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.
"Tax Attributes that
remain at the time of emergence from bankruptcy could prove to be of significant value"
That is the point. There will be none left. LBHI says all NOLs will be utilized. You just have to look at the balance sheet to see that they will.
That motion was to preserve the NOLs through the liquidation process for the benefit of the creditors receiving as much as they could from the sale of assets. That is the reason they went chapter 11 liquidation for an orderly liquidation of assets over time, versus a chapter 7 which would have meant the immediate fire sale of assets.
That motion was written in 2010. The disclosure statement of 2011 adds this;
Someone here a couple weeks ago described the equity component of the CTs and got exactly right. I was surprised. Can't remember who.
From the prospectus;
>>CTs have to trade to qualify LBHI for the NOLs.
A lot of people don't understand it. <<
Unfortunately you don't understand it as well. The is no connection between the Cts and the NOLs. The 'One Big Share' was created to preserve NOLs. The OBS stopped equity holders from selling shares as to possibly affect a change in ownership of over 50% that would have the potential of the nullifying the NOLs. That is why equity shares do not trade. The CTs trade because they represent debt by their sole asset being a Lehman debt security. The CTs have no equity in LBHI.
Notice that it says the NOLs are being preserved to maximize recoveries for the creditors. It says nothing about benefiting equity holders. The only way for their to be a benefit to equity holders is if all the debtholders were paid in full. We know that will not happen.
>>For securities laws purposes, and in order to preserve NOLs and certain other valuable tax attributes that will maximize assets and thereby recoveries to creditors, on the Effective Date all existing Equity Interests in LBHI shall be cancelled and one new share of LBHI’s common stock shall be issued to the Plan Trust which will hold such share for the benefit of the holders of such former Equity Interests consistent with their former economic entitlements. On the Effective Date all existing Equity Interests in each of the Debtors other than LBHI shall be retained by such holder and only cancelled if and when such Debtor is dissolved in accordance with the Plan. In the event that all Allowed Claims against such Debtor have been satisfied in full in accordance with the Plan, each holder of an Equity Interest in such Debtor may receive its Pro Rata Equity Share of any remaining assets of such Debtor. <<
SA, You will never get anyone on the phone with the IRS that has any idea what you are talking about as to NOLs and cancellation of debt.
This is in the disclosure statement. Very clear.
>>We got $150B+ in NOLs<<
The NOL balance is down to zero. Most holders of their bonds have taken their losses, meaning income to LBHI that needs to be recognized and offset NOL credits. Net operating losses is not the same as shareholder equity, meaning NOLs are not what LBHI falls short in paying off creditors. NOLs can only be generated from Net operating losses. Once LBHI exited BK and in to liquidation, no new NOLs could be generated.
This is not fairyland where you can make stuff up and wish it was true. Well, I guess you could because that is what you are doing. That is exactly what this lawsuit nonsense is.
None.
For stocks to trade in OTC they need to have a sponsor. The new SEC rules basically state they can't be listed or be sponsored. There are no other markets available for them to trade.
Yes. I did very well with them and others. When you write an article for SA you are suppose to disclose ownership in any stocks mentioned, which I did at the bottom. That was an unique situation and very profitable for those that understood what they were buying. These issues sold off because most fixed income holders did not understand them. The CFC preferreds of Countrywide were then now BAC preferreds and guaranteed by them. XFP and MKS were AIG exchange traded debt for AIG. Big difference between Trups held by BAC and AIG that the government supported, and LBHI that the government walked away from.
Article I wrote about Trust Preferreds in 2011. Great opportunity to make great returns for those that followed me on this trade.
https://seekingalpha.com/article/298790-trust-preferred-returns-dodd-frank-offers-an-interesting-opportunity
Can you share that with me.
Eifrid@bellsouth.net
>>We don't know what the final outcome will be<<
Actually if one understands the bk process,can read a financial statement, and can comprehend what the CTs prospectus says, one does know what the final outcome of the CTs will be.
