Democracy starts with you, tag your it! ...Thom Hartman
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.
fwiw, the FDIC ‘Balance Sheet Summary’ link has been broken for a few days in a row now (‘405 Not Allowed error’) as well as the FDIC link to ‘Ammendments to the P&AA’ has also been down (404 Not Found).
I think there might be some updates coming to the FDIC WAMU website
Thank AZ, I was kind of thinking it was something like that, although not in as much necessary detail. Again thanks.
I did research last week on which WMI subs still have active state registrations as viable and ongoing businesses. I’ll post what I found later today for everyone.
Debt and Cash, are different things, and can be used for different things. Especially if one is Inside BK, and one is Outside of BK.
Original WMI P Preferreds were/are debt vehicles to drum up cash flow, backed by specific mortgage securities as collatoral. like renting out a house, with a senior note against it, where income is reduced by the cost of the debt note.
The original P Preferred trust assets were not segregated out of BK, so I'd think those debt assets could be used by the debtor however and whenever they chose. And my contention is the did use it temporarily for new WMI A&B Preferreds as operating money until an aggressive income generating Merger/Acquisition was consummated.
Which is different from original legacy Commons and just pure interests in securitized income streams from WMI Capital Trusts and their specific mortgage security collatoral. Pure cash flow, no debt assigned against these Trusts as senior collatoral....like renting out a house you own free and clear. pure profit.
The debtor couldn't touch this cash, as it WAS segregated out of the reach of Bankruptcy.
So:
I'm thinking WMI/WMIH/COOP could use this raised debt backed by mortgage trusts (old P Preferred) for whatever the heck purpose and use it how they please (aka hence my wondering if A&B Preferred were temporarily paid back with P Preferred debt interests until paid off). I'd think there is still plenty left going forward for P Preferred interests.
And all that is guaranteed to original legacy holders of P 'debt' is Face + interest. So going forward since Sept 2008, this trust backed debt might've generated 2 Xs FACE or something. I'm wondering if the 'Cream' above and beyond what is owed to legacy P holders (Face + interest),...if that 'Cream' (retroactive) is equal to what was guaranteed to A&B Preferreds. If so this lends credence to my theory.
Could A&B Preferred essentially be looked at as a loan to the company WMIH for carrying costs UNTIL, a future merger/acquisition could be found (turns out NSM) that would eventually start producing income for WMIH /COOP to become self sufficient without living off of debt ?......,
and ....that an arrangement was made in a sense that the 'loan' - the new A&B preferred, ....this debt owed to A&B is to be paid back from the P Preferred trusts? After all, WMIH didn't have much income elsewhere until a future merger was consummated, yet WMIH had
other debts and executives to nurse off the teet meanwhile?
sort of like a cost of doing business? aka, costs of maintaining a life line until a suitable merger partner is found? (eventually NSM)
So once that original debt (collatoral guaranteed by A&B Preferred) is paid back through WMIH income generating Original P Preferred Trusts including retroactively, then the "THANK YOU" for lending to WMIH is Conversion to a boatload of new Common shares (without legacy tracking markers), not to mention being paid back their principal and interest owed from a guaranteed trust income stream.
sweetheart deal - absolutely. but when you're a bankrupt shell with no liquid legacy assets to claim (yet), what choice do you have, other than 'Hard Money Lending'?
IDK, but just trying to apply a bit of logic and personal lending experiences. If you're inbetween a rock and a hard place, you're gonna have to pay interest and then some......title to a Harley (lol), a boat, shares in a newbie company fresh out of technical Bankruptcy.....
But if all this is true, I'd think that back then WAS the deal, and now going forward as we all wait and are in the same boat, then maybe the P Preferred income stream goes back to original intentions.
Thanks AZ - that helps to understand the process! Now from there I'm trying to get my arms around these details and marry it into the big picture going forward here.....
Trying to figure out how A&B Prefereds before their conversions to all Commons, was allowed to (or were they in addition to?) whomever WMI was originally issuing dividends to off the P preferred originally?
