Any posts are my opinion, and should not be relied on for your investment decisions.
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.
Both Fannie and Freddie have been growing and now effectively back ~$5T of MBS.
R-ship is not an option (its also why USTSY took 79.9% warrants and left stock outstanding). No R-ship until a proven third entity CSS LLC (CSP) is fully functional and proven. That will take several years to a decade and at that future time F&F would need to stop writing/securitizing new business.
At that transition point, it would still take several years for their remaining portfolios to wind down. 10-20 years in total duration
I think the fiduciary breach happened back in 2007-2008, but the judge is now giving the parties a chance to right the wrong.
JPM as one of our trustees and a large creditor to Lehman creates a big conflict of interest. JPM really prioritized who they were looking after (themselves), not those who paid for the trustee services.
I like your outcomes RL, hope your right.
Best JW
Based on reading the orders, I do think the timing of the fiduciary breach by JPM/LBHI is very interesting. Incriminating.
Especially since JPM knew to put additional contracts and collateral in place well before lehman's chap 11 filing, additionally failed to act as our trustee when they knew LBI was being shopped around.
Thx Cotton,
After quickly reading Judge Sullivan's order. It looks like the indemnification JPM was seeking (being CT trustee) was denied at this time.
Denied, because its unknown if LBHI will fulfill its contractual obligations to these agreements (CTs included).
Opens the door for trustee lawsuits IMO.
Different case in front of Judge Sullivan. Have to read the judgement. I believe this was the one cotton wrote Judge Sullivan on behalf of CT holders.
http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/tyghh4iw/new-york-southern-district-court/lehman-brothers-holdings-inc-et-al-v-jpmorgan-chase-bank-na/
Scheduling order is for claim 66462
http://dm.epiq11.com/LBH/Claim
See exhibit C on that claim (66462) and CTs are listed.
LBSF is not our debtor (CTs,prefs,commons)
JPM vs LBHI scheduling order is out on EPIQ
51015 09/30/2015
Notice of Presentment of [Proposed] First Amended Scheduling Order and Discovery Plan filed by Harold S. Novikoff on behalf of JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.. with presentment to be held on 10/8/2015 (check with court for location) Objections due by 10/7/2015, (Attachments: # (1) [Proposed] First Amended Scheduling Order and Discovery Plan)(Novikoff, Harold)
Case: Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.
Related: none
http://dm.epiq11.com/LBH/Docket
Time and Sales for LEHMAN BRO HD C/T IV PR L (LEHLQ)
Sep 29, 2015
Symbol:
LEHLQ
GO
Time Price Volume Market
15:49:30 0.0101 100 OTO
09:43:37 0.1224 1000 OTO
09:43:37 0.12 1000 OTO
Spam alert
Look at the overall market, that is why brokerages are increasing margin requirements.
For our CTs to get paid via the case JPM needs to win. Otherwise its just more money for Sr creditors.
I am waiting for the JPM case outcome or a distro to LBHI2 pref stock via LBIE. Last, a newco with NOLs.
Class 10A,10B,10C distros are being reallocated to higher classes. It states it right in footnote of the Oct distribution notice. No payment in Oct.
Fannie, Freddie And The Difference Between Power And Authority (Part II)
http://seekingalpha.com/article/3522006-fannie-freddie-and-the-difference-between-power-and-authority-part-ii
Your posts make no sense at all. Please elaborate with some documents/research to support your numbers.
Why is this a sticky? Yes BNYM acts as an escrow in case of distro. by LBHI
What is the point of highlighting this?
New article out RE: Fannie&Freddie Illegal Sr pref agreement
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/423467/fannie-freddie-profits-government
No, but the order book will show the lowest ask. I'll bet you get a fill at a lower pps of .20
Last: 0.1001
Change: 0.00 (0.00%)
Bid/Size: 0.0012/10,000
Ask/Size: 0.20/2,500
Iron, scottrade is showing current ask at .20/2500
That is funny. Thx for posting
The trust is not in BK, but the assets of the trust are (LBHI sub-notes). The trust cannot make distros until it receives distro on the LBHI sub-notes.
RE LEHKQ, looks like 3000 shares went across...
Last: 0.1001
Change: +0.0001 (0.10%)
Bid/Size: 0.0012/10,000
Ask/Size: 0.20/2,500
Volume: 3000
Right on JH. RE: LEHKQ, its on the greys and IMO, if the order book is not showing much on either side anyone making market will move on.
