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.
ron_66271,your knowledge and understanding is highly appreciated. Thank you for posting.
AZ,
that's what i thought . Thank you much for help
AZ,
in a payout matrix do you think is any difference/ segregation between pre BK(P,K,and Q) holder and post BK holder (P,K and Q)?
Thank you much
A share is a share, regardless when you bought it I don't see how they can do that. IMO
As FDIC said JPM paid only 1.9 billion a premium for WMB.Assets minus liability as 2008 (298.7 billion-258.5 biliion) is what JPM reported when they took over. Just for the bank is around 40 billion.
It s not included WMI (holding company assets) and portofoliu loans.
JPM did NOT get over 615BB in portofoliu loans and the income generated from interest from those loans.Portofoliu loans (615 BB) is not and was never part of WMB transaction.
Those loans generate (6BB-9BB) income per year before 2008 , for the REAL OWNERS of WMI HOLDING Co.That s escrow markers!
With foreclosure that follow financial crisis in 2008, I assume the income generated from 615BB portofoliu loans could be much smaller.
Take a look at market cap of JPM before 2008 and now. Market cap of bank increased almost 3 times. Most of big banks market cap double up in value after financial crissis.
WMB was never reported as insolvent bank,just short on cash same as JPM or any other big bank.
JPM will pay us with our OWN money and make it out like bandits with a lot ++ BB profit.
It s not a fantasy to see 80BB -100BB coming back.
IMO
rockie101, Hang in there! The end of the wamu "story" is near :). The only REAL question is HOW MUCH was the WMB book value as 2008 and how much interest from loan portofoliu was generated in 9 years. That s what we are going to get! I m in 80 BB -100 BB club ( total payout)
:)
IMO
Minimum ; Cash +24BB (book value for the WMB as 2008) + Assets 65BB (interest generated from loan portofoliu + stock Wmih )
IMO
Escrow Markers? Signed release?
Most wonderful thing that will happen in our lifetime! Once in a lifetime opportunity! Imo
we are all waiting together
Thank you newflow
im in realistic world ! We will never see another opportunity like wamu in our lifetime! Maybe this happened once in 300 years.
Imo
that's very conservative . Imo
ReikoBlack,
There is no excuse for rudeness, offensive behavior, or being unkind . Many of us appreciate contribution and all DD done by AZ,LG and many others (they know who they are), and as far as I know we are all free to express our opinion here.
If you don t like it or desegree it s ok,many of us are thankful to people like Az.
Thank you
Thank You AZ!! Great post!
just Facts!! Thank you
I agree 100% with you. This is the only way to clear up this.
Thank you
Welcome back Az!! It's so nice to hearing from you! Thank you from all your work and DD on wamu!!
Great post!!! Thank you
Correct!!! Great post newflow
Thank you
LuckyPanda ,
Great Post!! I think is 100% correct.
Thank you for your great DD
bkshadow
Please ,can comment on this factual information?!
Thanks
Investigator Bill Paatalo: Why JPMorgan Chase did not purchase $615 Billion of WaMu Loans
https://livinglies.wordpress.com/2017/07/24/investigator-bill-paatalo-why-jpmorgan-chase-did-not-purchase-615-billion-of-wamu-loans/
This should help you. It s cristal clear
LuckyPanda is right IMHO
https://livinglies.wordpress.com/2017/07/24/investigator-bill-paatalo-why-jpmorgan-chase-did-not-purchase-615-billion-of-wamu-loans/
bkshadow,
Please feel free and comment on this article. A lot of factul information here:
Investigator Bill Paatalo: Why JPMorgan Chase did not purchase $615 Billion of WaMu Loans
https://livinglies.wordpress.com/2017/07/24/investigator-bill-paatalo-why-jpmorgan-chase-did-not-purchase-615-billion-of-wamu-loans/
Investigator Bill Paatalo questiInvestigator Bill Paatalo questions the practice of using “Substitution of Trustees”. Paatalo points out that WMAAC and WMMSC have never been dissolved and still exist. Although the loans did not go through the FDIC, Chase executes assignments from the FDIC in order to substitute trustees. In this article Paatalo demonstrates that JPMorgan Chase did not purchase ownership of $615 billion in Washington Mutal loans in three simple steps.
Please visit Bill Paatalos’s informative blog at http://www.bpinvestigativeagency.com. Paatalo has investigated and exposed the fraudulent WaMu/FDIC/JPMorgan Chase fraud and is one of the most talented foreclosure fraud investigators in the country.
