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.
The crew that knows everything in every filing and they are also 100% sure that escrow is not getting a dime.
They should give us their comments or analysis of Mordi's conjecture.
You know who they are.
That's about right. They probably got the response from GE that they were not the successful bidder.
That would necessitate a significant event filing since they had put in all the effort and money for their bid package.
GLTY.
Typing on my phone.
They crew claims JPIG got everything for $1.88B, Mordi is saying there are assets set aside in a safe harbor provision or legal isolation.
I'll review the P&AA again to see if there was a statement to legal isolation of assets or safe harbor.
My question to the crew would be what's their take on Mordi conjecture?
I picked up on Mordicai's post but am left with a lots of doubt because BK and the crew said JPIG but everything for $1.88B but at the same time the implications of Mordi's post his there are assets set aside through legal isolation or safe harbor.
Both theories are diametrically opposite.
I'm sorry through the FDIC-R purchase and assumption agreement to see if there was a hint of the legal isolation of assets.
Yea, it's a double edged sword. They either have fraudulent conveyance or BK fraud.
I've reviewed every possible reason for TPS to give up the pursuit but after the deposition of the EC for only about 30 minutes. My conclusion is they saw something good IMO.
Not only did they have a serious claim but there was a preferential transfer of assets within 90 days of the BK filing.
That alone would have won them their case. You cannot move billions of assets and immediately file bankruptcy in less than 24 hours. That's BK fraud.
GLTY.
Hi Mordi, great to have you back.
I disagree on the point that the keyword in the statement is DISTRIBUTED.
The operative word in my assumption is PURCHASED for a stock of value by WMIH.
Thanks for the DD but we disagree on the distribution to purchase by the reorganized estate.
Apples and oranges IMHO.
The release language requires no parsing.
It's clearly stated as NOTWITHSTANDING at the start of the statement concerning the FDIC-R.
There's no confusion and that's the FACT.
No you miss the point and the call on the dime warrants.
Wrong call on reverse splits and dimes.
Biggest asset of WMIH are the NOLS and they will not jeopardize it in any way shape or form.
The discussion on splits would be a distraction and muddy up the waters.
Exactly, all the financial statements are all unaudited and clearly assets might not listed at their fair market value.
The point is the crew likes to pretend they have all the information when they haven't seen the financial analysis by PJ Solomon on the value of the assets transferred at receivership and what's left in the estate.
GLTY.
And the FDIC-R were NOT RELEASED.
How many times do we have to tell you this simple FACT.
That's a great summary of the workings during the early days of these BK.
My thinking is the assets are were hidden and undervalued in WMIIC. If they only claimed that they a Billion in assets and no single debt then my sense is we almost got swindled by the hedge funds trying to get the new company instead of taking their principal plus interest.
Isn't that interesting.
GLTY. Your posts actually get me thinking back to the early days.
Please don't feed the sixteen year old.
The board has literally been bugged down in this mess all day.
No need to respond.
I never stated that the BK was not over either.
You continue with the same old pattern.
Dude, The receivership has not been terminated.
The FDIC-R was not released and that's the fact.
Yea, the work is done why should they keep billing?
They only got the deposits and it's clearly stated in the previous post and 123 posted a clear link but you explained it away.
JPIG immediately on receiving the mortgage portfolio wrote the value down by $30billion. If the mortgage portfolio was not as impaired, they would have to restate their financial statements and pay book value eventually for the assets.
The FDIC-R would have to provide a final financial statement at the termination or completion of the receivership. If the FDIC transferred assets to JPIG for less than the stated book value stated in 3.2 then they have not met their own P&AA terms.
Their's so much to come. I'll wait until the termination of the receivership.
I suggest you stop telling everyone that you know everything that's transpired.
Thanks I don't need you advice about actions to take. The BK case went for more than 4 years and I think PJ Solomon have the numbers to keep the FDIC-R on the straight and narrow.
Just spoke to a CPA and now am 100% confident that WMB was not sold $1.88B.
Here's why.
