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.
simon interested in some ggp malls
http://globestcounterculture.wordpress.com/2009/05/27/simon-interested-in-some-ggp-malls/
AAA cmbs market's improvement & general growth implications.
from todd sullivan's value plays post of 5/21/09
Much of this is due to the recent decision from the FED to make CMBS eligable to TALF backing. Whatever the reason, the CMBS market has made a stunning reversal from the end of 2008
The importance of this on the GGPWQ Chapter 11 cannot be understated. Anything that causes the CMBS market the strengthen does two things. It enables lenders to more easily sell refinanced debt & in essence encourages them the do just that rather than having them position themselves to replace said debt with equity. It also places a floor on CRE prices and by default, properties that General Growth may decide to sell. The more money received from any asset sales increases the odds of equity survivability.
The Fed said in announcing the facility ""The inclusion of CMBS as eligible collateral for TALF loans will help prevent defaults on economically viable commercial properties, increase the capacity of current holders of maturing mortgages to make additional loans, and facilitate the sale of distressed properties,". Emphasis mine..
It is not a big leap to then say that those properties of General Growth that were commercially viable at the time of the filing (the vast majority) would then stand a chance of TALF backed refinancing in Chapter 11. If this is then true, the outlook for the equity then increases. Now, a lot can happen between now ans next year when this stuff start getting taken care of. Properties that are performing today may just as well see performance deteriorate as they may see it improve and their lies the $27B question.
Remember, it was not the operating performance of General Growth that drove int into Chapter 11, but the lending markets. In December of 2008, then Treasury Secretary Paulson was told in a letter from a dozen commercial real estate trade groups "Right now, we believe there is insufficient systemic capacity to refinance expiring, performing commercial real-estate loans,".
My thought has been and still is General Growth's operations will be performing better and there will be plenty left for shareholders.
Usual disclaimer. This is a highly speculative bet that depends greatly on the whims of the US legal system. You must be prepared to lose 100% (or close to it) in this investment before you invest. BUT, if we are right (I think we are)........wow will it be good...
i agree, this is really great news. it will be interesting to see how ggwpq's debt ratings hold up. weren't they dropped from AAA when ggp filed for bk? can only guess that the downgrade was due to the bk and lack of availability of credit to refinance which led to downgrade. if the cash flow can service the debt, then it seems that re-evaluating those ratings might be possible. getting the debt back to AAA will be critical to being able to roll over ggp's debt under tarp. will be interesting to see how this plays out.
dirt lawyer blog posts re: ggwpq and spe's
Tuesday May 12, 2009
While getting ready for work this morning, I found two excellent posts here and here at Zero Hedge. As you can see, these posts are from last month, but they still bear reading.
Why? It states what may be reality tomorrow, depending on the judge: that General Growth may be able to consolidate its SPE malls into the GGP bankruptcy. If that succeeds, chalk that up in part to good lawyering.
They are saying this is a procedural consolidation only, but is that really true? I'm honestly not sure. I readily admit that, while I worked on a number (say, a dozen or so) of these opinions over the years, I do not live, breathe and eat non-consolidation. No thanks. Here are some D&B thoughts, by the way.
Are there remedies? There could be insurance out there, I suppose. And law firms have, in every case, rendered legal opinions about non-consolidation. These, however, are reasoned legal opinions and while it may not be feasible to go after a law firm for its opinion, don't be shocked if someone tries to go after a possible deep pocket.
You may recall that I really didn't want to see GGP file, because of the human element and because of the very messy roll of the dice that BK can be. The problem is that this could bode a really tough future for lending, because of the impairment of the lender's ability to go after a single property. And here it just may be coming sday, May 12, 2009
More on GGP, independent directors and substantive consolidation
true....
Posted by David Stejkowski at 8:13 AM 0 comments Links to this post
THE FOLLOWING IS FROM DAVID'S MAY 11 BLOG POST
Now that I have a few minutes, I want to comment on a great story in Friday's Journal about the General Growth Properties bankruptcy.
When GGP filed its Chapter 11, it also dragged 166 individual malls with it. How so? Each mall is owned by a special purpose entity, demanded by its lenders to try to prevent what actually happened. And this could have major ramifications throughout the real estate world. Why? Because (a) lenders thought the structure of the deals would prevent this from happening; (b) GGP wants to take the cash flow from the deals into general operating funds for the company rather than into paying these otherwise-performing loans -- in short, use the good malls to prop up the dogs; and (c) get some leverage in the bankruptcy.
