Linda is biotch...! LOLz JayKay
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Section 5. Liquidation. (a) In the event the Company voluntarily or involuntarily liquidates, dissolves or winds up, the Holders at the time shall be entitled to receive liquidating distributions in the amount of $1,000 per share of Series R Preferred Stock, plus an amount equal to any declared but unpaid dividends thereon to and including the date of such liquidation, out of assets legally available for distribution to the Company’s shareholders, before any distribution of assets is made to the holders of the Common Stock or any other Junior Securities. After payment of the full amount of such liquidating distributions, the Holders will not be entitled to any further participation in any distribution of assets by, and shall have no right or claim to any remaining assets of, the Company.
(b) In the event the assets of the Company available for distribution to shareholders upon any liquidation, dissolution or winding-up of the affairs of the Company, whether voluntary or involuntary, shall be insufficient to pay in full the amounts payable with respect to all outstanding shares of the Series R Preferred Stock and the corresponding amounts payable on any Parity Securities, Holders and the holders of such Parity Securities shall share ratably in any distribution of assets of the Company in proportion to the full respective liquidating distributions to which they would otherwise be respectively entitled.
(c) The Company’s consolidation or merger with or into any other entity, the consolidation or merger of any other entity with or into the Company, or the sale of all or substantially all of the Company’s property or business will not constitute its liquidation, dissolution or winding up.
The 3rd grade questions:
What was WAMPQ trading at pre-seizure? I believe it was 100'sih per share.
Do you really think that a divy really makes no difference to WAMPQ, or ANY preferred stock for that matter?
Why do you think WAMPQ would get the liquidation value based on your post? In a merger, imo, WAMPQ will most likly be free trading. The question is will it continue to have the divy? WAMPQ may get re-negoitiated terms. You have to remember, WAMPQ is a non-cumulative stock, therefore NO INTEREST is paid in arears (except liquidation). In order to pay the divy, the corp MUST BE PROFITIBLE. There is no way to tell if they will be profitable or need to be reinvested back in to the corp to get the corp back on its feet before paying out any divies.
Under the best case scenario, WAMPQ will be freely traded and continue the divy. Others want the liquidation value.
THE THING THERE IS THERE ARE TOO MANY SCENARIOS. You are obviously like the above. No problem with that, I am just a realist.
So please rework your numbers . . .
300,000 shares x .06 = $18,000 invested
$600,000 / $18,000 = 3,333 % return on investment (ROI)
So, if you would have invested the same $18,000 in WAMPQ at the current price of $6.49 per share that would give you 2,773 shares
2,773 shares x $1,000 full face value = $2,773,000
$2,773,000 / $18,000 = 15400 % return on investment(ROI)
2,773 shares x $150 value = $415,950
$415,950 / $18,000 = 23 % return on investment(ROI)
Correct my math if I am wrong.
Disclosure: I hold ALL classes of stock. All of the above is my opinion.
You forgot one scenario about preferreds: They can remain freely tradeable and not receive a divy.
The Importance of Dividends
Dividends are very important to the investor. Every young investment student learns of the "greater fool theory" when their professor or mentor asks whether dividends are important. If the answer is "not really, if the share price increases", the professor then goes on to explain that without eventual dividends to the investor, the share is worthless. Consider, in the extreme, the purchase of a share that guaranteed not to pay any dividends or other payouts to the holder. What would be the worth of this share to the holder? Simply, it would be a "promise not to pay". Ever. The holder might get some psychographic thrill from saying they owned the share, but they would in reality have the same claim to its assets and cashflows as anyone else. Their claim would be worthless, except if they sold it to someone who hadn't figured this out. Hence the "greater fool theory".
The annualized dividend divided by the market price of a common share is called the "dividend yield" and forms an important component of the valuation process. Even though many companies don't pay dividends, they have the potential to pay dividends in the future. If they invest their earnings in new assets which will earn future cashflows, we have a claim on these future cashflows. This is why many "growth companies" in an expanding phase don't pay dividends. The shareholders hope the company reinvests their share of profits at a high return. If the company fails to make profits on these reinvestments, they would be better to pay out the profits as dividends to shareholders who could do a better job of reinvestment on their own.
