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.
never said conversion itself breaks law ... to the contrary, i said that they can legally convert with 2/3 jps approval ... i only noted that IF a potential plaintiff feels the conversion terms violate some statute/law, then a law suit could arise ... btw, IF a conversion happens, I think it will happen on terms mutually agreeable to ALL parties
No matter what, jps can't convert unless 2/3 jps agree to proposed conversion terms ... now, of course, the terms could be made incredibly attractive at the expense of common, but that would likely just trigger more law suits
"shall" can mean "may"? ... oh well, so much for the 10 commandments ...
Barron, agree re JPS conversion, but why do you believe that the warrants won't (can't?) be exercised? Only suit I know of challenging warrants is WF, and I think that is based on the exercise price (i.e. a taking) rather than the legality of the warrants themselves. tia shadow
PS I am grateful for some of Sweeney's pro P's comments, but don't think she can make a distinction between pre and post purchasers' right. What say ye?
Yes, I read all their bios and even google the more senior folks ... and still have the same question: So ACG has connections feeding them information not available to hundreds (or thousands) of other incredibly well connected individuals? Or are you saying ACG is the only ones sharing what they learn? I find both possibilities very hard to accept.
So ACG has connections feeding them information not available to hundreds (or thousands) of other incredibly well connected individuals? Or are you saying ACG is the only ones sharing what they learn? I find both possibilities very hard to accept. And, apologies for not remembering, but what were their predictions that were spot on ... and not made by others? tia
what makes you think Gabby is any more aligned with decision makers than the countless others watching this closely? they look like a tiny boutique advisory firm with no big-name partners - and suddenly they are a leading authority of FnF? seriously, what am I missing?
proactive? they continue the largest taking in modern history supposedly waiting for a major decision to give them cover to settle, then the en banc falls in their lap, and what do they decide to do? appeal. good grief, 3 three years (and counting) of more stall tactics ... that's proactive?!?!
Maybe OTC land ... or maybe an administration that thinks EVERYTHING should be appealed to SCOTUS. Think about it ... the gov't effectively has unlimited manpower, money and time ... their slogan is Delayed Justice, Terrific!!!
Serious question ... after SOOOOOOOOOOO many experts have been proven stupendously wrong about FnF, in every way possible, why are some folks so certain that ACG has a high (or just higher?) chance of being right? They list 12 senior analyst - just 12 - and some of them specialize in things like the Equal Rights Amendment - not Fortune 100/500 financial matters. Not being disrespectful (my cv pales in comparison to theirs), but honestly, why are some of you so convinced that their opinion warrants attention? tia
Who would have thought that FnF would be quantum objects exhibiting superposition... they can be every possibility at the same time ... and only become one of those when observed ... just hope Sweeney is the observer ...
Yes, economist tell us talk is cheap ... supply vastly exceeds demand! ; )
wow, thanks for the quick reply ... i've read the WF filing twice but didn't pay close enough attention to the class definition as I did buy just before cship. Will re-read tonight with benefit of your guidance. Thanks
Haven't watched CNN, Fox, MSNBC, RT, etc. for over 3 weeks and feel like I can think again ; ) ... at the 30,000 ft level, there are really only two questions: 1) will FnF be released (which means NWS ended, suits settled, etc.) and 2) how will current shareholders fare? I think odd are very high that #1 happens, but still have serious doubts about how well existing common will do. Held since Aug 08 so, of course, ain't about to leave now ... and really hoping we get some love from the courts.
Totally agree ... didn't say 10%/warrants would be overturned; rather, they would be basis for calculating the value of taking.
I did not realize WF filing had actually defined the proposed class as pre-cship owners? That's significant. If you get a moment, would be very grateful if you could just tell me where to look (much appreciated).
kt, thanks. Not sure Sweeney will limit class to pre cship holders, but in any event, she hasn't ruled so its still pending. Re Wash Fed counsel on contingency, I did see TH's comment (thank you) and wondered if that is based on past, or recent, knowledge. Also, another poster at TH wondered if "new investors" might provide new/additional funding for the Wash Fed suit given that the warrants could have significant value as an element of the takings calculation. Many thanks, shadow
LOL! Good call. I need to be more opened minded ... I thought emoji investing just meant Entirely Misguided Opinions Just Ignore ... ; )
Amen to that!
"This time is different"
"The journey is its own reward"
"Timing is everything"
"The meek shall inherit the earth"
"I'm from the gov't and I'm here to help you"
Chapter headings, Lemmings' handbook, now in its 11th year of publication
Just trying to keep it light on a bad day. Market HATES uncertainty and delays, and more of each were added today, so pps goes down. Nothing mysterious. Nothing.
yes! then we will remain in the hands of the party that started this whole mess!! brilliant!
the 10% divi and warrants are, effectively, in play, as they will form the basis for calculating the taking ... and it remains to be seen who would benefit from the leverage an open suit like WF MIGHT bring to the full settlement (impossible to tell now) ... and correct, the class has not been certified yet, which is why I said "potential to be a class action"
good intel on WF attorney's working on contingency; is there a link that might provide more detail? tia
It does seem relatively more straight forward to settle the NWS suits, but that still leaves Wash Fed. My impression is that their suit may essentially concede that gov't had the right to trigger cship (fog of war and all that rot), but the cship nevertheless constituted a taking without due process and compensation - and that puts the 10% divi and 80% warrants in question. No sure if Wash Fed P's have deep pockets and want to play chicken, but could that suit be a spoiler? ... and isn't that under Sweeney as well? ... and doesn't that have the potential to be a class action? Sorry for so many questions, but inquiring minds ... :)
Thanks for posting. Gov't really is schizophrenic ... grant their cert but deny P's. Per ROLG, En banc NWS remand to Adams WILL proceed regardless because gov't missed deadline to block remand. Would prefer cert NOT granted for NWS because there is a chance SCOTUS could reverse, but P's are willing to risk that if it will get their constitutionality cert approved. What a CF. Could someone remind me again how quickly this is all going to be resolved ...