For those of you saying, "Huh?" here's an explanation:
In past years, to get the malls' mortgages, General Growth had set up 166 "special purpose entities" whose sole purpose was to borrow money. SPEs are attractive to lenders because, according to legal experts, they are "bankruptcy remote," meaning their cash flows are dedicated to paying debt service. The lenders issued securities backed by the SPEs. Holders of securities expect the structure would ensure they'd be paid even if the parent company went bust.
If you have done any of these deals, you know that each entity has independent managers or independent directors or names of similar ilk. They are typically of the springing type, meaning that they come in to vote only in an event such as bankruptcy. And interestingly, the managers were replaced on many of the entities just prior to the filing. What does that mean? You decide for yourself, as there are many interpretations. And, depending on the language in the loan documents, "independent" isn't necessarily what one may think.
Finally, these deals were all backed by legal opinions as to banruptcy remoteness. Will lawyers be impacted? Maybe not. But you never know.
In any event, this is definitely something to monitor as it could have a major impact on the market. And if CMBS ever comes back in a meaningful way, expect even tighter bankruptcy remoteness covenants to try to protect lenders as much as possible.
Posted by David Stejkowski at 7:39 AM 2 comments Links to this post
Labels: CMBS, lenders, retail
maybe a good sign for equity holders
there were four sec filings dated the 14th of may in which four separate directors for general growth each received 10,000 shares each for restricted stock options which vested 1/3 on the date of issue and 1/3 for each of the next two years on the anniversary of the original issue.
one would be hard pressed to believe that directors would take options for stock that might be worthless when they might have just voted themselves cash compensation instead.
general growth's cash forecast
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/895648/000095015209005113/c51279exv99w1.htm
key ruling for ggwpq's cmbs on wednesday
from todd sullivan's valueplays
Monday, May 11, 2009
Key Ruling for General Growth Properties CMBS Wednesday
If the ruling goes as indicated by the judge, his is bad for bondholders, very good for General Growth and then good for shareholders as anything that strengthens the holding company is by default good for them.
Also, tomorrow a ruling is expected on the DIP financing General Growth will present to the judge. We may find out today whom they have selected.
From the WSJ
(Dow Jones)--A final ruling is expected Wednesday on whether General Growth Properties Inc. (GGP) would be allowed to tap into the cash flow from its properties, and overturn what was believed to be a basic tenet of commercial mortgage securities.
At a hearing last Friday, the bankruptcy judge postponed the decision, but indicated he was likely to side with the company.
He pointed out investors in commercial bonds would continue to receive their interest payments, and General Growth is only looking to sweep the excess cash into a centralized account that would pay for its general expenses.
Investors and lenders had believed pools of mortgage collateral that back commercial bonds would be cocooned in these special-purpose entities, and steady cash flow to investors would be protected even when the parent company files for bankruptcy.
So when General Growth dragged 166 of its properties into the bankruptcy filing and sought to consolidate the income from these properties, more than a dozen investors and industry groups rallied to protest strongly against such a move.
The Commercial Mortgage Securities Association and the Mortgage Bankers Association filed a brief stating such a move would hurt the $1 trillion commercial mortgage market.
However, the bankruptcy judge called such statements "hyperbole."
"I am not surprised," said Richard Zeigler, counsel in Mayer Brown's bankruptcy and restructuring group.
"Bankruptcy remote doesn't mean bankruptcy proof, and that's what investors are finding out," he said. Zeigler isn't representing any of the interested parties in the bankruptcy.
for those of us on the outside of this process, there are probably more opinions than facts at this point. the real answer will come when ggp files its plan of reorganization which is what must be approved by the bk judge in order for ggp to emerge from bk. late this year would be an optimistic schedule (remember that pershing's dip plan was to last for a period of 18 months and the new one is for 24 months). in each of these cases, i would have to think that those timeframes provided for worst case scenarios. in the meantime, news will come out of the bk proceedings as motions are heard and rules are entered. that action will provide some factual information and many opinions about what the implication of those rulings are. if you are having angst about the few shares you are holding then you should probably get out and be able to sleep at night. my view is that this is a potential grand slam and i'm tending to think i will be holding for the long term which means through all of the dips and rises as this bk process works itself out. like most things in life, what you do is your call based on your particular situation.