Regardless, IMO pps on nearly 0 volume means little.
Have a good weekend everyone
Still showing on scottrade. OTC shows no bid/ask...
http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/LEHKQ/quote
LEHKQ Scottrade showing...
Last: 0.10
Change: 0.00 (0.00%)
Bid/Size: 0.0012/10,000
Ask/Size: 0.20/2,500
Volume: 0
Market indicator, I believe OTO is a Pink(Non-reporting) and OTC is an Over-The-Counter reporting company
Time and Sales for LEHMAN BRO HLDC/T 6.00% M (LHHMQ) Aug 04, 2015
Symbol:
Time Price Volume Market
12:31:53 0.1499 4600 OTO
12:03:36 0.0821 3200 OTO
12:03:34 0.08 400 OTO
11:46:11 0.08 1800 OTO
11:38:07 0.08 800 OTO
10:25:27 0.1001 50000 OTO
JT99, agree re:Ignore function, had to sign in to get rid of the garbage posts. Much better now.
Cotton,
I have not seen any briefings filed or any motion hearings since late last year.
Are you expecting summary judgement to be issued or further briefing(s) and trial dates?
Thx JW
Before 3/2012, LBHI had the automatic stay in place.
Automatic stay-
Like other forms of bankruptcy, petitions filed under chapter 11 invoke the automatic stay of § 362. The automatic stay requires all creditors to cease collection attempts, and makes many post-petition debt collection efforts void or voidable.
I think that because LBHI emerged from bankruptcy in 3/2012, that's when the 20 quarters started (~13 quarters so far).
I do think CTs end up with whatever remains in a SPV or SPAC with runoff companies and NOLs to attract capital.
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/spac.asp
All 4 CTs showing bid/ask @scottrade
LEHKQ
Last: 0.12
Change: 0.00 (0.00%)
Bid/Size: 0.12/5,000
Ask/Size: 0.1798/11,342
Volume: 660
LEHLQ
Last: 0.15
Change: +0.0498 (49.70%)
Bid/Size: 0.15/5,000
Ask/Size: 0.1826/24,100
Volume: 3500
Exactly toogood, Lehman had a liquidity problem, not an asset problem when they filed for BK. $639B Assets $618B Liab.
Some assets were sold at firesale prices in the early days of BK but A&M stated they were brought in to build a bridge to a better time (when they could get more for the assets). This also added to NOLs.
Also, A&M said LAMCO was "shelved" for now, not eliminated.
Really wish they would get rolling with the major trials (JPM, Credit Suisse, etc).
The audits are interesting, keeping an eye on the status of the K's to change.
Best JW
Also, Giddens is trustee over LBI proceedings. LBHI has no trustee. It has a BOD.
No it says- "Lehman Brothers Inc." = LBI, not LBHI
LEHLQ knocked down on $4 trade...LOL!
Time and Sales for LEHMAN BRO HD C/T IV PR L (LEHLQ) Jul 13, 2015
Symbol:
Time Price Volume Market
15:37:45 0.01 400 OTO
15:34:41 0.178 4000 OTO
14:59:59 0.1201 2000 OTO
12:26:24 0.1201 400 OTO
This is LBI, not LBHI. Some of the 1.8B will flow to LBHI.
New Maloni GSE blog out
http://malonigse.blogspot.com/2015/07/david-david-david.html
Sorry, not following your point(s)
The Trustee signed off on the sale...
The Trustee agreed to the sale of Lehman Brothers Inc.'s brokerage business to Barclays on the understanding that it was consistent with the deal that was presented to the Court and faithful to the fundamental principle of protecting customers and ensuring sufficient assets to satisfy customer claims. The disputed assets are needed to satisfy the claims of customers the Trustee was appointed to protect, and, in the case of certain assets, a transfer to Barclays would cause a violation of the Securities Investor Protection Act and the Securities and Exchange Commission's Customer Protection Rule.
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/statement-from-the-office-of-james-w-giddens-trustee-for-the-liquidation-of-lehman-brothers-inc-under-the-securities-investor-protection-act-trustees-complaint-against-barclays-and-barclays-opposition-memorandum-88448692.html
Not an attorney. IMO, if US TSY loses it will be appealed. US DOJ is going to drag this out as long as possible.
Best intermediate term chance to recover some, would be to sell the commons on the strength of US TSY losing the current appeals or US TSY losing Fairholme case w/Judge Sweeney.