Long term studies have shown that reinvested dividends are very important to the returns that investors make. They form a very important component in securities valuation and should have a very important place in the investor's analysis of a company. Well managed and excellent companies like General Electric have a history of increasing dividends. An investor should be very wary of a company that doesn't seem to want to pay dividends. If the analysis shows the earnings are reinvested in profitable projects rather than paid in dividends, this is a very good thing. If the analysis shows the projects are unprofitable or that excessive corporate expenses have eaten up the potential dividends, this is a very bad sign. Absence of a corporate dividend with stories of the corporate jet flying the President's poodle around the globe should not be taken lightly.
High dividends is not always a sign of good management. A company that needs to reinvest should not pay out all of its accounting profits in dividends. This will cause the productive capacity of the company to diminish and the company to eventually fall into bankruptcy. This actually is a technique of "corporate vultures". They buy a large controlling position in a fine company and purposefully pay far more dividends than they should. This causes the competitive position and productive capacity of the company to falter. This all takes a long time to happen and the company can rest on its laurels for a while. It takes outside analysts a long time to figure all this out. Accounting rules offer lots of scope to obscure what's going on The company is usually able to borrow money to pay dividends for quite a while before the market refuses to offer more credit. Then the inevitable day of reckoning eventually comes, but the "vulture" has already picked the bones clean before the death throes arrive.
http://www.finpipe.com/divexpl.htm
I like all classes.
Error: WAMPQ should be WAMUQ. Thanks
Why is Citi adding 22,645,169 more WAMPQ shares? Increased by 726.98%.
Why is Merrill Lynch adding 2,114,650 more shares? Increased by 164.62.
Why is California Public Employees Retirement System adding more shares? Increased by 142.34 %.
http://www.mffais.com/wm.html
"Judge Mary Walrath has issued an interim order approving the sale restrictions, but a final order was postponed Friday after attorneys for Washington Mutual and JPMorgan Chase & Co. couldn't agree on specific language for a final order."
Why would the Attorney's for JMP care about the language of the Final Order if JMP is supposedly does not want WAMU Holding?
Seems fishy to me. It is like saying, why do basher hang around a stock they do not own...
JMP would only care if it affected them. We know (speculate) that JPM owns the max shares in PQ, but do not know about Common.
If we can find out and compare the original Order and Final Order, that will at least clue us in to what specific language JMP did not like.
My opinion only.
Market Manipulator, I mean Market Maker.
Liquidity issue...
Wells Fargo bought Wachovia RIGHT after the tax/IRS changed regarding NOL/carry over, etc. Wells offered 15 billion instead of Citi's pitiful 2 billion.
Coincidence that Wells appears out of nowhere? Nope!!!
Yes, Wells is a Creditor too, BUT Wells wants the NOLs. They are valuable especially to Wells since Wells is VERY PROFITABLE and the NOLs will shelter Wells from tax obligations and can most effectively use the credit. The 4.4 billion is a bonus for them, almost like a rebate after purchase.
Since Wells is a CREDITOR, that will be considered a partial payment toward the acquiring of Washington Mutual Holding. Therefore, it will be less out of pocket form Wells since Wells already has a down payment (prepaid via debt owed to Wells) on Wamu Holding.
Once Wamu Holding is acquired by Wells, this will give Wells the authority to go after OTS/FDIC and JMP for damages and likely through the fraudulent conveyance under the US Bankruptcy law. This may entitle Wells to fair value (near fair value) of Wamu especially since JMP was given unfair preference of Wamu assets and was therefore unjustly enriched at the expense of Wamu shareholders and creditors.
The above is an expressed opinion of the poster only.
Unedited for spelling and grammar.
My, my ... GSCO is the front runner on BID. Hmm... Brandes connecting? Still needs share, eh???
Ya, I noticed the big gap between .061 through .064. There is nothing there in between, just like the California blonds, no offense. LOL j/k about the Blond joke.
I wonder if the postponement has anything to do with allowing Brandes/Goldman covering their short position. Possibly talks behind closed doors between the Moving Party and Defense came to realize the Motion was Moot.
I know Wells coming into the mix had a role as well.
I don't have Lvl II where I am at right now.
Maybe someone can watch GSCO (?) and SBSH.
NO since in order to have NOLs intact, the common shares have to be intact. They go hand in hand.
My opinion.
In a buyout, it is for the commons. Perferreds will probably still be free trading, hopefully with interest, BUT NOT obligated since some are non-cumulative, forced conversion into common, etc. Many variables to tell, but any offer is usually only for common stock.
It appears that Wells Fargo is interested in NOLs AND 4.4 Billion.