In other words did old P preferreds cease to exist at the start of WMI's 2 Chapter 11 BKs, and then in later after BK Re-org, did those former dividend interest incomes start paying out only to the new WMIH Preferred A&Bs?
How the heck could original P Preferred who released get bypassed by new A&B Preferreds at that time without addressing those who released their old P Preferreds?
Thanks AZ. Connecting the relationship dots between what I know to be there asset wise, to what those who released show as % ownership tracking markers, is so #$% murky.
That doesn't sound promising for Preferred who released, lol. Was the liquidation preference of those backing trusts different in comparison to the WMI Capital Trusts for old WMI Common, that allowed the debtor/reorganized WMI/WMIH to put their hand in the cookie jar?
Most importantly......'the SECOND Ownership Change only issued Secondary Dilutive Shares....' That's right, Coop shares only. ZERO escrow trackers held by the DTC.
Only those who released in the First ownership change received BOTH 1) Shares 2) DTC Escrow markers
The Second Ownership Change doesn't get their fingers on legacy WMI interests as evidence by ones' DTC tracking markers
They can't steal it. We can't sell these DTC interests, because CASH is coming.
Hi AZ, Something you said I caught it the first time during the holidaze and meant to return to it....but it's quite interesting to think about.
"... the SECOND Ownership Change ? was only able to issue "Secondary Dilutive Shares" ... or "Common Shares" in COOP' (privately) ... think about that' ... it's a big deal
AZ "
As AZ says, we all wait together...individuals and institutions alike. So, there are some much deeper pockets than mine, that are getting shafted should any more delays occur.
Q4 2020 hasn't ended yet, but after all these years where retail is hated so much, I had to poke around a bit with regards to REIT distributions. I am not an expert, and maybe AZ can correct me as to whether the WMI Capital Trusts are REITS by this definition, as it may not be entirely applicable. But I did find it interesting amongst a cacophony of new IDs pushing hard against a 2020 year end distribution. I agree with AZ's research and I know he has adequately stated what should happen regarding the 90% Rule under the spotlight of Q4 ending.
I found a Tax Director, who lists some rare instances where a REIT Trustee 'could' postpone disbursements, but not with consequences, or ignoring the mandatory requirement to declare a dividend before Dec 31 - even if money comes later. I believe AZ has already mentioned this to some degree.
What is bothersome in reading this is numbers 1-3. As legacy retail is hated, some sadist might like #1 to delay paying retail another month - or this same sadist might like #2 by filing taxes late and tax extensions to postpone paying till June (although #2 costs the REIT excise taxes). The only thing about #3 that is bothersome is if by "consent of the shareholders"......it might mean that legacy WMI being the only shareholder, could it direct the REIT to not distribute the dividend income and leave it in the REIT while sticking us with the taxes?
Here are the highlights:
"What if Your REIT Doesn’t Meet Its Distribution Requirement?
JUNE 17, 2020
By David Nigliazzo
But what happens if the REIT fails to meet the distribution requirement? Are there any remedies?
Dividends must be pro rata and without “preference” within a single class of stock. There are three provisions that will remedy the situation when a REIT fails to meet its distribution test:
1) Declare the Dividend in the Current Tax Year and Pay in January of the Subsequent Year
If a REIT declares a dividend in Q4 of a taxable year (October, November, December) to shareholders of record in such quarter, but does not pay the dividend until January of the following year, the distribution is deemed to have been paid on the last day of the taxable year (i.e., December 31.) The REIT will include the distribution in the current taxable year; however, the shareholder will need to also include the dividend in their taxable income for the current tax year. These dividends are deemed paid on the last day of the taxable year. The REIT must have earnings and profits in the tax year in order to classify these distributions as dividends.
2) Declare and Pay the Dividend in the Subsequent Year Exposes REIT to excise taxes
If a REIT does not declare the dividend in the prior tax year, there is still a remedy. The REIT can deduct dividends in the prior tax year if the dividend is declared prior to the due date of the REIT’s tax return, including extension, and the dividend is paid in the 12-month period following the close of the REIT tax year. Once the dividend is declared with regard to the prior tax year, it must be paid no later than the next regularly scheduled dividend.
