Washington Mutual Mortgage Reinsurance, Inc. - stock holders won in this major bankruptcy case.
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.
There is simply nothing that will satisfy those in denial.
It's the red herring or false conflict you know I kill state emphatically everything that we already know about what has happened that you know maybe construed as a possible elimination or returns. Not how he doesn't dress the actual possibility.
Duh...red herring.
I just looked through this and it doesn't make any sense.
He must admit he is rude before anyone will care about his point of view again. Imo.
One side simply digging for news and positive developments, the other harassing posters.
Has JPMorgan Chase paid the balance on the purchase of Washington Mutual Bank?
This report says more about who gets into the banking business and their character and ability to manage well other people's money.
Why do you think anybody cares what you think a problem is for you?
Now they're appear to be a lawless organization.
I like that observation: the holding company had 1.88 billion on hand. Did I get that correct?
One of the primary protections the bankruptcy court provides is protection from repeat offenders. Not allowing WMII to salvage their bank network with their own cash seems prudent. Besides the whole thing had been sabotaged to cover indebted JP Morgan Chase.
...
Yeah we're just meandering through the fog.
If one reads that link about TruPS one finds out that the FDIC is kind of sitting on the fence on this type of security
Apparently, a 5-year window to succeed or fail encourages the FDIC to allow this as part of the insured estate. Seems a little weak.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/trustpreferredsecurity.asp
I'm not sure how relevant this is but it occurred to me while I was reading that the foundational nature of this Purchase and Assumption Agreement has been the primary public facing operating agreement on which the bank reorganization moved forward. HOWEVER, ALL PARTIES TO THIS AGREEMENT HAD, AND STILL HAVE, MAJOR LEGAL BEEFS WITH IT.
From what I gathered I think it was breached very early on because there were questions that JPMorgan Chase wanted to sue about.
There were suits and counter suits having nothing to do with LIBOR at all. We are still arguing about it in the courts and on the boards. I just think that that's an important aspect of the reality because people say, read the paperwork, well we're still arguing about it.
Now that you mention they did say there would be no more updates and they don't have to say anything more whether there's a distribution or not. I recall now.
This document changes it's fact reporting on the Receivership from the first paragraph to the last. Further, it was last updated in late 2020.
I'm entertaining the idea that it will be once again updated with different information about possible distributions given that in the last paragraph they refer to the Libory suits but don't really,at that time, know what the amounts are.
https://www.fdic.gov/resources/resolutions/bank-failures/failed-bank-list/wamu-settlement.html
Indeed
Speculating is, by definition, not knowing. Most of the speculation comes from naysayers who have posted volumes more than the hopeful and those certain.
One way to understand another is to repeat what they are saying and get a sense of how it sits in one's own mind.
When I read his stuff it feels desperate and void of relevant verifiable citations.
Has Lodas ever provided links or public records in original form to support his "nothing" theory?
Has directly and thoroughly debunked anything relevant.
His whole thing is like saying there are no hot dogs in the cafeteria today. And nobody's interested in hot dogs anyway.
Right I get that it's rather ethereal but it's quite possible.
I think I'm confused though because I'm real they'll never connect the dash for us how are 30 banks liable to Washington Mutual Incorporated?
I agree.
I'm not party to a class action of which I'm aware.
Meta dingaling
"Legacy WMI common equity is the FDIC claim holder because the commons owns the parent corporation." This edit makes sense to me.
Further knowing that the FDIC won't close out until distribution I then find a incentive for distribution which I felt was missing.
I can't fathom what his days look like these days. Now, after so many years of prognosticating, it seems like a compulsive behavior at this point. It's not that I don't appreciate his efforts. Clearly there's a determination and the focus but I mean, you know, where's the beef.
I have made the distinction but I don't keep the details with me on a daily basis and I appreciate that you do.
WAMU was a state chartered bank. I researched a bit.
More b******* lodas style
What do they use a fire extinguisher
Bullshit
Ron, Thanks for this because the legal bones of this thing are not debatable. So many people overlook the actual laws and rules of the game and just spend their time speculating and when the law is the law.
Nonsense may appear to rule this board but the outcome of the BK is not determined by this drivle.
This is for the book The book that will be written from the aspect of point of view of us.
We can even put the flip side and you know opposite arguments and create a debate you know and then figure out what the hell is happening and then publish that s***
Ha ha ha.... of course it is all gone for now. Duh.
All those who said that it's gone should apologize correct themselves and change their whole thang.
You the man
Indeed they used Oregon but frankly I don't understand the complete details and I will someday. I want to get a couple of the good guys on this board to agree to write a book after we get paid we have tons of time to do it.
Direct me if I'm wrong but the document that you posted Royal and I hope a lot of people look at it does essentially prove the existence of separate subsidiaries feeding washing mutual Incorporated with income separate from the bankruptcy and behind the corporate veil.
For those who might want to read the whole article, it is a detailed tax law discussion and its conclusions about Oregon taxing Washington Mutual and it's subsidiaries which, further proves there are remote subsidiaries because Oregon spent many dollars trying to get taxes out of them.