcy stuff. I am waiting for the other stuff to come out. I am sure there are many here who have much better questions they could put out there. These are my simple common sense ones that come to mind is all. GLTA here, holding strong against the fall winds. Strength is in numbers and I still believe in our U.S. court system.
More........
Judge to JPM:
Do you have anyone that has left your firm in the past and now work for the FDIC or Federal Reserve? Who are they and what is their position in life now? Do you keep in touch? Prove it.
Have you or any of your affiliates bought WAMUQ or WAMPQ stock in the last two years? If so how much? Why?
Did you receive more TARP funds than you would have if you had not bought WAMU and all it's so called bad loans? How much more?
Do you have an exact accounting of all the received debts you purchased from WAMU and how they all turned out financially for you?
Can you state here unequivocally that you knew WAMU was worth much more than you paid for them? What would you think would have been a fairer number in your estimation?
What did WAMU have to gain by this buyout happening as a solvent concern?
What did the FDIC gain by this transaction? So then who gained the most from this overall transaction?
Judge to JPM "Why did your firm offer them $8 per share in 2008? You must have known they were worth more than low balled your offer to them trying to get them to move on it?
Did you think it was worth twice or three times as much?
When they refused your offer did you come back with another one? When after this offer did the FDIC and your firm meet on how you could take them over at a lessor value?
Did you ever have anyone leave your firm and go to work from WAMU to find out their inner workings and processes and inside value?
Did you attempt to force a selloff of WAMU stock causing it's value to decrease in the open market?
Was it successful?
How do you feel about buying a company worth 50 times more for what you were able to get it for from your friends at the FDIC?
Who approached whom in the sale prospect, the FDIC came to you or you contacted them?
Were to aware of the TD Ameritrade offer of $30 Billion dollars for just the WAMU East Coast operations? If so what did you think of that offer? Fair or not?
Do you believe the shareholders were taken advantage of in this sale at such a low ball value?
What gains did you make by making this deal? Did you lose money on all their loans you bought or make money on them?
Do you consider your firm fair or moreover above the law in monetary deals you make?
What exactly was your relationship with the FDIC in early 2008 to September 2008? What is that relationship like now?
Doing a Google Search for number of stores for Retail Drug Chains.
CVS was the closest with over 7,027 stores, then Walgreens with 6,727 in 2008, then Rite-Aid with about 4,000 stores all the rest were down from there unless it's the Walmart Pharmacy which I did not look up. So CVS is one of the obvious choices here. Wish the PR had more detail but I'm used to this S&M routine as are others.
Remember the examiner gave up his JPM shares so he could produce an unbiased report. That's so sweet. Nice touch. Driving the value down was his goal folks. HOLD TIGHT TO ALL YOUR SHARES. At this point you my as well see it through like most of us. GLTA here. Like poker, I'm callin.
It is of course obvious to all here that when the $8 pps was turned down the company must have believed their company was worth much more than that, is that not evidence in of itself that WAMU was worth more than the offer made? That is one point. The second point would be that in cases such as these the payout can be up to 3 times it's value. I think that is where that came from. But I will say if the $8 pps was turned down because the value was in fact actually worth more than it could be much higher than the $24 pps being touted here. To me the court should be wondering why on earth did WAMU refuse the $8 offer way back when unless the company knew they were worth much more than that. We all know the rest of the story. JMHO. GLTA here.
From bathomspson on Raging Bull Boards:
The following debts need to be paid by the end of the Q
In order for the company to be current.
Remember that the average daily volume is 17.5 million shares. Times 60 trading days in the quarter equals 1.050 billion shares.
The debts in this post are still listed in the most recent 10Q as being past due and owing. They represent 1,593,800,000 shares which need to be issued to cover: http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=43622453
Now lets look at the shares that will be needed to cover the convertible notes due during the current quarter. From the most recent 10Q: http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/sec/filing.asp?Symbol=inbg
10% Interest; principal of $104,757; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discounted related to the debt discount of
$30,430 ....$74,327
10% Interest; principal of $11,000; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 10/9/2009, net
of unamortized discount related to the debt discount of $459 ....$10,541
10% Interest; principal of $31,925; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discounted related to the debt discount of $0 ....$31,925
10% Interest; principal of $10,269; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discounted related to the debt discount of
$780 ....$9,489
10% Interest; principal of $12,500; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discount related to the debt discount of
$4170 ....$8,330
10% Interest; principal of $32,017; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discount related to the debt discount of
$10,725 ....$21,292
10% Interest; principal of $40,542; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discounted related to the debt discount of
$15,715 ....$24,827
10% Interest; principal of $10,642; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discount related to the debt discount of
$3,565 ....$7,077
10% Interest; principal of $9,458; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discounted related to the debt discount of
$3,000 ....$6,458
10% Interest; principal of $37,133; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discounted related to the debt discount of
$10,576 ....$26,557
10% Interest; principal of $5,000; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 10/28/2009, net
of unamortized discount related to the debt discount of $595 ....$4,405
10% Interest; principal of $10,000; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discount related to the debt discount of
$3,271 ....$6,729
10% Interest; principal of $7,209; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discounted related to the debt discount of
$2,257 ....$4,952
10% Interest; principal of $23,847; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discounted related to the debt discount of
$7,375 ....$16,472
10% Interest; principal of $20,000; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discount related to the debt discount of
$6,578 ....$13,422
10% Interest; principal of $25,000; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discount related to the debt discount of
$8,181 ....$16,819
10% Interest; principal of $70,000; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discount related to the debt discount of
$22,778 ....$47,222
10% Interest; principal of $36,867; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discounted related to the debt discount of
$10,619 ....$26,248
10% Interest; principal of $10,000; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discount related to the debt discount of
$3,285 ....$6,715
10% Interest; principal of $15,000; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 10/29/2009, net
of unamortized discount related to the debt discount of
$6,369 ....$8,631
10% Interest; principal of $50,240; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discount related to the debt discount of
$16,110 ....$34,130
10% Interest; principal of $50,000; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discount related to the debt discount of
$16,349 ....$33,651
10% Interest; principal of $50,000; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discount related to the debt discount of
$16,349 ....$33,651
10% Interest; principal of $15,000; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discount related to the debt discount of
$4,787 ....$10,213
10% Interest; principal of $10,000; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discount related to the debt discount of
$3,595 ....$6,405
10% Interest; principal of $20,500; convertible to common
stock based on 75% of average price; due on 12/31/2009, net
of unamortized discount related to the debt discount of
$4,871 ....$15,629
Total current debts due in the Quarter...............$506,387
Total additional past due and owing debts due now....$159,380
Grand total of debts due for conversion during this current quarter....$665,767
That represents conversion to 6,657,670,000 shares or three times the current OS.