Wells Fargo wants to be informed/present regarding the NOLs and 4.4 billion because Wells may be formulating the cost of acquisition depending on the out come of the hearings and do NOT want to wait for the Transcripts of the hearing.
Why is Wells interested? Take a look back into the last few months. Off the top of my head...
700 Billion bailout package was yet to be announced on a Friday, ONLY ONE DAY BEFORE WAMU WAS SEZIED BY THE FDIC/OTS. Wells was one of the interested parties to buyout WAMU.
Wachovia was in a shot gun wedding w/ Citi for. The day the IRS tax change re: NOLs was announced, Wells out of nowhere announced an agreement to buyout (15 Billion rather than 2 billion offered by Citi) Wachovia BECAUSE of NOLs.
Wells needs these NOLS becasue it is probably one of the few banks that has weathered the Mortgage crisis, especially, Wells being concentrated in California (West Coast Bank) and has been profitable. These NOLS means that their income for 2008, 2009, 2010, etc will be TAX FREE and will benefit Wells' bottomline.
The above is only an opinion of the poster.
P and K Series have the same seniority and paid at the same time. P just has a higher potential and lower float than K Series.
All right, large blocks going through. Something must have transpired...
Also, the subsidiary may be able to be under TARP funding/bailout. Ambac, MBIA and other companies in this type of business are asking the US Treasury for some bailout money. We will see . . .
Another thing to note is this subsidiary is collecting premium payments from WM Bank. This subsidiary can increase the premiums to increase revenue streams since WMB is no longer a part of WM Holdings.
I was not able to read they entire Motion, but from my brief scan of the pleading, the above is what I came up with.
Also, I feel it will be granted as prayed since it does benefit the Estate and its Creditors.
The above constitutes MY opinion only.
UPDATED: Section 5. Liquidation. (a) In the event the Company voluntarily or involuntarily liquidates, dissolves or winds up, the Holders at the time shall be entitled to receive liquidating distributions in the amount of $1,000 per share of Series R Preferred Stock, plus an amount equal to any declared but unpaid dividends thereon to and including the date of such liquidation, out of assets legally available for distribution to the Company’s shareholders, before any distribution of assets is made to the holders of the Common Stock or any other Junior Securities. After payment of the full amount of such liquidating distributions, the Holders will not be entitled to any further participation in any distribution of assets by, and shall have no right or claim to any remaining assets of, the Company.
(b) In the event the assets of the Company available for distribution to shareholders upon any liquidation, dissolution or winding-up of the affairs of the Company, whether voluntary or involuntary, shall be insufficient to pay in full the amounts payable with respect to all outstanding shares of the Series R Preferred Stock and the corresponding amounts payable on any Parity Securities, Holders and the holders of such Parity Securities shall share ratably in any distribution of assets of the Company in proportion to the full respective liquidating distributions to which they would otherwise be respectively entitled.
(c) The Company’s consolidation or merger with or into any other entity, the consolidation or merger of any other entity with or into the Company, or the sale of all or substantially all of the Company’s property or business will not constitute its liquidation, dissolution or winding up.
Under Ch 7 liquidation you would receive divys.
If they decide to liquidate in Ch 11, same as above.
The only thing is, I believe, Wamu Holding will emerge out of Ch 11 or be bought out. Under this scenario, this stock is still non-cumulative and will not receive any divy that is unpaid and will most likey be free trading.
http://www.finpipe.com/divexpl.htm
Interesting find BUT that is for liquidation. What happens to a non-cumulative preferred stock, such as WAMPQ, that does not liquidate? Thanks.
Definition of non-cumulative preferred stock: A type of preferred stock that does not pay the holder any unpaid or omitted dividends. If the corporation chooses to not pay dividends in a given year, the investor does not have the right to claim any of those forgone dividends in the future.
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/noncumulative.asp
In case anyone gets confused, this is in regards to "WASHINGTON MUTUAL CAPITAL TRUST 2001" which is WAHUQ, not WAMPQ. WASHINGTON MUTUAL CAPITAL TRUST 2001 ONLY applies to WAHUQ and NO OTHER PREFERRED STOCK.
Wampq is Non-Cumulative which means there is no recourse for unpaid interest and interest does NOT accumulate upon liquidation.
I assume Cookie meant to post on Wahuq board or neglected to mention that this ONLY applies to Wahuq.
No offense, you are going in circles again. You need to pay more attention. Thanks.