saw another article which said that ggp pulled the plug on the pershing dip proposal in front of the bk judge which was scheduled for tomorrow. so, the judge will only get to hear the new proposal. there won't be a bidding war in front of the bk judge.
ggwpq posts first quarter results:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/General-Growth-Properties-Inc-bw-15159602.html?.v=1
while i think the bidding competition is good, neither one has been approved by the bk court yet. pershing's dip deal was due to be heard by the bk court on the 8th unless ggp has pulled the matter. what's the interest rate on the proposed new deal? for how long does it last? since its conversion rate was to 6% of new common vs 4.9% of new common for pershing, can't see how that is better for equity holders. the ability to convert pershing's loan to equity was up to ggp, not pershing, as i remember. from what has been said/printed about these two financing deals, it still seems to me that pre-petition stock holders will/may have some type of preference. anyone who held stock before the bk and then sold it after bk, only to trade into it again, i still think those traders are or may be disadvantaged. i tend to think that if warrants are issued to stockholders for purchase of new issues after ggp comes out of bk, that those warrants will only be issued to holders of pre-petition stock. however, all of this begs thew question of what about all of the entities which were not placed into bk. those have value and the bk court can not attach those assets since they are not part of the bk so it seems that any shareholder will have an interest in those assets. wonder if there will be two classes of stock. one related to anything not placed in bk, and the other associated with those entities which were placed into bk. seems this gets more interesting as time passes.
barron's ggp comments:
The ultimate speculation is General Growth Properties (GGWPQ), a mall owner that filed for bankruptcy recently after failing to restructure part of its $27 billion of debt. General Growth shares, which are trading around 50 cents, amount to a super-leveraged bet on the health of the commercial-property market and the economy. General Growth has attracted aggressive hedge-fund manager Bill Ackman, who controls about 25% of the company.
"Given GGP's extremely high leverage, minor changes in cap rates have an enormous impact on net asset value per share," Green Street wrote recently. At its current cap rate around 9%, General Growth Properties' equity has no value, but if cap rates fall to 7.5% in an improving economy, the stock could be worth $16 a share, Green Street estimates. In such a scenario, "Pershing Square's equity investment would be a 'grand slam'. However, a lot has to go right -- in court and in the retail market -- for that to happen."
ackman, stiglitz, ross-sorkin on charlie rose
http://greenlightadvisor.com/glablog/2009/04/28/bill-ackman-joseph-stiglitz-on-charlie-rose/
mortgage group braces for ggp fallout:
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idINN2834016020090428?rpc=44
potential cram down plan by ggp
latest from todd sullivan. good read
http://www.valueplays.blogspot.com/2009/04/general-growth-properties-cram-down.html
a little color re: add'l properties added to bk
General Growth Properties adds to Chapter 11 filing: Baltimore's Mondawmin Mall, seven Columbia buildings now listed
Sat. April 25, 2009; Posted: 08:39 AM
Apr 25, 2009 (The Baltimore Sun - McClatchy-Tribune Information Services via COMTEX) -- GGWPQ | Quote | Chart | News | PowerRating -- General Growth Properties, the giant shopping mall and development firm that filed for bankruptcy protection last week, has added Baltimore's Mondawmin Mall and seven buildings in Columbia to the 158 centers listed in the Chapter 11 filing.
According to the Chicago-based company's Web site, the buildings that were added include one housing Clyde's Restaurant and the Columbia Association offices on the lakefront; the adjacent former Columbia Exhibit Center; a building occupied by a convenience store in Running Brook; and four older office buildings along Little Patuxent Parkway, including one occupied by That's Amore restaurant.
Company spokesman Jim Graham said the additions came separately because the filings were so complicated that not all the work was completed initially. The inclusion of the buildings should not disrupt their use, he said.
"We expect it to be business as usual at these properties," he said.
The initial filing included three high-rise office buildings near Broken Land Parkway, but it did not include The Mall in Columbia or other GGP-owned property slated to be part of a major redevelopment of Town Center with which the company is moving forward. Several of the older buildings added this week were to be part of the project, however.
In a statement issued via e-mail, Gregory Hamm, a GGP vice president and the general manager of Columbia, sought to reassure residents that the Chapter 11 filing does not mean liquidation. He also said it should not interfere with the county government's review of the redevelopment.