The mortgage portfolio at the time of receivership could have been for example 95% impaired for transfer purposes to JPIG but if the mortgage portfolio ends up performing or better than expected and ends up that only 30% of the mortgages where actually impaired then that's tantamount to unjust enrichment by JPIG and fraudulent transfer by FDIC-R and the impairments have to be restated by LAW.
A good example is the $30B of apartment mortgage portfolio that they suddenly found, you know that diamond in the rough LOL.
Here's the problem, we had PJ Solomon doing a financial analysis on behalf of the EC but we never got to see the results and financial statements.
Therefore, the EC knows an approximate value of WMB (the examiner was not allowed access to the books by JPIG) and if JPIG claims that the impairments cannot be restated then I think the FDIC-R should request book value or the case would be ripe for the litigation trust to file a motion against the FDIC-R which were NOT RELEASED as per the POR 7.
If your in doubt about restatements of financial statements, let me know because I have several example to provide you.
The FDIC-R screwed up big time.
SCHEDULE 3.2 - Purchase Price of Assets
(a) cash and receivables from depository Book Value
institutions, including cash items in the
process of collection, plus
interest thereon:
(b) securities (exclusive of the capital stock of Market Value
Acquired Subsidiares), plus interest
thereon:
(c) federal funds sold and repurchase Book Value
agreements, if any, including interest
thereon:
(d) Loans: Book Value
(e) Other Real Estate: Book Value
(f) credit card business, if any, including all Book Value
outstanding extensions of credit:
(g) Safe Deposit Boxes and related business,
safekeeping business and trust business, if Book Value
any:
(h) Records and other documents: Book Value
(i) capital stock of any Acquired Subsidiares: Book Value
(j) amounts owed to the Failed Ban by any Book Value
Acquired Subsidiar:
(k) assets securing Deposits of public money, Book Value
to the extent not otherwise purchased
hereunder:
(1) Overdrafts of customers: Book Value
(m) rights, if any, with respect to Qualified Market Value
Financial Contracts.
(n) rights of the Failed Ban to provide Book Value
mortgage servicing for others and to have
mortgage servicing provided to the Failed
Ban by others and related contracts.
(0) Ban Premises: Book Value
(p) Furniture and Equipment: Book Value
(q) Fixtures: Book Value
That's false and totally baseless.
How many times are we going to show you from P&AA that the $1.88B was for the deposits and that at a later time all assets would have to be purchased at book value.
It's becoming very glaring that you have a tendency to twist posts and filings to suite your point of view.
The book value has not been determined yet because the FDIC-R clearly stated this in Article XII. That's fact and non-disputable.
Dude, since you know the FDIC has accounted for everything. Pretty please tell us the book value of WMB?
I mean this is a very simple questions and you should be able to give a number.
Yea.
At a minimum, they should have secured the books.
Here is the problem with this kinds of posts.
You provide very little depth of information but a lot of innuendos and false accusations against a law firm that consistently stated in court that there were $33Billion worth of assets at a minimum.
We have the slides for their closing arguments and they fought for the Rabbi trusts, they fought for the cash and they fought the debtors themselves which is not an easy feat in the Delaware BK system.
When Rosen, referred to the Judge in her first name I was shocked and from that day on I knew something wasn't right. There was no solvency analysis and there was no valuation analysis provided to the public.
Why do you think they sold us out?
In my day job, I do a lot of root cause analysis and the people that sold us out were the WMI BOD. They should have not only contested the receivership but immediately moved to have the books intact for a thorough forensic and financial analysis but you want to call Susman names because it would give you a warm cozy feeling.
You can't blame the guys in the backseat for how the drivers (debtors) drove the car.
That's what we've been talking about but the crew would want you to believe this case is routine and normal SOP.
The FDIC-R has yet to terminate the receivership in almost 7 years.
Well am sure the crew have a long post to explain it away.
The assets are massive compared to the liabilities but in the hurry to quickly get WMB, they also took WMI assets.
I'm not shocked that the crew has refused to answer the simple question.
Am starting to think that there's an attempt to muddy the waters and post verbose and long-winded comments to sound smart and actually not say anything important.
GLTY. Until the FDIC-R speaks, am holding my ground to the end.
