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.
We really appreciated how quick you loaded the audio the last time. I Hope you can do it again today.
Good morning fellow WAMUQ longs. Could be a great day today.
All I can say is... Marcia, you got some splainin to do.
Actually I got another thing to say: Marcia, SHOW ME DA MONEY!
WickedGame, Here is WMI with $32 Billion Assets and $8 billion
in debts.
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229080926000000000001.pdf
First, you are the only one responsible for your own investment. Having said that, true longs believe commons survive.
True longs sat back and simply enjoyed today's show. It was sort of like watching a dress rehearsal before the real show. How many more dress rehearsals will we see? I don't know, but we are patiently waiting for the Grand Opening.
Great post. It's the truth.
The DD for WAMUQ for the last 2 years is very complicated. It is very difficult to understand this stock in one day much less in 5 minutes. LOL! TAKE THAT!
Wow 1,251,845 buy at 9:32:15
Good evening fellow longs. Another day of nice gains here in WAMUQ land. Looking forward to hear from the settlers very soon.
Keep your seatbelts on.
Can't thank you enough Ilenes for being in court for us. This turn of developments no doubt is a big win for the true longs.
The current pps is of no consequence. Our seatbelts are securely fastened. Exciting days ahead.
Good to see you here my friend. Most of us long timer WAMUQ longs are still here and will be here till the end. GLTU. And for those that you said have bought and sold, this is what I have to say.
"Baby lock the door and turn the lights down low".
Consider it done sir.
Thanks to you Bet and other objectors. You'd make a fine lawyer if I may say so.
I believe he's been doing all he can to fight for the interest of shareholders. Not to say he couldn't use a help from individual shareholders in the fight for our cause.
Absolutely. Kudos to you too for finding Mike Willingham for us.
"I'm glad to know I'm not the only one who suspects Nate Thoma's perfectly timed appearance is mere coincidental.
"Lastly – and this is SHEER SPECULATION – but so very, very interesting: just days after the Examiner crushed us with his report, the superbly articulate, wonderfully prepared, and supremely courageous Nate Thoma, just popped out of the ether by uncanny coincidence; ready, willing and able to present the EC with the direct means to move WMI to solvency and thus closer to the possibility of convening a SHs’ meeting, and thus arming itself with tremendous new leverage against JPM and FDIC.
Mere coincidence you say? I certainly hope not. I hope our EC is as conniving and ruthless as the b@stards who have been fighting us are."
All I can say is... WOW!
On the last confirmation hearing, Judge Walrath didn't accept the EC's demonstrative into evidence. This time PJS valuations should be accepted as evidence. PJS should be on the stand as expert witness of the EC and will be refuting the debtors own valuation. Here is the transcript from the last confirmation hearing regarding ECs demonstrative.
MR. NELSON: There's also, Your Honor, the summary
18 exhibit that we discussed last night that's not in the binder
19 because it has not been admitted yet. It would be EC-92. We
20 haven't heard anything from any of the parties one way or
21 another on it, and --
22 THE COURT: What is it?
23 MR. NELSON: It's a summary exhibit, a demonstrative.
24 MR. MASTANDO: Yeah.
25 MR. NELSON: May I approach, Your Honor?
THE COURT: Oh, yeah, I remember this. I think you --
2 did you hand it up?
3 MR. NELSON: I don't think I did, actually.
4 THE COURT: Okay, thank you.
5 And what's the debtors' objection to using it as a
6 demonstrative?
7 MR. MASTANDO: No, I think the objection is to having
8 it admitted into evidence. I don't know if there's any
9 foundation that's been established for any of the items on the
10 exhibit.
11 MR. NELSON: Well, I think the point is the foundation
12 has been established for every item on the exhibit and that
13 it's a summary exhibit giving the total potential assets of the
14 estate and showing the summary of what it is; it's no different
15 than some of the other exhibits that were admitted on Thursday
16 showing the summary of the claims, for example, that I think
17 JPMorgan asked to have introduced into evidence. And so we
18 would just respectfully request that this one be admitted as a
19 summary exhibit.
20 MR. SACKS: Your Honor, we object to the admission of
21 this. This is a summary of counsel's argument. It's a
22 demonstrative for counsel to make an argument during the
23 closing. This is not evidence. Nobody used this, no witness
24 testified to this, no witness testified as to any of the facts
25 on it. This is simply counsel's argument. I'm sure you're
going to see multiple similar types of things in the course of
2 the morning and afternoon, but it's not evidence. It's a
3 demonstrative. And that's what it is, and counsel can use it
4 to argue, but it shouldn't go into evidence.