Posted by Bill Paatalo on Jul 24, 2017 in
Here is a simple “3-step Analysis” to show that “ownership” of at least $615,000,000,000.00 (over half a TRILLION Dollars!) of WaMu loans were not purchased by JPMorgan Chase from the FDIC.
STEP 1:
The U.S. Senate Sub-Committee (Levin – Coburn Report) reveals in its findings of fact that WaMu sold and securitized at least $615B of residential mortgage loans through its subsidiaries “WaMu Asset Acceptance Corporation” and “Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corporation” who acted as “Depositors” in the securitization transactions.
See:
https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/investigations/media/senate-investigations-subcommittee-releases-levin-coburn-report-on-the-financial-crisis
Pg. 116 –
From 2000 to 2007, Washington Mutual and Long Beach securitized at least $77 billion in subprime and home equity loans. WaMu also sold or securitized at least $115 billion in Option ARM loans. Between 2000 and 2008, Washington Mutual sold over $500 billion in loans to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, accounting for more than a quarter of every dollar in loans WaMu originated.
Pg. 119 –
“WaMu Capital Corp. acted as an underwriter of securitization transactions generally involving Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp. or WaMu Asset Acceptance Corp. Generally, one of the two entities would sell loans into a securitization trust in exchange for securities backed by the loans in question, and WaMu Capital Corp. would then underwrite the securities consistent with industry standards.
STEP 2:
See: Page 2. – PAA – (click here: FDIC-Chase – PAA)
“Assets” means all assets of the Failed Bank purchased pursuant to Section 3.1. Assets owned by Subsidiaries of the Failed Bank are not “Assets” within the meaning of this definition.”
STEP 3:
In the case of Fox v. JPMorgan Chase, a specific REMIC Trust is named in the action. To prevail on its argument that the loan was sold and transferred to the Trust, JPMorgan Chase and U.S. Bank, N.A. as Trustee, both admitted / “stipulated” that the loan contained both investor codes “AO1? and “369” in the loan transfer history, which means the loan was sold by Washington Mutual Bank to the subsidiaries prior to those subsidiaries transferring the loan into the Trust. AND, it was stipulated that the loan was NOT PURCHASED FROM THE FDIC.
(Click here: Chase Stipulated Fact – AO1 – WMAAC)
Stipulated Facts:
“8. Investor Code AO1 in the Loan Transfer History File represents WaMu Asset Acceptance Corporation.”
“9. Investor Code 369 in the Loan Transfer History File represents Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corporation.”
“10. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. did not purchase the loan from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.”
In the Fox case, “JPMorgan Chase” and “U.S. Bank as Trustee,” have taken a position that universally applies to all $615B of these securitized loans.
Each one of these loan transactions will show either the investor code “AO1,” “369,” or both somewhere in the “Loan Transfer History” screenshots within the servicing system, and as such, the loans were not purchased from the FDIC.
The presumptions that Chase has relied upon in order to maintain its position in thousands of foreclosure proceedings that (1) it acquired the loans through the PAA, and (2) the assignments of beneficial-ownership interests to the loans unto itself as “
Paatalo demonstrates that JPMorgan Chase did not purchase ownership of $615 billion in Washington Mutal loans in three simple steps.
Please visit Bill Paatalos’s informative blog at http://www.bpinvestigativeagency.com. Paatalo has investigated and exposed the fraudulent WaMu/FDIC/JPMorgan Chase fraud and is one of the most talented foreclosure fraud investigators in the country.
Posted by Bill Paatalo on Jul 24, 2017 in
Here is a simple “3-step Analysis” to show that “ownership” of at least $615,000,000,000.00 (over half a TRILLION Dollars!) of WaMu loans were not purchased by JPMorgan Chase from the FDIC.
STEP 1:
The U.S. Senate Sub-Committee (Levin – Coburn Report) reveals in its findings of fact that WaMu sold and securitized at least $615B of residential mortgage loans through its subsidiaries “WaMu Asset Acceptance Corporation” and “Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corporation” who acted as “Depositors” in the securitization transactions.
See:
https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/investigations/media/senate-investigations-subcommittee-releases-levin-coburn-report-on-the-financial-crisis
Pg. 116 –
From 2000 to 2007, Washington Mutual and Long Beach securitized at least $77 billion in subprime and home equity loans. WaMu also sold or securitized at least $115 billion in Option ARM loans. Between 2000 and 2008, Washington Mutual sold over $500 billion in loans to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, accounting for more than a quarter of every dollar in loans WaMu originated.