Common dude, that's an intellectually lazy answer to a very pertinent question.
If you don't care about the ownership of the preferred shares then you shouldn't call people using terms like unicorns and pie in the sky theorists.
Just state that you don't know. It's as simple as that.
If in your infinite wisdom cannot provide the information that means you and the shadowy fella do not have all the information to the BK case.
Don't get me wrong, I don't know everything either but one thing is clear why would JPIG have to file the exhibit 99.1 on behalf of the originators?
If JPIG bought all the assets why are the assets listed Total Assets in ABS by Originator?
The next question would be who is the originator?
Remember these assets are separate from the $150B on JPIG off-balance sheet report of WAMU assets.
There is so much Billions floating around for anyone to believe that the BK is over without the final receivership balance sheet from the FDIC.
Dude you need to do your own research and check your facts.
You were asked a simple question, does retail own 70% of the newly issued common shares?
That's as straight as you can get a question.
Stop the obfuscating.
Dude, if reconciliation has been completed how come the FDIC hasn't shown the final receivership balance sheet.
You just made that up and that's totally wrong.
Provide the final receivership statement or your post is totally false.
I already explained this to you. No matter what happened to the reorganized company there was going to be an ownership change. The NOL cannot be cashed out and they would have had to invest millions to use the NOLs.
My question is why leave cash and interest on the table for the pesky tax attributes?
Yea so they almost lost everything to get a few million dollar company.
Give it up. We all know there was something that stunk to high heaven and they got super greedy.
Just doesn't make sense for the creditors to want shares instead of cash plus interest.
Yea buddy and they got it for book value too.
Everything belong to the pig and compay but they haven't made the name change for the last 7 years because they ran out of paper and ink.
Those are disputed assets and until everything is resolved they can't legally take ownership.
They got wmbfsb and changed/merged them like within hours but they forgot about this one.
Why would you want any clarity?
You already believe there's nothing coming to escrow markers. Your request for clarification is moot.
Why would you care to know?
You already know everything and you said escrows are not getting anything.
Take a seat and watch.
I believe BK is totally wrong because you can't separate the assets from the repurchase responsibilities because the issuer had to replace the mortgages that failed to meet the agreed terms that's the guarantee.
The agreement was that WMI would ensure the quality of the pool of mortgages backing the securities were of high quality. The assets quality is continuously monitored.
There were also hold backs whereby the bank had to have some skin the game.
After looking at exhibit 99.1 and researching repurchase agreements, am starting to be very confident that assets are going to be returned because the filing show the demand are 0%.
Since you know answer.
So who owns the underling mortgage assets?
You cannot securitize nothing to something. Who owns the original mortgage pools that were then securitized is the question.
Let's get down to the basics. You cannot separate the mortgages from the repurchase responsibilities. It's impossible.
Lol, i can see you punted and danced around the question that was asked.
I'll not unload the pertinent legal info yet.
If we cannot reach a consensus on what's ownership, held in trust (servicing rights) and repurchase responsibilities are then we are talking past each other. You cannot have repurchase responsibilities without having full or part ownership of the assets.
If you buy a car and you have a guarantee that if the car doesn't perform as required, you can come back to the dealership and get a replacement or a repurchase, who owns the car until it's totally paid off? I mean this is simple.
One more time, you cannot have repurchase responsibilities without owning the underlining assets. I have researched this well enough.
Another question - Who owns the $Billions of assets on exhibit 99.1?
Let me get this straight, so we can nail down what you are inferring.
Are you stating the underlining assets now belong to JPIG while the repurchase responsibilities belong to FDIC-R?
Not need for long explanation. Just Yes or No. I got my response typed out and waiting for you.
Lol if they did so great why then would they risk it all for $100million empty shell and Nols?
Your missing the point as usual. You don't risk your neck trying to test a new guillotine design.
But I'll defer to you since your not just an accomplished analyst but a guru in risk management.
Yea you got that right dude.
They almost lost $3Billion thing just to get a $100million dollar company with nothing but NOLs.
First principle of risk management never risk more than you make in returns.
They basically almost committed a cardinal sin.
There was more to that deal than just the new company shares.