"The filing will not cause delay or alter GGP's pursuit of the public approvals relative to downtown Columbia. ... We believe that Columbia's underlying real estate fundamentals remain strong and that the plan can be realized once market conditions improve," Hamm said in the statement.
GGP owns more than 200 shopping centers in 44 states, as well as office buildings and several "master plan" communities such as Columbia. Locally, the firm also owns Harborplace, the Owings Mills and White Marsh malls and Towson Town Center.
Hamm said the filing was necessary to restructure the firm's debt. A GGP spokesman said no additions to the bankruptcy filings are expected.
this goes back to a prior post in which it was discussed that pre-petition holders might be the ones who receive the options. if this is the case, anyone trading post bk is sol. if pre-bk holders traded in and out of their shares after the filing, then they may have given up the beneift (if any) of being a pre-petition holder. lets just say for sake of argument there were 50 to 100 million shares outstanding before the bk filing which did not belong to ackman (either directly or through swaps), the bucksbaums, and the other half dozen or so other major holders. if the controlling shareholders have a plan to take the company private after the plan of reorganization and not screw the equity holders (read ackman, bucksbaums, and those similary situated, i.e. ones holding shares prior to bk), then they would reduce the number of options to be awarded by limiting those options to pre-petition shareholders. therefore, anyone selling prepetition shares would be sol and anyone holding shares purchased after bk would end up after the plan with zero interest. if half of those holding shares prior to bk subsequently sold those shares after bk, that would be a way to reduce the size of the pie. just a thought but it's not completely in left field.
the more entities which are not placed in bankruptcy i read as good for existing shareholders. it would be good to know exactly why the add'l 11 entities were placed into the filing. if it was because vendors or creditors would not work with them then that might be good. if these properties had debt which did not mature for the next three years but the debtholders convinced ggp it would/could extend maturities if it were done through bk, then that would be good. if some underlying reason behind not placing these entities into bk originally was flawed, then that would be a potential concern. as long as they keep the management company and the majority of the remaining entities not previously placed under reorganization out of bk, then i think things are still ok. maybe this is just part of the roller coaster we find ourselves to be riding for the next 9-12 months.
mesterharm's filed declaration in bk proceeding
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/9966000/9966000090416000000000092.pdf
metz' filed declaration in bk proceeding:
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/9966000/9966000090416000000000089.pdf
add's subsidiaries file for protection
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/General-Growth-Properties-Inc-bw-15006063.html?.v=1
today's sec filing RE: delisting from nyse
STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 8-K
CURRENT REPORT
Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Date of Report (Date of Earliest Event Reported): April 16, 2009
General Growth Properties, Inc.
__________________________________________
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware 1-11656 42-1283895
_____________________
(State or other jurisdiction _____________
(Commission ______________
(I.R.S. Employer
of incorporation) File Number) Identification No.)
110 N. Wacker Drive, Chicago, Illinois 60606
_________________________________
(Address of principal executive offices) ___________
(Zip Code)
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: 312.960.5000
Not Applicable
______________________________________________
Former name or former address, if changed since last report
Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:
[ ] Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)
[ ] Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)
[ ] Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))
[ ] Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Top of the Form
Item 3.01 Notice of Delisting or Failure to Satisfy a Continued Listing Rule or Standard; Transfer of Listing.
On April 16, 2009, General Growth Properties, Inc. (the "Company") received a notice of delisting (the "Delisting Letter") from the New York Stock Exchange (the "Exchange") under Rule 802.01 of the NYSE Continued Listing Criteria that the Company’s common stock has been suspended from trading on the Exchange and will be delisted from the Exchange as a result of the Company’s April 16, 2009 filing of a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York. On April 16, 2009, the Company’s common stock began trading on the pink sheets under the symbol GGWPQ.
The last day that the Company's common stock traded on the Exchange was April 15, 2009.
The Company does not intend to take any further action to appeal the Exchange's decision, and therefore it is expected that the common stock will be delisted after the completion of the Exchange's application to the Securities and Exchange Commission.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Top of the Form
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.
General Growth Properties, Inc.
April 22, 2009 By: Thomas H. Nolan, Jr.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Thomas H. Nolan, Jr.