Pg. 119 –
“WaMu Capital Corp. acted as an underwriter of securitization transactions generally involving Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp. or WaMu Asset Acceptance Corp. Generally, one of the two entities would sell loans into a securitization trust in exchange for securities backed by the loans in question, and WaMu Capital Corp. would then underwrite the securities consistent with industry standards.
STEP 2:
See: Page 2. – PAA – (click here: FDIC-Chase – PAA)
“Assets” means all assets of the Failed Bank purchased pursuant to Section 3.1. Assets owned by Subsidiaries of the Failed Bank are not “Assets” within the meaning of this definition.”
STEP 3:
In the case of Fox v. JPMorgan Chase, a specific REMIC Trust is named in the action. To prevail on its argument that the loan was sold and transferred to the Trust, JPMorgan Chase and U.S. Bank, N.A. as Trustee, both admitted / “stipulated” that the loan contained both investor codes “AO1? and “369” in the loan transfer history, which means the loan was sold by Washington Mutual Bank to the subsidiaries prior to those subsidiaries transferring the loan into the Trust. AND, it was stipulated that the loan was NOT PURCHASED FROM THE FDIC.
(Click here: Chase Stipulated Fact – AO1 – WMAAC)
Stipulated Facts:
“8. Investor Code AO1 in the Loan Transfer History File represents WaMu Asset Acceptance Corporation.”
“9. Investor Code 369 in the Loan Transfer History File represents Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corporation.”
“10. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. did not purchase the loan from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.”
In the Fox case, “JPMorgan Chase” and “U.S. Bank as Trustee,” have taken a position that universally applies to all $615B of these securitized loans.
Each one of these loan transactions will show either the investor code “AO1,” “369,” or both somewhere in the “Loan Transfer History” screenshots within the servicing system, and as such, the loans were not purchased from the FDIC.
The presumptions that Chase has relied upon in order to maintain its position in thousands of foreclosure proceedings that (1) it acquired the loans through the PAA, and (2) the assignments of beneficial-ownership interests to the loans unto itself as “
You are correct! Wamu was one i a lifetime opportunity! IMHO
Great post!!! Thank you
Factual Information!!! No secret here!! We all know ...Money on the Way!!
Thank you
Thank you UncleBo. Even my son in second grade can get it. Money on the Way.
It s not a question IF we get paid, the question is WHEN!
Thank you for your great DD and factual post.
It s black and white. Please read page 79, not to hard to get it. Your opinion is ok,but is far from reality.I m trying to help you
thanks
56555555
it s your opinion and it s ok. Since you don t own escrow markers as you said long time ago, why you worry so much about escrow getting paid or not?!!
What am I missing?!
thanks
Best post of the day!!! Great knowledge!!! Thank u
if is not OFF BALANCE (R 203) then JPM lied to regulator. Make up your mind what are the "facts" for you or what is your opinion.
So far nobody read what you post here anymore.
imo
I cannot find my name on the list. It s from octomber 2008.
This is not a complete list.
loooove it!! crystal clear for me!
thank you
Big week, lot of cash too!
me too :)
100% agree!!!! well done!! Escrow is the real GOLD!!! IMHO
thank you
Great Post!!! I believe from your numbers we have to substract deposits (151-165 billion) and we ll get to 65-100 billion that JPM will pay us!!
Merry Christmas!! Thank you
The deposit itself is a liability owed by the bank to the depositor, and the word refers to this liability rather than to the actual funds that have been deposited. When someone opens a bank account and makes a cash deposit, he surrenders legal title to the cash, and it becomes an asset of the bank
thank you AZ!!!
great post
let me help you bkshadow
here is the link with sec
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/19617/000119312516529435/d171874ds3a.htm
The amount to be registered and the proposed maximum aggregate offering price per unit are not specified as to each class of securities being registered pursuant to General Instruction II.D of Form S-3 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”). The maximum aggregate offering price of all securities issued by the Registrants pursuant to this Registration Statement shall not have a maximum aggregate offering price that exceeds $173,638,778,550 in U.S. dollars
bkshadow please let know if i can help you with more info about this.
Goo escrow, go wmih
i ll just hang around cemetary too :))
great post LG
thanks