For example, assume that a REIT typically makes distributions on June 30 and December 31 each year. On May 15 of the current year—the year subsequent to the tax year—the REIT declares a dividend related to the prior tax year to solve its distribution requirement. The dividend related to the prior tax year must be distributed no later than June 30. The distribution must be from the earnings and profits of the prior tax year. Under this scenario, the REIT will deduct the dividend in the prior tax year; however, the shareholder will be taxed on the REIT in the year in which it was paid. This option may cause the REIT to be subject to the excise tax for the prior tax year.
3) Declare a Consent Dividend Requires shareholder WMI (and others?) consent prior (maybe someone research the IRS form 972, 973)
A “consent dividend” is a constructive distribution from the REITs earnings and profits. From a shareholder’s perspective, it is treated as a taxable dividend on the federal income tax return in the current year. It is considered as if the shareholder immediately reinvested the dividend back into the REIT, increasing the paid-in capital of the REIT and increasing the shareholders basis in the REIT stock. This will allow the REIT to keep the cash in the REIT and increase the shareholders’ investment in the REIT. All shareholders must consent to the dividend by completing and signing Form 972, and the REIT will complete Form 973. Both forms must be submitted with the REIT’s tax return and by the REIT’s tax filing due date, including extensions. If a shareholder does not consent and is not distributed cash, then there is a preferential dividend with regard to the class of stock having the consent dividend, and no amounts with regard to that stock are eligible for the dividends paid deduction.
4) None of the Above REIT status would be canceled - I doubt they'd risk this
If a REIT fails to meet the distribution requirement and does not elect one of the three aforementioned solutions, it will fail to be a REIT and will be taxed as a C corporation. Some practitioners believe if an entity continues to pass all other REIT requirements, the REIT will be taxed as a REIT in the subsequent tax year. Others view that the five-year prohibition on re-election applies, and the REIT will be taxed as a C corporation for the five-year period. Given the uncertainty of the application of this rule, it is critical for a REIT to meet its dividend distribution requirement.
5) SALT Issues a REITs primary objective is to avoid taxes, I doubt it comes to this.
A REIT should also be aware of potential state and local tax issues. While some jurisdictions comply with federal law for REITs, some do not, specifically regarding consent dividends. This could cause the REIT to have an income tax liability in state and local jurisdictions, even if there is no federal taxable income. State adjustments can also cause a REIT to have state income and, therefore, state income tax liability. Furthermore, some states have a franchise, excise, or net worth tax to which the REIT will be subject.
A best practice is to monitor the REIT’s estimated taxable income and distributions paid throughout the year in order to comply with REIT distribution requirements and avoid a potential shortfall. An essential part of REIT compliance is ensuring the REIT meets distribution requirements. If there is a deficiency in the REIT’s distributions at year-end, contact your tax advisor to discuss and assess your best options to ensure the REIT’s compliance with the distribution requirement.
https://www.eisneramper.com/reit-distribution-requirement-0620/
100% agree. I wouldn't be surprised if she was hired by former TPS or Piers interests or the debtors as a delay function.
There are those that hate retail. There are not strong enough words for their disdain. They are not financially hurt by the delays like much of retail is.
That was just the date the trustee had to give notification to the SEC of intent to move money I believe. 10 days prior.
Public notification is not required. although we'd appreciate it
bots never do any DD. It's just calculated noise.
lmao...its the same MO every time. Hi, newbie here, what do i do with this escrow thingy, what does it mean and then all of a sudden have a flood of immensely negative epiphanies, in a cacophony chorus of all the other newbie neg nellies.
So boring. They got no game.
Yes, read your release you signed
Because it’s DOA. If it was alive, her cheerleaders would be pumping the results hourly in the waning moments of 2020. They will play along while they can, to add to FUD with COOP
thankfully having to argue with bots over legacy WMI ends in 2020
Why is it dangerous for them? If you manipulate retail to take a lemming leap out of any returns, what recourse do they really have?