MC, please consult Herbert Swope asap ... "I cannot give you the formula for success, but I can give you the formula for failure - which is: Try to please everybody."
I really hope you are right. I personally believe RnR is possible and maybe even likely, but we really have NO idea if current shareholders are holding a golden ticket or a coupon to the dollar store. The pps strongly suggests that the smart money will buy the new shares; meanwhile, the pumpers and dumpers will ... well ... pump and dump.
PPS drops and its manipulation ... it goes up and its all aboard we're going to the moon ... kind of the message board version of socializing losses and privatizing gains ...
what's that condition when you do the same thing over and over again and expect different results? ...
good point ... a common stock buy back program now would be brilliant (though hard to use earnings for that while the poor taxpayers are still "at risk") ... I also wonder ... when they get to the point of selling shares to raise additional capital, I wonder if they will have the option to just keeping building reserves through retained earnings and forgo the stock offering ... yes, that would take longer, and they would have to continue to pay g-fees, but that still might be far less expensive than selling stock (depending, of course, of where the pps is at that time)
Exactly my sentiments as well. It will be amazing that many folks will call the RnR a brilliant success, even if it was preceded by the largest in-your-face theft in history (100's of billions via the 10% rate, 80% warrants, 11+ years hostages). Those who take comfort in such an outcome must surely hold a very special rule-of-law perspective.
This may be THE most complicated and unpredictable trade EVER - yet, as you have noted, that doesn't stop many shorts and pumpers from making endlessly wrong predictions and ad hominem attacks. Even brilliant individuals like attorney Richard Epstein have been spectacularly wrong ... not because their expertise was deficient but because NO ONE could predict the depth of corruption in the gov't AND the willingness of the courts to defy ALL precedent (and common sense) to protect the thieves. Its almost a complete crap shoot at this point - and clearly the market feels the same way. We'll probably have to suffer through endless pumping/dumping (again) with the upcoming court decisions (Sweeney, Atlas, Lamberth and SCOTUS). Meanwhile, my original $300K investment ($6 x 50,000 shs) remains a huge "paper loss", but THE most valuable civic and judicial lesson ever - one that I sadly will probably share with my kids some day.
So as the old saying goes (sort of), believe half of what you see, none of what you hear ... and even less of what your read on a message board ; )
Go for it! (and thanks for checking)
This whole ordeal reminds me of scuba diving. The deeper you go (capital fully depleted) and the longer you stay down (11 years and counting), the longer and more frequent stops are needed on the way back up to avoid a fatal attack of the bends. The timeline also reminds me of the cardinal rule in scuba diving - don't EVER hold your breadth. This kitchen is packed with so many crooks - I mean cooks (FHFA, UST, WH, Congress, WS ... + courts, plaintiffs and, likely, new shareholders) - that NOBODY knows WHAT is going to happen or WHEN. Even the insiders don't know ... with one exception ... the Shadow knows ... ;)
greatly appreciated - thanks!
Not sure motion to produce 11K docs means that much any more re NWS now that we have the en banc decision that gov't exceeded its authority which was based on EXISTING docs that PROVED gov't lied (e.g., CFO stating twins were about to be very profitable). Maybe 11K doc would be helpful if SCOTUS review en banc, but I don't think so. Only place I could see the 11K docs being useful (i.e. beyond NWS) would be for Wash Fed (Sweeney?) which is only suit challenging the cship itself. Don't think pps will move much but would love to be wrong. cheers shadow
and the accompanying headline will be ... "And today's top story, hell froze over" ...
FD, really appreciate the complete and easy to follow methodology for projecting pps based on key variables. I hope it also helps others understand just how many ways the pps can go north or south. cheers, shadow
I have two hopes - 1) that we will continue to get relief from the courts, though I may be dead by then, and 2) all of this anti-FnF rhetoric by those supposedly controlling RRR is for cover to eventually make us somewhat whole.
BTW, Obi, if you are still here, do you know if there is any way the govt could move to rship, wipe out all common but somehow preserve the warrants for exercising post-rship? Thanks
With deep state shadow Gov opposing him at every level, President Trump relying on SCOTUS with Gorsuch and Kavanaugh appointments to take the lead in doing the right thing and restoring rule of law. SCOTUS ruling, if they accept the case, will be FINAL and the thieves will be silenced
so the en banc ruling wasn't enough political cover? maybe, but that sounds weak imo ... also, what happens if, god forbid, the gov't wins? ... then trump will be forced to do the wrong thing? ... can't have it both ways
if trump is for end of sweep, recap and release, then the en banc ruled in his favor. what the heck does he need scotus for??
Think of the billions at play here, the 11+ years in the Big Lie slow-cooker and the endless cast of corrupt players. Then add to that the totally schizophrenic position the gov't is in trying to maintain the "protect the taxpayer" mantra while, quite possibly, trying to also settle the law suits, attract new investors and maximize the warrants to give our Commander-in-Real-Estate the bragging rights to one of the most lucrative deals EVER!! I know its hard not to hang on every word uttered by every Tom, Dick or Harry (or Steve, Mark or Bill) but, as others have said, only real ACTIONS (court, regulatory, etc.) matter. The rest have proven to be utterly confusing noise. cheers