5 MR. NELSON: Again, the underlying factual basis has
6 been established with Mr. Kosturos and other witnesses about
7 the value of every single thing on the left-hand column.
8 THE COURT: But that doesn't make it admissible, does
9 it?
10 MR. NELSON: Yes, Your Honor, that's absolutely true.
11 It's a summary exhibit, so for example, for the same reason
12 that the JPMorgan document that was from their pleadings that
13 stated what they thought the value was, which was clearly from
14 their brief and counsel's argument, this is the same thing.
15 MR. SACKS: The difference, Your Honor, is that I used
16 it with a witness and got the witness to provide the foundation
17 for it, that he thought that that reflected, accurately, his
18 assessment and his understanding of something. They didn't use
19 this with a witness; they didn't try to put a foundation for
20 this. This is simply Mr. Nelson's argument that he's going to
21 use with Your Honor as to what these things mean. Potential
22 assets to the estate, dollar sign, question mark, with a whole
23 bunch of things. He has dollar values for things. I don't
24 know where those dollar values come from. They're not entirely
25 accurate. He has a number of things to which there's been no
testimony from the witnesses, here, and I think this is for
2 argument, and that's what it is.
3 THE COURT: I agree. I agree.
4 MR. NELSON: Thank you, Your Honor.
5 THE COURT: I will not allow it into evidence, then.
Ilenes. Thanks again for sharing. I was thrilled to hear about the exchange of expert reports by PJS v.s. Blackstone. PJS finally will get their valuation into evidence as oppose to the last confirmation hearing.
Ilene Slatko)
Cont. And if holdings change, new affidavits need to be submitted
DelShareholder (Ilene Slatko)
JMW: with respect to analysts reports, docs need to be produced. With respect to ownership and/or changes affidavits need to be signed
DelShareholder (Ilene Slatko)
Steinberg: we can look at other LTWs and how they were settled
DelShareholder (Ilene Slatko)
I don't know how well this is translating on the phone, but JMW is clearly leaning away from Debtors today...her words and demeanor
Thanks again DanBB. Hope this goes on the archive afterwards. Due to work, I think I've missed a couple of audio files including batsbats100 court statement. At any rate, I salute you for your very important contribution to the shareholders.
My measly few hundred shares is riding on this bull. Thanks to Zardiw for the tip. I was hoping though that it would dip a couple days ago so I can average down,instead it shot up. At any rate, it's good to be aboard.
Is it Benesch Friedlander Coplan and Arnoff llp?
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229100128000000000004.pdf
"Because they can't discuss anything on the CC that has not been publicly disclosed before the CC. Translation...they have to PR any deals before the CC if they want to discuss those deals on the CC."
Why can't they discuss anything on the CC without a PR? Are you referring to public disclosure rule by the SEC?
"Remember THJMW valued Coram's NOL's at 30% of total Nol's. Some here have said the estate has over 26Bill in NOl's."
30% of 26 billion is awfully close to the $10 billion that judge Walrath posited. Hmmmn..
Sorry Catz, here were the facts then...
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/CrisisandB
At about 1 minute and 30 sec - Carl Levin said WAMU is a thrift with $300 billion in assets and $188 billion in deposits.
Audio is up. Can't thank you enough! You are the best.
DanBB, I would really appreciate it if you can post the audio.
It is the next best thing to being in court. Thank you very very much Sir.
IMO, this stock is really ripe. I'm back in.
Super! And thanks.
Latest I see is 43.4 million outstanding shares. Is this still accurate or have they issued more?
Profitscout, any idea how much is their current Outstanding shares?
Thanks! and good luck!
This looks interesting. Any idea what the O/S shares will be post bankruptcy? Anyone know revenues of Kruse? How about the NOLS, Anyone know their value? Sorry if I am asking too many questions.
Is this it? http://www.ghostofwamu.com/documents/HearingTranscripts/08-12229-20101207.PDF pg. 143
14 Your Honor, my firm represents four independent and
15 separate clients; Appaloosa, Centerbridge, Owl Creek and
16 Aurelius. Collectively, they've been referred to in these
17 cases as the settlement noteholders. Our clients have
18 requested, Your Honor, that I address the Court today. And in
19 doing so, I am speaking on behalf of my Fried Frank colleagues,
20 Ms. Nagle, Mr. de Leeuw, Professor Resnick. The four of us and
21 our colleagues at Fried Frank participated as co-architects of
22 the integrated plan and global settlement agreement with our
23 fellow professionals in these Chapter 11 cases.
I think this is the reason why Justin's comment on that news article said "we are gratified the court denied confirmation and we're evaluating the opinion and our options going forward."
They have a competing POR ready backed with PJS valuation?