BTW, that was not the subject.
No offense, BUT you look like you are going in circles.
WAMPQ = meant Wamu Holdings as a whole. I am sure everyone assumed that. Thanks.
Your Post:
Posted by: hahawin Date: Sunday, November 09, 2008 5:32:44 PM
In reply to: marayatano who wrote msg# 39109 Post # of 39117 [Send a link via email]
Good find, what about our president William Kosturos's ownership status then ?
Kosturos bought or own WamPQ is baseless
The Importance of Dividends (MUST READ)
Dividends are very important to the investor. Every young investment student learns of the "greater fool theory" when their professor or mentor asks whether dividends are important. If the answer is "not really, if the share price increases", the professor then goes on to explain that without eventual dividends to the investor, the share is worthless. Consider, in the extreme, the purchase of a share that guaranteed not to pay any dividends or other payouts to the holder. What would be the worth of this share to the holder? Simply, it would be a "promise not to pay". Ever. The holder might get some psychographic thrill from saying they owned the share, but they would in reality have the same claim to its assets and cashflows as anyone else. Their claim would be worthless, except if they sold it to someone who hadn't figured this out. Hence the "greater fool theory".
The annualized dividend divided by the market price of a common share is called the "dividend yield" and forms an important component of the valuation process. Even though many companies don't pay dividends, they have the potential to pay dividends in the future. If they invest their earnings in new assets which will earn future cashflows, we have a claim on these future cashflows. This is why many "growth companies" in an expanding phase don't pay dividends. The shareholders hope the company reinvests their share of profits at a high return. If the company fails to make profits on these reinvestments, they would be better to pay out the profits as dividends to shareholders who could do a better job of reinvestment on their own.
Long term studies have shown that reinvested dividends are very important to the returns that investors make. They form a very important component in securities valuation and should have a very important place in the investor's analysis of a company. Well managed and excellent companies like General Electric have a history of increasing dividends. An investor should be very wary of a company that doesn't seem to want to pay dividends. If the analysis shows the earnings are reinvested in profitable projects rather than paid in dividends, this is a very good thing. If the analysis shows the projects are unprofitable or that excessive corporate expenses have eaten up the potential dividends, this is a very bad sign. Absence of a corporate dividend with stories of the corporate jet flying the President's poodle around the globe should not be taken lightly.
High dividends is not always a sign of good management. A company that needs to reinvest should not pay out all of its accounting profits in dividends. This will cause the productive capacity of the company to diminish and the company to eventually fall into bankruptcy. This actually is a technique of "corporate vultures". They buy a large controlling position in a fine company and purposefully pay far more dividends than they should. This causes the competitive position and productive capacity of the company to falter. This all takes a long time to happen and the company can rest on its laurels for a while. It takes outside analysts a long time to figure all this out. Accounting rules offer lots of scope to obscure what's going on The company is usually able to borrow money to pay dividends for quite a while before the market refuses to offer more credit. Then the inevitable day of reckoning eventually comes, but the "vulture" has already picked the bones clean before the death throes arrive.
http://www.finpipe.com/divexpl.htm
I did not check, BUT as we all know, KOSTUROS was hired as a THIRD PARTY to restructure WAMPQ for the BENEFIT of WAMPQ, NOT JMP.
KOSTUROS would have insider information if he purchased WAMPQ. Your thoughts.
Insider Filings - FISHMAN ALAN H
Insider & restricted shareholder transactions reported over the last two years
Date Shares Stock Transaction
10-Sep-08 612,500 WAMUQ.OB Acquisition (Non Open Market) at $0 per share.
http://biz.yahoo.com/t/90/3969.html
Fishman owns 612,500 shares of stock PLUS options.
CEO William Kosturos was hiled for the benefit of WAMPQ.
Keep guessing.
"It is just merely my guess, my personal guess only."
I don't know if WAMPQ paid their divy, but if I remember correctly, the last one was not paid.
Also, WAMPQ is a non-cumulative stock, so WAMPQ holders have no recourse for the divy that were unpaid other than to sell WAMPQ in the open market. This is probably why WAMPQ traded all the way down to $400. I just hope WAMPQ continues to pay the divy if the emerge or if their is a buyout, BUT the problem "they" do NOT have to pay the divy and just let it trade freely.
Uncle Sam Set to Take Over WaMu Branches
by Dana Rubinstein | November 4, 2008
| Tags:
* Real Estate
* WAMU
This article was published in the November 10, 2008, edition of The New York Observer.