Track down anonymous internet IDs and sue them? with what money? It could happen, but the odds of them actually getting caught and punished are close to nil.
Rather just thank my lucky stars for people like AZ who keep it real and based in fact that I can and have verified...to know who and what is complete and utter BS.
It is pretty clear. And it really 'is what it is'. I really don't care anymore who gets it, or doesnt. I know what I own, and I know its coming.
And it really is shameful what lengths people and business go to, over grudges and money. Retail is hated!
HLCE
Don’t you understand what a ‘mole’ is? Jeez! A mole gains the trust of the people it seeks to stab in the back later. How do you gain the trust of retail? Act like retail, gain their trust, be invited into private messaging and research groups, and then use all that to F’em over later from the shadows.
She'll have better luck suing Starbucks again
Chapter 11 is a get out of jail card for big business. WMI took advantage of it like thousands of others.
Shed those cement shoes, and reorganize around remaining assets. Dump retirement plans, dump enough shareholders, dump debts......
Chapter 11 only require that you claim enough assets to cancel liabilities. You don't have to reveal all the other assets you might own, as they aren't required to settle the liabilities stated.
Chapter 11 is a lather, rinse, repeat scam. I'll never be a common stockholder of most large companies ever again.
That’s interesting.... trading history only starts 12/1/2020
Preferreds are not ahead of commons. The WMILT is done and toast. The bankruptcies are over. There is no hierarchy remaining.
You have separate income issues on different tracks or highways, all running somewhat concurrently. However as the Ks are redeemable and the Ps are convertable......there is prob some strategy to how and when the Preferreds are dealt with for WMI/WMIH now trading as COOP.
Escrow tracking markers still reserve ones % share of temporary withheld income from such during the bankruptcies, so that is not lost to those who release.....but how the Preferreds carry on in the future, is up to some corporate even dictated by WMI/WMIH now trading as COOP, imo
The Capital Trust portfolio has also been slowly decreasing over time I'd think as loans get refi'd, etc., imo
I think the idea of $ .38 is based on real numbers recently, is conservative, and a wise thing to do.
He doesn't mean its a toss up as far as yes they will produce income, or won't....
K's are redeemable, Ps are convertible I think.
The Preferreds are managed by a trustee subsidiary(s), who may not have the same reporting standards as the WMI Cap Trusts trustees. Or might be international based collateral and hard to track from here.
The Preferred Trusts are there and do exist. Just can't be as easily tracked as the base for old Commons can be now within the WMI Cap Trust
imo
I don't have anything close to that, but I will be quite happy with that return. And most of all, the returns coming every quarter for years to come.
That number doesn’t include Q1, Q2. It is a number completely out of context when applying Q3 as an annual number.
hahaha, it finally comes out. Thanks for playing
Thanks AZ for your reply!
Great! Thanks for proving.... that after 10 plus years of WMIH CORP owning the LEI code, that COOP is NOW the TELL as AZ has said all along the past few years.. !!!!!
MR COOPER could NOT administratively take WMIH CORP's DTCC approved LEI code unless the long awaited accounting consolidation by the "Lead Arrangers" was finally in PLAY....ie the TELL. You've proved the TELL, and we all appreciate your misplaced dedication.
Thanks meat for proving to me that COOP, the TELL, is finally moving to update its Accounting !!
Thanks for playing......I enjoyed that one IMMENSELY.
HLCE, AZ is Right!
AZ: "Currently, However' Quickly coming to a change by the LEAD ARRANGERS, as the Accounting is being updated, ... our SEC submissions have merely considered the SEC allowed "Registrant" ... actually its the same one NationStar used, ... LLC ... But Again, that is all about to be changed, now that the WMI Cases are closed' ... "
"The separations between “WMiH and its Subsidiaries” ... and what the SEC allows the company to submit as its financials ... using merely a “Registrant” ... actually, they’ve been using the same “Registrant” that NationStar was using at the time of the “acquisition” ... LLC’ ... simply because WMIH, the Parent Corp., was still under the confines of the BK Court ...