The CTs have no chance of seeing a recovery. That was the point of my post. So many here speculating there is a way this way or that (you guys can't agree even on how a recovery will look like) has no basis in reality. None. You guys are making stuff up. This lawsuit scheme is really of faulty logic and denies a common sense understanding of procedural law. Just stupid!
Crazy after all these years that the only ones left here are those that talk like they know what they are talking about but are clueless to the facts at hand and speak nonsense.
>>Theres strength in numbers. <<
In this case there isn't. The strength in numbers doesn't change the fact that you don't have a case nor standing.
Go ahead. Do it. What do you have to lose? But if you are putting money up for this nonsense you are a fool.
You guys really don't understand NOLs, do you.
They are somethings that a company decides to keep or not. They don't go straight to the creditors.
If I am a bondholder and lose $1,000 dollars, on my tax return I can deduct that loss of $1,000 from income. I must report the social security number, or federal tax ID for a corporation, to the IRS when I file my return. This triggers income to the entity that defaulted on the debt. In this case that would be $1,000 income to Lehman. Lehman can offset that income by using a NOL of $1,000. If they don't use the NOL then they must pay tax on the income. In Bankruptcy any debt they default on must be deducted from from the NOLs. That is why Lehman says ALL NOLs will be FULLY utilized basically due to Lehman defaulting on about $125 billion of debt. They say that in their filings. It is a non-cash entry and they have no choice but to offset derived from default of debt with NOL credits.
Lehman does not have cash to pay taxes. The IRS requires that they offset taxes as much as they can with NOLs. The IRS takes the NOLs away. Lehman has no choice but to comply.
>>Got $155 to spare? A crystal sphere paperweight emblazoned with the Lehman name can be yours<<
I have one of those bought after the BK. Ink pens, memo books, and canvas briefcase tote too! Probably got them same time as this guy. Gave most of the pens away over the years.
ANNUAL SHAREHOLDER MEETING October 17th
Wouldn't be great to see a headline like that!
We should act like shareholders and hold our own meeting. Just think of the press the financial media would give us shareholders to have a shareholder meeting in Washington. It would be a great David versus Goliath/big government story. Hold one every year. Shame OUR management to meet with their shareholders! We don't need FnF management to hold our own meeting.
Something I suggested back in 2013. Even built a website and opened a FaceBook page https://www.facebook.com/fanandfred in attempt to organize shareholders to make this happen. I thought we needed to fight to get our company back! Make some noise and no better way to do it that have a shareholders meeting covered by the likes of CNBC. Could not get any traction. People on this board thought I was trying to profit and did not want to upset the government that they thought for SURE was going to release FnF any day.
If this has already been brought up, sorry. I am not a regular on the board and just recently got back in on the recent sell off after being out for about 2 years.
>>Continuity is the main benefit of creating a successor company. The new corporation can use the existing assets and infrastructure instead of investing capital into building everything from the ground up. The employees are already in place and have gone through the company's training program. Managers and decision-makers who stay on board can bring stability to the new company. <<
NONE of which Lehman has! They have no physical presence. No human resources. Court ordered all assets be liquidated. Why is it so hard to understand what "all" means?
>>if the BHC is to continue to operate as a going concern.<<
You still don't get it. There is to be no surviving holding company. Read the modified plan. EVERYTHING is to be sold or given away.
Good to see the OTC get cleaned up of all these worthless stocks.
Most recent earnings call transcript;
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4444905-genworth-financial-inc-gnw-ceo-thomas-mcinerney-on-q2-2021-results-earnings-call-transcript
$GNW 13F out for Blackrock. They increased their holding 17% for the quarter to nearly 73 million shares for 14% of company. Seems to be a huge vote of confidence!
https://fintel.io/so/us/gnw
>>When I read about the "final" distribution in October, I remember it sounding more like if the creditor wants that payout, it will be "their" final payout. Not that it will be the last distribution for all creditors. <<
That is correct.