A Washington Mutual Branch.
Getty Images
A Washington Mutual Branch.
Ever since Chase snapped up WaMu’s assets, the fate of the bank’s 148 storefronts in New York City has hung in limbo. Now, the plot thickens.
It turns out that Chase has to turn over those Washington Mutual branches it doesn’t want to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. That’s right, the F.D.I.C. will become a New York City landlord.
A legalese-heavy paragraph in Section 4.6a on page 14 of the Purchase and Assumption Agreement between the F.D.I.C., WaMu and Chase gives Chase 90 days to take over whichever WaMu branches it wants, according to a real estate attorney who translated for this story.
Those branches that Chase doesn’t want, the F.D.I.C. can take. In that case, the F.D.I.C. can either reject the lease, or sell it to another tenant.
According to sources, a crew out in Washington State is busy figuring out just which leases Chase wants to keep, a process one broker referred to as a “nightmare.”
“We are following the guidelines set by the F.D.I.C. and are currently reviewing WaMu’s leases and contracts,” a Chase spokesman said.
Cushman & Wakefield executive director Brad Mendelson said he doubts the F.D.I.C. will give the leases to other banks. “The WaMu bank branches were kind of weird,” he said. “They were set up like living rooms. It’s not a format that anyone really works with. And a lot of them are mid-block.”
Another broker said the true story lies with the F.D.I.C. “It’s more interesting what the F.D.I.C. will do with these properties and how it’s handled,” the broker said. “Isn’t that the mystery?”
And so apparently it will remain, at least for a while. F.D.I.C. spokesman Andrew Gray didn’t grant our request for elucidation.
drubinstein@observer.com
http://www.observer.com/2008/real-estate/uncle-sam-set-take-over-wamu-branches
________________________________________________________________
Looks like (possibly) Wamu may be able to purchase, at a discount, their NY branches back at pennies on the dollar after 90 days from the seizure. Possible.
________________________________________________________________
Looks like Washington Mutual Inc. owns the trademarks for Washington Mutual and a host of others Wamu trademarks. WMI can continue to use the Washington Mutual name. Can WMI reopen, after reorganization/emerge from Ch 11, as a regional bank. Depends on what the Asset Purchase Agreement states JMP can use the Wamu trademark under license/certain period of time. If I remember, there was non-compete clause in the Asset Agreement w/ JMP. If not, WMI can open banks in JMP's back yard, New York. Also, with the FDIC shutting more banks down all other the nation, WMI may be able to take over these banks, if it is feasible. WMI has the money and operating businesses. Then again, WMI can merge with another regional bank. Many possibilites here since WMI has money. I am sure WMI's creditors would rather WMI emerge from CH 11 and operate and wait to get paid.
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=toc&state=suoopf.1.1&p_search=searchss&p_L=50&BackReference=&p_plural=yes&p_s_PARA1=&p_tagrepl~%3A=PARA1%24LD&expr=PARA1+AND+PARA2&p_s_PARA2=washington+mutual&p_tagrepl~%3A=PARA2%24COMB&p_op_ALL=AND&a_default=search&a_search=Submit+Query&a_search=Submit+Query
An opinion only. TIA.
To me it looks like reorganization or buyout. Not liquidation.
The potential is 1k, BUT I think WAMPQ will be free trading and no payout of 1k. This in the event of a buyout or reorganization.
The REAL QUESTION is if WAMPQ will continue to pay the divy. That is my only concern at this point.
I rather keep my FACE VALUE of 1k and collect the divy, but that is just me. Some people rather have WHATEVER the payout/liquidation value. Preseziure WAMPQ was trading at $400 to $600 w/ divy paying. Have to wait and see reoraganization plan to be filed and wait in limbo.
Payment of divy will determine the value.
Maybe MARGIN CALL on Brandes. Poor, poor Brandes...
WAMU Short Squeeze Play (I am not very good in articulating into words, please forgive me if sounds like rambling)
Wamu has a hearing on Nov. 14, 2008.