Title: President and Chief Operating Officer
for what it's worth, of the 245 million you say are out, remember that the bucksbaums have over 70 million of that amount. together, ackman and the bucksbaums own/control about 50% of the stock. i noticed that after the manipulators screwed around buying/selling 2,000 to 5,000 share amounts and got the stock down to the low 50's there was an after hours trade which picked up 750,000 in one purchase. think this was yesterday after hours that this occurred. i'm betting that pumpers and dumpers are gradually being taken out by large share purchases such as the one referenced above. was researching this weekend and saw a stat that there were only 3,034 stockholders in general growth as of mid-march. have to believe that number is being significantly reduced, especially with the recent large block purchases. granted, that's nothing more than an opinion, but until proven wrong, i'm sticking with it. anybody heard if a pass in needed in order to get into the annual meeting? i emailed investor relations with that question last friday but have not gotten a response yet.
were you posting this as "new news" or have you just not been keeping up?
corporate bankruptcy resource -great read
a lot of answers in this link for many of the questions raised on this board.
http://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/bankrupt.htm
do you have a site which shows these big blocks trading? the only think i have is the pink sheet site and it is only showing trades in the range of 2500 shares or so. however, it does indicate over 10 mil shares traded so far today.
http://www.pinksheets.com/pink/quote/quote.jsp?symbol=GGWPQ&gclid=CNfJ_6mx_5kCFQJN5QodGyKmFQ#getQuote
annual mtg is scheduled for the 13th. haven't seen any announcements that is has been cancelled or rescheduled. since not all of ggp's properties, any of its joint ventures, nor its management company were part of the bankruptcy, it seems that the meeting should still take place. furthermore, since the bankruptcy judge is going to hear the ggp/pershing square dip financing proposal on may 8 (and presumably rule on it that same day) if ackman is going to seek and hopefully obtain a board seat, that would all be ripe for nomination and vote on the 13th. imagine there will be a lot of public news if the meeting is not held.
hummerttt, just wondering
have you ever done any reasearch on your own or do you just lift that of others?
did a little research on my own and it appears that IF there is a rights offering that ggp shares will have rights attached to them and be worth somewhat more than ggwpq shares which will not have rights attached to them. if the equity survives in this bankruptcy both ggp shares as well as ggwpq shares will survive but ggp shares will be worth somewhat more in the event a rights offering is announced.
rights offering
Definition
Offering of common stock to investors who currently hold shares which entitle them to buy subsequent issues at a discount from the offering price.
Rights Issue
An offer made by a quoted company to its shareholders to enable them to buy new shares in the company at a discount to the market price. Existing shareholders are usually offered shares in proportion to their existing holding. For example in a one for five rights issue, a shareholder would be invited to buy one new share for every five shares already owned. The new shares are offered at a discount to the current market price and because of that the rights have a value in themselves and can be sold separately.
Cum Rights
A situation in which the shares held by holders of record are qualified for a rights offering declared by a company.
Investopedia Commentary
Shares that are trading cum-rights can be sold to another individual with the rights attached. This is the opposite of ex-rights, which do not allow the transfer of rights from an old shareholder to a new shareholder during the two business days prior to the record date.
The price of a stock with cum rights is normally higher than that of a stock with ex-rights.
post-bankruptcy value of shares:
any help in interpreting the schedule 3.1 language below would be appreciated.
the following definition of "qualified rights offering" was cut and pasted from schedule 3.1 of ackman's debtor in possession agreement which can be found on the edgar data base. i am not a lawyer and would love to hear from anyone on this blog who is, what the impact of the following provision means. it seems to me that if there is a new stock issued when ggp comes out of bankruptcy, only those holders of ggp stock who held stock prior to ggp's bankruptcy filing (i.e. "prepetition stakeholders") will be permitted to purchase or receive any of the rights to new stock. that may mean that any shares acquired after ggp filed for bankruptcy (i.e. any shares acquired under the symbol ggwpq, may either have have no value after ggp comes out of bankruptcy or will not be entitled to receive any rights offerings). if that is in fact the case, ggwpq shares may only have value for those able to trade in and out of the stock during the bankruptcy period or they may be significantly diluted as a result of not being able to obtain additional rights shares. i don't know if that is a correct interpretation of the following definition but it sure would be a critical piece of information to find out for those who are only getting into the stock after the bankruptcy petition was filed. fyi, POR means plan of reorganization which will be the plan filed by ggp when it is ready to emerge from bankruptcy.