>>The Plan Administrator doctored the terms of the subordinated guarantee to exclude the guarantee rights of being in parity with the most senior preference shares of LBHI’s
Affiliates to support the statement. <<
Here is what the prospectus says;
Solution for what? There is nothing left. Lehman is gone and only the court approved administrators are left to sell off everything that remains. According to the plan, if anything remains it is to be donated to charity.
What about LBIE? Well, the CTs have no connection to Lehman Brothers Europe operations and administration (Europe's term for BK). That has been made clear by the courts. The CTs can only look to LBHI for recovery.
And right there at the link provided it says;
What someone would say when they can't defend their position.
What someone would say when they can't defend their position.
>>Some people here bought it in less than ten cents each. ( joe is jealous) <<
lol! My lowest buy was 1 cent. I had a GTC order for a penny and to my surprise it got hit for 200,000 shares ($2,000). As I recall I sold for 19 cents.
Those were the good times. This trade is dead now. Get out with what you can.
>>THE ONLY WAY LEHMAN CAN AVOID PAYING INTEREST IS TO FILE A CHAPTER SEVEN BANKRUPTCY FOR A COMPLETE DISSOLUTION OF THE COMPANY.
<<
That is not correct. The Lehman bankruptcy plan is a chapter 11 liquidation plan. The difference only being from a chapter 7 is that instead of immediate liquidation that chapter 7 requires, in chapter 11 liquidation they can take their time to liquidate to maximize assets being liquidated value for the benefit of creditors.
As to NOLs, filings clearly state that ALL NOLs will be utilized for cancellation of debt. And this makes perfect sense. The IRS will not allow Lehman creditors write off $120 Billion of Lehman debt (benefit to Lehman) and let them keep $50 Bil+ in Net Operating Loss credits.
What you fail to recognize is that Lehman is in business in name only. All assets have been turned over to administrators to liquidate the whole company for a complete dissolution under a chapter 11.
Look it up. "Chapter 11 liquidation"
SA, I could buy as many shares as I want without any of you selling. If I truly believed there will be a recovery I could be buying at the ask all day long. I mean if you all expect this huge outcome what would be the difference if one paid 15, 25, 30 cents?
Fraud; wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain.
If the administrator liquidated something for $1 million dollars it only has one option and that is to pay it to the senior debt holders with an UNSUBORDINATED guarantee. You want them to pay the Cts holders instead that are junior debtholders with a subordinated gaurantee. How would that be fair to the senior unsubs? And how do the administrators financial gain by paying the seniors first? Fraud is just not paying you. To charge fraud you need to show that they did not pay you what you believe you are rightfully owed with intent to financially gain themselves. Intent to defraud has to be shown.
Wu and company I do admire for their determination. I do think it is misdirected though. They are in complete denial that they hold subordinated claims. They has been pointed out to the them by the judge. You can't expect the judge to take funds from the seniors holders to give to the junior holders. That is in essence what you want. You have no documentation that shows that you shall be paid ahead of the senior debtholders. Quite the contrary. The prospectus for the CTs clearly states that the senior debtors must be paid in full before the Cts receive a penny.
You know SA, there are cynical and evil people on these boards. Those that will personally attack you simply for the sin of disagreeing with them. I think I am quite clear and can back up every thing I post. After Fannie and Freddie went into conservatorship I built a message board for FnF shareholders at my own expense. I felt that we as FnF shareholders should organize and hold our own shareholders meetings. Just think of the financial press that would have received to see shareholders come from all over the country to meet and share and report how unjust the taking is. I bet CNBC would have been all over it. Perhaps main street media as well as the reported the unfair taking from mom and pop shareholders. I got attacked because some bullies try to claim was was trying to make money off of it with no proof that I would. I also set up a facebook page (www.facebook.com/fanandfred/) The only way i would make money is the same for other shareholders and that would be if we were released from cship. I even got attacked when I posted my trades when I sold to take a profit on just some of my shares.