Quick Summary:
Brandes Investment Sold Restricted Stock through Goldman Sachs on October 20, 21, 22, 2008 (Look at the charts on those dates and you will notice that the PPS PLUNGED). The amount sold was approx. 33 million shares of WAMUQ from 9 cents per share all the way down to 5 cents a share. Today's share price is 6.2 cents. Brandes is asking Wamu to unrestrict the stock sold by Brandes. Wamu says "no" and fires Transfer Agent. So basically there is no one to unrestrict the restricted stock Brandes sold through Goldman. Brandes is now SHORT shares. Brandes has brought a motion to compel Wamu to unrestrict shares originally sold on Oct. 20, 21, 22, 2008 and since Goldman wants unrestricted shares certificates delieved to Goldman by Dec 1, 2008.
Monday will be Nov. 10, 2008. Nov. 14, 1008, Friday, (the HEaring date) is one week away, which there will be a hearing on 4.4 billion going to Wamu and I believe NOL motion (might be more going on that day). The daily volume of WAMUQ is now about 10 million. Since Brandes is short about 33 million shares, it will take 3 1/3 days (need to cover by Nov. 13 before the hearing on Nov. 14) to cover assuming they are the only buyers. Thrown in the "Momentum Players" competing for shares, I think you guys can force a cover the 33 million short. Also, next week is Veterans day so I am unsure if the float/daily volume will be thinner due to holiday.
Also, Vanguard Group recently bought about 27 millions shares:
http://www.mffais.com/wm.html
Below are links to the motion and original posting on IHUB.
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229081107000000000013.pdf
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229081107000000000014.pdf
Brandes Investment is SHORT and NAKED 33 Million SHARES!
Can this be true? Am I reading this pleading right?
Brandes, on behalf of certain clients, owns RESTRICTED Wamu shares since early April'ish 2008.
Recently, October 20, 21, 22, 2008, Brandes enlisted the services of Goldman to liquidate said stock under the ASSUMPTION that these are freely tradeable (WITHOUT ASKING WAMU TO REMOVE THE RESTRICTION). BAD MOVE. Share were sold short on the above dates at the price of approx. .09 all the way to .05. (Do you guys remember the days the PPS took a plunge? This was the reason!!! Now we all know why).
Goldman now wants the certificates delivered to Goldman w/o RESTRICTION. Guess what, Brandes sold SHORT and now is naked because of the "T" + 3 delivery has passed.
Now why does Brandes want an EMERGENCY order? Because we have a hearing on Nov. 14, which will (may) propel the COMMON stock, WAMUQ, way up once the Judge orders the 4.4 B to Wamu Holding. This will result in a possible short squeeze since Brandes is SHORT and NAKED (no shares to cover the short UNLESS Brandes purchases from the open market, the Restricted share they are holding now are USLESS). Can you say MARGIN CALL>??????? (Brandes is short from 9 cents all the way down to 5 cents. Look at the chart on Oct. 20, 21, 22, 2008.) http://finance.google.com/finance?q=OTC:WAMUQ
MARGIN CALL AND SHORT SQUEEZE.
I will not be surprised if these is a hedge fund out there that will exploit Brandes' short position to make a shit load of money.
HOW CAN BRANDES BE SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO STUPID TO PUBLISH THIS OR EVEN BRING A MOTION SO EVERYONE WOULD KNOW THAT THEY NEED SHARES? If they were smart, they should have bought back the shares quietly and then filed the motion to get the restriction off. STUPID, STUPID, STUPID !!!!!
This explains why GSO was on the bid so often. MIght be trying to cover the short.
All is an opinion. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Unedited for grammar and spelling.
EDIT: I have not read the entire Motion, it is way too long for a person, like me, with a short attention span!
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=33424978
Brandes sold short unintentionally assuming Wamu Holding would lift the restriction under ordinary course of business. WRONG. Brandes should have asked for the restriction to come off FIRST before Goldman sold millions of shares.
Now that WaMu Holding has their own pleading asking the Judge to fire their Transfer Agent means that the shares will remain RESTRICTED unless the Judge grants the lifting of restriction.
Can lift a restricting on a stock if there is no transfer agent to do the work.
Now, Brandes has to make a decision: wait for the Judge to lift the restriction, buy back so many millions short from the open market, or chance it hope the PPS will go lower or be stable.
Well, they have their Pleading in the PUBLIC eyes where heage funds are probably following the case. I feel that there is a hedge fund preparing to push the PPS to force Brandes to cover or face margin call.
I really hope we have a short squezze here (sorry, at the expense of Berandes).
Anyone feel free to correct me if you feel I am off base here.
This is only an opinion and should only be used for entertainment purposes.
Brandes Investment is SHORT and NAKED 33 Million SHARES!