... now that the “Cases” were “Closed” back on 12/20/2019’ and the Court Ordered Requirements have been completed, carried into 2020’ ... Things Are About To Change’ ...
Your DTC Issued ESC Cusips maintain your original connection to “WMIH and its Subsidiaries”
Thx for this.
MR Cooper uses an E - conference call sign up via Q CONF. https://www.qconf.com/conference-call/WMIH/2020-04-30%2016:00:00.0
"In order to join the earnings online meeting, contact Mr. Cooper Group Inc for the information on connecting using web conferencing or bridge number and PIN code"
Even in April 2020, well after the 2018 name change to registrant and trading symbol COOP, the E-Conference Call company describes the registrant MR Cooper Group as:
"WMIH Corp. ("WMIH") is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware. On May 11, 2015, WMIH merged with its parent corporation, WMI Holdings Corp., a Washington corporation ("WMIHC"), with WMIH as the surviving corporation in the merger (the "Merger"). The Merger occurred as part of the reincorporation of WMIHC from the State of Washington to the State of Delaware effective May 11, 2015 (the "Reincorporation Date"). WMIH, formerly known as WMIHC and Washington Mutual, Inc. ("WMI"), is the direct parent of WM Mortgage Reinsurance Company, Inc., a Hawaii corporation ("WMMRC"), and WMI Investment Corp., a Delaware corporation ("WMIIC"). Since emergence from bankruptcy on March 19, 2012 (the "Effective Date"), our business activities consist of operating WMMRC's legacy reinsurance business in runoff mode.
Read more Conference Call
Mr. Cooper Group Inc (WMIH)
Fifth Avenue Plaza, Seattle Washington 98104, United States"
I bought my P's after mid 2010 also, so that'd explain why i didnt get a letter either.
I have no idea why he got this LIBOR settlement letter. Old P preferreds were bonds. Maybe he holds P escrow? My P escrow tracking cusips are stored in my bonds portfolio.
Thanks for sharing AZ. That is a great quotation from the court!
That would be fine with me
They been loose on the filings for over 10 years, playing hiding the sausage with themselves. They don't want a light on it. It's not worth arguing anymore, lol. They're not allowed to accept it.
It is what it is.
LMAO! This doesnt resolve anything. And this could've been typed up by my 7th grader.
- Status right now, shows ACTIVE ENITIY STATUS at GMEI. Registration is Lapsed, which isn't fatal to keeping an LEI number or ACTIVE ENTITY STATUS.
- "the LEI’s legal name is still the outdated one" at this point in time.
- as I stated before, GMEI regs require the new owner must claim the LEI, and nobody else has other than WMIH CORP at this time
- this 'letter' as you typed up... what you wanted us to 'see' here, "based on the information you provided"...
- "we requested GMEI to validate the Legal Name of the LEI and make necessary changes to the LEI as soon as possible."
-WMIH CORP exists right here, right now. all one has to do is look at a real doc, not something a child typed up. https://www.gmeiutility.org/actions/RecordDetails/viewRecordDetails/355551373075292745
I've never seen someone so excited about not making money! Truly doesn't hold any escrow tracking cusips
I tried to buy those first as a single flavor purchase, and got nothing. So I split my purchases into smaller quantities amongst the other flavors
I'm new here, but my observation: I bought a bunch recently. The NQ was instant purchase for full quantity . The KQ took 30 minutes, and came in 4 blocks, and the MQ on a day order could not be purchased.
From prior research elsewhere, there might be a randomness to which flavor is more desirable, based on the underlying asset pool and how quick a pool is/has been paying down. It's possible that a pool at/near complete liquidation, could mean a quicker cash out.......but mayb if JPM is trustee, those flavors are more important to them once liquidated, if they are indeed double dipping while they can. ie, JPM might be creating a false hype over certain flavors
The whole Q label still puzzles me, and makes me think there's still a ways to go on this.