I was out of FnF for a couple years. I may have had a couple hundred shares but nothing like before in the thousands. I did get back in with a low 5 figure holding on the recent sell-off. FNMAS at 1.85 average. And FNMAN at $2.70. Normally I would buy the common but the prices of the $50 preferreds (FNMAN) were very competitive with the common.
I think the government will eventually have to turn FnF back over to the shareholders. I regret the day that hedge funds got in because now the public thing hedge funds own the whole thing and the public doesn't have sympathy for them. That why we have to have unofficial shareholder meetings and act like true shareholders.
As the the Cts, I am not your enemy. You, yourselves are your own worst enemy with your denial of the facts and denying common sense.
If you don't know what all these things are you probably shouldn't own the CTs.
"Why should I post in response to people I don't understand?"
yes
>>It's called the risk/reward ratio. <<
lol! The risk is you can lose all of your investment. The reward is you can lose all your investment.
You some common sense, man! Back in 2011 the subordinated debt was rated subordinated class 10b. The disclosure statement said the estimated recovery was ZERO. Looking at the financials that was very clear. 10B claims represented billions of dollars. Not one lawsuit was filed by those holding these 10B claims. But you want to base your risk/reward on Wu and Waske thinking there was a mistake here now 10 years later. If there was truly any chance of recovery those holding millions in dollars of shares would have filed suit years ago before the statute of limitations ran out.
I can't believe there are buyers her at 8 cents. Sell to them. Don't be a bagholder.
Words matter. I replied to someone that implied that there is an attorney involved. It is my opinion that there is not from what I have seen posted.
Yes, they have filed motions but their argument has been asked and answered several times now.
There has been NO misappropriation and fraud. Don't you know what "subordinate" means?
You have asked this before, and I have replied before.
I have contacted the SEC on this matter several years ago.
The reason they continue to trade is because they represent a claim against the estate. The underlying debenture bond for the Cts with Lehman has been cancelled and replaced with a claim against the estate. When that happened they changed cusip numbers for the CTs. If you notice in docket filings they don't address transfers of debt, but transfer of claims. The exit plan called for the claims to remain transferable until the liquidation is complete. If you were to sell your shares technically you would not be selling the CTs but the claim against the estate they represent. As the judge noted in court, Lehman no longer operates.
Of course after the OTC quits making the shares available to trade, you will only be able to transfer your shares in a private transaction.
>>I hope our (wu's} attorney <<
From what I have seen (actually from a lack of what I have seen) Wu doesn't have an attorney. It appears that he is collecting names to trying entice an attorney to take the case. If there was an attorney he would be advertising for clients with large holdings like they do with other potential classactions. They would be looking for those with losses/damages exceeding $100,000 like most CA suits do. If you bought anytime after August 31st,2011 when the public disclosure statement came out, you were legally aware that the CTs were placed in class 10B and that document states that your estimated recovery was ZERO. Buying after you have no right to claim damages.
Run this by your attorney and you will find that what I say is true. If you signed on to this lawsuit and you think Wu does have an attorney then you should have that attorney's name/contact and you can seek an answer from him.
If you don't lose money occasionally you are not trading. The key thing is that I admitted I lost on that trade.
Anyway, TWGP has nothing to do with the CTs. If you disagree with something I said about the CTs then point out with what you disagree with. This BK has been going on for 10 years. The stocks has gone no where for the last five at least. Now someone wants holders to join a class action suit that has no standing to sue what so ever. If one should be weary of anyone it is those that have pumped this stock and have been wrong about seeing a recovery since 2012.
Get out with at least something before it goes dark in and untradable in September.
>>3) In the eye of the storm, LBHI created and issued new guarantees that improved the ranking of specific debt. <<
That is false and there is no documentation to support.
>>How bizzare and corrupt this is !<<
Nothing corrupt. Everything in the process is according to the book.
Sad thing about the shareholders here is that you don't see what you did wrong, nor know exactly what you own. The CTs are clearly subordinate to all other debt as clearly written in the prospectus. Instead of facing reality that you screwed up buying these shares, you want to claim being a victim to a corrupt system instead of believing the facts and learning from them.