FOLLOWING IS THE CUT AND PASTE FROM SCHEDULE 3.1
“Qualified Rights Offering” means a rights offering to prepetition stakeholders of the General Partner and/or its Affiliates in connection with the POR that meets the following qualifications: (i) subscribed to be sold to at least 50 ultimate purchasers; (ii) the offered shares shall be listed on the New York Stock Exchange or The NASDAQ Stock Market within five Business Days of completion of the rights offering; (iii) the issue size is at least three times the Conversion Amount; (iv) the rights offering is conducted by a nationally known financial advisor and (v) if and to the extent applicable, the offered shares are priced with reference to the trading market for the Common Stock prior to the commencement of the rights offering.
ackman - ggp is fundamentally healthy
dip financing may be converted to equity
http://uk.reuters.com/article/usTopNews/idUKTRE53F7EH20090416?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0
i may have missed the vote, but when was ackman elected to the board of directors? board members are elected by shareholder vote and to the best of my knowledge the most recent proxy statement indicates the directors will be elected when the company has its annual meeting on may 13 (or thereabouts). ackman was not even proposed as someone running. unless he is placed on the ballot as an at large candidate to be voted on may 13, i just don't understand how he go elected without shareholders participating in his election. where are you getting your information?
regardless of how the bankruptcy works out, ggp did not place into bankruptcy around 50 malls, any of their joint ventures, a number of office buildings, somed mixed use developments, and their management company. all of these entities are part and parcel of ggp and as such the equity holders have an ongoing interest in these entities, even if everything placed into bankruptcy is wiped out. the properties placed into bankruptcy had recourse debt against those specific properties. anything not pledged as collateral can not be liquidated in the bk proceedings. furthermore, the 2.6 billion of debt to commerzbank was non recourse so if ggp wanted to be total jerks about that, they could seek to have that debt completely wiped off the books. i don't think they will do that, but they certainly could attempt to do it and just walk away from that debt.
if the bankruptcy works out favorably, ackman will be able to turn his share position into a retun which far exceeds a 15% annual return. additionally, the article seems to not take into consideration the fact that ackman has responsibility for in excess of 42 million shares as a result of his direct purchases as well as the swaps into which he entered for which he gets all the upside while being exposed to all of the downside. furthermore, if the bankruptcy works out favorably, one would have to believe that ggp will return to a dividend paying reit (since that is the nature of a reit). in the homerun situation (if the bankruptcy works out favorably) and ggp continues paying a dividend at the level at which is was paying 9 months ago ($2.00/share), ackman would make better than 100%/year on his investment in those 42 million shares. that seems far superior to collecting interest on a loan which will be repaid (if the bankruptcy works out favorably).
talf help may be on the way
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123991092969726305.html
why don't you share your "reading" with the rest of us. following link to bloomberg article quoting ackman does not support your position.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=az8WlkQ_Qgrs&refer=home
thanks for that site. although i posted that trading had resumed just prior to closing, i could not get the nasdaq site to confirm the trading symbol nor could i get big charts to recognize it at first. they do now. man, there are some hugh purchases being made. those trades at over 2 mil shares are definitely not chump change. think you can see from a prior post about what properties were not included in the bankruptcy (including the management company, whose earnings are consolidated with ggp's overall financial picture), one can see that the equity holders will survive at some rate. i certainly hope that ggp can find a way to keep the hawaii properties coming out of bk. those are significant current cash flow cows as well as enormous future cash cows. the 60 acre ward centers holding in downtown honolulu would be a significant property to be able to salvage.
big charts showing ggwpq trading. sorry no streaming detail.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/895648/000095015209001871/c48762e10vk.htm#126
trading resumed: ggwpq
bid/ask running around .68
let the party begin!
ggp site for bk info
for those of you who were counting on the bk and placing your bets with ackman, you can follow what's going on at the following site: www.ggp.com
this site lists all entities filing, which ones didn't file, all court procedures, and generally all things pertaining to the bk. since ackman's pershing square agreed to provide debtor in possession financing for $365 million (or thereabouts), i would guess that will place him on the creditor committee during the bankruptcy proceedings. also, as one of the major stockholders, i would also imagine he might be on other committees as well. he WILL be involved so at this point, if you are long and this is what your were counting on to happen, it has happened.
saw a post that trading has been halted. don't know if that's true or not. the nasdaq premarket site shows a number of trades this morning with the last one at 55 cents at 7:07. none posted since then. if in fact it has been halted and once trading has resumed, it will probably show up as ggpq.pk or something like that. sure that you will be channelled quickly to the new ticker. whatever happens, this is going to be a roller coaster ride.