Can this be true? Am I reading this pleading right?
Brandes, on behalf of certain clients, owns RESTRICTED Wamu shares since early April'ish 2008.
Recently, October 20, 21, 22, 2008, Brandes enlisted the services of Goldman to liquidate said stock under the ASSUMPTION that these are freely tradeable (WITHOUT ASKING WAMU TO REMOVE THE RESTRICTION). BAD MOVE. Share were sold short on the above dates at the price of approx. .09 all the way to .05. (Do you guys remember the days the PPS took a plunge? This was the reason!!! Now we all know why).
Goldman now wants the certificates delivered to Goldman w/o RESTRICTION. Guess what, Brandes sold SHORT and now is naked because of the "T" + 3 delivery has passed.
Now why does Brandes want an EMERGENCY order? Because we have a hearing on Nov. 14, which will (may) propel the COMMON stock, WAMUQ, way up once the Judge orders the 4.4 B to Wamu Holding. This will result in a possible short squeeze since Brandes is SHORT and NAKED (no shares to cover the short UNLESS Brandes purchases from the open market, the Restricted share they are holding now are USLESS). Can you say MARGIN CALL>??????? (Brandes is short from 9 cents all the way down to 5 cents. Look at the chart on Oct. 20, 21, 22, 2008.) http://finance.google.com/finance?q=OTC:WAMUQ
MARGIN CALL AND SHORT SQUEEZE.
I will not be surprised if these is a hedge fund out there that will exploit Brandes' short position to make a shit load of money.
HOW CAN BRANDES BE SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO STUPID TO PUBLISH THIS OR EVEN BRING A MOTION SO EVERYONE WOULD KNOW THAT THEY NEED SHARES? If they were smart, they should have bought back the shares quietly and then filed the motion to get the restriction off. STUPID, STUPID, STUPID !!!!!
This explains why GSO was on the bid so often. MIght be trying to cover the short.
All is an opinion. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Unedited for grammar and spelling.
EDIT: I have not read the entire Motion, it is way too long for a person, like me, with a short attention span!
cc: the letter to BK Judge w/ instructions to place in the Court's Case File. Don't forget to reference the case no.
I have mixed feelings as to buyout or reorganize. Part of me wants the quick money, but if you have the time, I bet reorganization would yeild a hell of a lot more money in the future only because the type of environment we are in, will yield us less from a buyout. As the economy gets out of the slump, all shares of any company will appreciate.
As far as TPG, they have all the time in the world. They originally bought/lent to Wamu as a long term investment especially since the money from TPG came from part of their "funds", mutual, Value funds, private investor, etc.
TPG sits on the Board of Directers. THat tells me that there maybe reorganization if TPG wants more money for their shares. Who knows, TPG may take it private. THey are know for taking distressed companies.
If I remember correctly, TPG took over some/owned Ahason (sp?) and Home Savings BAnk and sold it to Washington Mutual. So we know there was an existing relationship between them.
All I know is that TPG, sitting on the Board, has a say since he is now close to the Restructing Offier who holds many hats.
Well, if I remember correctly, WaMu missed their last divy before BK. While in BK, the divy is suspended.
The question remains, what will happen after the BK? Continue divy? Liquidate at $1000, negotiated lesser amount (especially if TPG/equity committee is formed)? Continue to trade but at what price (Before BK, it was trading at I thought $600, but the poster said as low as $400), a forced converstion in to common shares, etc.
Too many variables at this point, but I think if you have the patience to wait it out, or at least until the reorganization plan is filed, the picture will become more clear.
The potential is there, up to $1000 liquidation. It is just too many variables at this point in the early stage.
It is speculative at this point.
Good luck and cheers.
You guys have the same general consensus about the future of WMI as a group of us at WAMUQ on Google. But you are wrong about a few things regarding WAMPQ....and mislead a little about some events discussed IMO.
We have done ALOT of technical analysis about the value of WMI.....we have examined every SEC filing and court document available and come to a consensus of our own....I would like to invite the intellegent posters from hear to visit us and provide some input.
--------------------------------------------------
True WAMPQ was issued for $1000 and even went up to $1200 but the REAL value in WAMPQ is the $80 per year dividend. If they suspend the dividend, it is not worth so much because people hold it for the divident. Pre-siezure you will notice that pre-siezure WAMPQ paid dividends but after the June dividend it was sold off quite a bit to like $400....because at that point the risk in holding it was not worth the dividend. What it is really worth is what someone will pay....right now that is $2....because there is no gaurantee that WMI will come out of chap 11 and even if they do they may not even pay the dividend.....but it does have tremendous potential and I am quite long on it.