Even worse, it represents 6.5 times the current average trading volume.
These are actual facts, easily found in the current 10Q from the link provided above.
As this scam ponzi scheme comes unraveled, the company is faced with the typical penny scam problem of the dilution vastly exceeding the trading volume.
What are Yeung's options at this point?
They can listen to us sheep though right? Why I always invest my hard earned money off of what I read on these boards, doesn't everyone?
Does anyone else here think that management could spend one half hour per day reading the positive and negative points on this board and cover their bases at least? Not sure anyone is home or they are just too busy selling, and if that's the case where are the numbers. Misses an opportunity on LOCN recetnly because i own this stuff.
I as the appointed Examiner did in fact sell my 300 shares of JPM stock so now I am totally without bias in my reporting against anything JPM might have done in this case. And if I were to find out anything related to JPM which puts them in bad light here I would in fact not place that in this report because JPM can do no wrong and they pay me well too, but not in stock certificates. Oh well, trust me because I tell the truth and have no influence either way. By the way I sold "0" shares of Wamuq because I did not own any of this company so my report is totally unbiased again based on those facts.
Just stoppping in to see if any financial numbers have shown up. OOPS Guess not Oh Well back to sleep.
The FDIC and JPM were faced with saving the financial situation in America. In doing so they had to eliminate WAMU and LEH along the way. This way they are the saviors here, not the villains. They saved the world remember, hard to beat that I must say. In doing so JPM was allowed to reap the benefits of the TARP funds. They did not want any piece of their pie to go to WAMU, God forbid it we want all that money. So let us buy WAMU from the FDIC that way we can say we saved all from financial crises and reap the benefits of free tax money. No brainer here folks. The deception becomes the facts here. GLTA here.
Right on NASCOW, WAMU and Lehman were the sacrificial cows that allowed our Government to steal more of our money and dole it out to the richest among us thwarting the financial crises caused by the WAMU's and Lehmans of the world, we'll save the world scenario, without any basis of fact other than they caused them in the beginning to spiral downward. I guess we chalk it all up to the rich win the poor lose. Sorry folks but this one is over and I of all people hate to admit this fact. You cannot fight city hall and city hall owns you.
Who gained by WAMU robbery? Did the shareholders gain? No. Did FDIC gain? No. Did JPM gain? Yes. Mr. Hockberg found out that WAMU was in fact a solvent company. Question is why a solvent company was allowed or forced to be taken over and not allowed the TARP monies a week later? Because in the FDIC taking over at the exact time it did then selling off to JPM in a fire sale price $1.8 billion which astounds me this allowed JPM to get all the TARP funds that WAMU would have been able to get. So in essence it gave JPM your and mine tax dollars for all the bad loans WAMU had in its portfolio, which really in the end never materialized and JPM made money on those mortages. So again who gained by this takover? I'll tell you JPM gained from this takeover, no one else. Fraudulent conveyance happened and clear cut robbery happened at the hands of our great watchdog FDIC who did not do its due dilligence. There outta be some sort of punishment for high crimes perpetrated by rich companies. If this were a lower a value company situation all the assets would have been transferred back to the original owner with interest without question by the robber via the court system. Why is that simply not the case here. I just don't get it. Force someone into bankrupcy by causing a run on their bank then take them over. Sounds a bit criminal to me. Sorry for rambling on.
Two words seem to come to mind here "Bought Off".
Mr. or Ms. Winter I beg to differ with you kind person. The Examiner did not resolve to conclude all the facts as they are known. You cannot admit that no 'Asset List' here is a requirement as it holds information that you cannot draw any final conclusion on here. So one strike against your perfecto examiner report, (Facts Missing) I'd say here. No shareholder is turning it's back on the Examiners findings we of course do not like some of them but some footnotes and such report findings taht bode into WMI favor. Excuse me. No conspiracies but we do not like half of the facts either Winter. Sorry but I like all of the information not part of it.
IDTA Good Job Today Sold (3) Kits now we just gotta sell 1,000 more to move this puppy along. To the Moon I say or too much to drink by 5 pm.
Better watch out and not tout the stock too much or Jorge will ban you from the board. GO SAEIE. To the freakin MOON.
Show proof of that Mr. Winter or Ms. Winter please.