Also you seem to imply that if JPM buys WMI or even if WMI comes out of chap 11 and back in business that they will be happy to give you $1000 for WAMPQ....that is not true. If JPM buys WMI What will happen to WAMPQ is nothing- it will stay as it is- the preferred R shares- they will be owned by JPM but the terms will stay the same. JPM will not buy them from you- you have to trade them- and you can only trade them for what people will pay, and people will only pay $1000 for them if they pay the $80 dividend...so it is not a done deal.
On top of that a forced conversion event will occur in an-all-for-stock deal at a ratio of 115 shares common for WAMPQ, and it does not have to add up to $1000.
That being said, either way the potential upside for WAMPQ is HUGE...but more likely than not it will not approach $1000 overnight in any scenario....
----------------------------------------------------
Re-read the Prospectus.
None of the conversion terms apply because of the event of default -- i.e., bankruptcy. This triggered the liquidation provision which is crystal clear: $1,000 plus dividend/interest. Moreover, dismissing the filing cannot reverse the event of default. Nothing can.
--------------------------------------------------------
True under liquidation. If WMI goes chap 7 WAMPQ, WAMKQ, and WAHUQ will be next in line after senior and junior debt. But that does not gaurantee $1000- it just means they get their peice first. And under chap 7 liquidation, they do not have to pay 100% of value of preferreds before paying commons- they can appropriate it with the majority going to prefereds. But in this case you are going to get a hell of alot more than $2 but not necessarily $1000.
But we are not talking about liquidation- IMO that is the least likely scenario based on all the WMI happenings. Upon some merger or buyout, WAMPQ esentially remains the same, and is transferred to the buyer under the same terms- look any any merger like this and you will see that the new company carry the old company's preferred stock. They do not write you a check for $1000 per share, they just carry it over under the same terms. At that point again it trades for whatever anyone will pay, but yeah a hell of alot more than $2, but not necessarily $1000.
True under liquidation. If WMI goes chap 7 WAMPQ, WAMKQ, and WAHUQ will be next in line after senior and junior debt. But that does not gaurantee $1000- it just means they get their peice first. And under chap 7 liquidation, they do not have to pay 100% of value of preferreds before paying commons- they can appropriate it with the majority going to prefereds. But in this case you are going to get a hell of alot more than $2 but not necessarily $1000.
But we are not talking about liquidation- IMO that is the least likely scenario based on all the WMI happenings. Upon some merger or buyout, WAMPQ esentially remains the same, and is transferred to the buyer under the same terms- look any any merger like this and you will see that the new company carry the old company's preferred stock. They do not write you a check for $1000 per share, they just carry it over under the same terms. At that point again it trades for whatever anyone will pay, but yeah a hell of alot more than $2, but not necessarily $1000.
Interesting... TPG
Bonderman, David Director
Brief Biography
Mr. Bonderman is Director of the Company. Bonderman, a founder partner of private equity firm TPG Capital, previously served on the board of the nation's largest thrift from 1996 to 2002.
Kosturos, William President, CFO, VP, Treasurer, Controller, Assistant Secretary, Chief Restructuring Officer
Brief Biography
Since June 2002, Mr. Kosturos, has been a Managing Director at A&M, a management consulting firm specializing in advisory and business consulting services for companies in transition. Mr. Kosturos specializes in interim management and advising and assisting boards of directors, investment groups, management groups and lenders in a wide range of turnaround, restructuring and reorganization situations. Most recently, Mr. Kosturos served as the Chief Restructuring Officer of Movie Gallery from June 2006 to May 2008. Previously, from February 2003 to June 2005, he served as interim Chief Executive Officer and Chief Restructuring Officer of The Spiegel Group.
Please provide your thoughts in the event an equity committee is formed and there is not enough for the common. My assumption is that TPG will head the equity committee (since TPG is more influential) and pray the court for a prorata distribution for all equity classes since TPG is mostly in Common.
Also, your thoughts on possibly TPG use of the PPS right before the seizure of WaMu Bank, i.e. (I believe) $600 for Wampq and $2.00 common as a distribution basis.
TIA
He resigned because the Restructuring Team is coming in to take over and fill in all the positions. Good luck waiting on your fill.