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.
i stand corrected
nice article. seems like this guy should appear in walraith's court. i like the cut of his jig.
"'Poor earnings and asset quality problems created additional liquidity concerns because continued deterioration in these areas could have significantly reduced the level of available funding sources. Nonetheless, WaMu was well capitalized when it was placed into receivership,' Bowman said." continued deterioration could have reduced the available funding, that's all it takes, huh. why not let wmi know through an official letter that if conditions continue to deteriorate the ots could be forced to act?
"'The OTS did not regulate the largest bank that failed. The OTS regulated the largest bank that was allowed to fail,' Bowman, acting director of the agency, said in testimony prepared for a Senate subcommittee on investigations."
boy, if that's not a smoking gun, ..." uh, mr. bowman, next question, who exactly made the determination which bank or banks were "allowed" to fail. and if you believed the bank to be well capitalized, under what conditions did the bank "fail"?"
why weren't those questions asked?
as if somehow, wmi was the only financial institution involved in risky loans. the practices cited in your articles were systemic to the banking system, not isolated to wmi. in fact wmi's exposure to the sub-prime mortgages was far less than that of hmmm... who else? maybe the bank that "bought" them for fractions of a penny on the dollar?
jpm is one of the major holders of sub-prime mortgages and credit default swaps to the tune of trillions of dollars which if allowed to become exposed would have taken our economy out. the issue here is the illegal seizure of wmi and the "sale" of a company creating such negative goodwill for jpm that they have reported better than 3 billion dollars a quarter over their expected gains since purchasing wmb, and this during a credit crisis and a bad economy.
don't cloud the issues like the government is trying to do with their sham hearings. are we to believe that it has been a year and a half since the collapse of some of the biggest financial institutions in the country and just now, on the cusp of fdic and jpm being run through the blender are they having public hearings on the inefficacy of wmi's lending practices? talk about coincidence!
trying to close the gap from this morning...
it's good to see some of the faith and exuberance that fueled these ihub boards for so long come back to the forefront - it was pretty dark for a few days. that being said, it's not entirely unfounded to be confounded by the "settlement" that jpm/fdic...err wmi are getting.
has jpm actually paid the 1.8 billion for the original transaction? it's almost as if jpm and fdic are receiving punitive damages for the pain of extraordinary gains every quarter since paying pennies on the dollar for one of the giants of the industry. how could wmi force the fdic and ots to seize them and give them to jpm causing untold hours of paperwork and accounting nightmares, i.e. ,"where do we say this 3 billion quarterly profit comes from in the midst of the worst banking crisis in banking history, hmmm..."
all jokes aside, i do feel this is early negotiations and not the end game. before the ec was formed, we were hoping for signs of settlement - a lowball offer is a step in the right direction. it's still true, tpg gets paid, a big gets paid, me and the mrs. get paid!
it seems to me no surprise that shortly after the ec was formed, a settlement was announced. imo, the formation of this committee enabled wmi attorney's to leave equity out of the equation(which was probably imperative to jpm and fdic all along) and just focus on creditors.
this is not to say that equity will be left out in the cold, quite simply, it is no longer the responsibility or concern of the attorneys, it is the responsibility of the ec. now that the offers have started and we know where the baseline is, the equity committee will be able to protect the shareholders as this unfolds further.
on an aside, it was interesting to me that rosen made the pointed effort to inform the judge that the wmb bondholders would have to accept being wiped out or the deal was over. it seemed to me he was saying this is just a first draft, and they'll never go for it, but we're moving forward, no need to rule on sj.
the ec was in court today, they didn't have to object as this was an unofficial presentation of the agreement. rosen presented the details of settlement, but the actual deal does not get approved until at the earliest when they submit the written proposal(they said the 26th at the hearing).
the entire deal is subject to approval by the bondholders of wmb agreeing to zilch, and the ec and judge doing the same. now the judge might go for it because the three parties have come to it, but i doubt the bondholders and the ec are going to be on board, and that's the deal breaker. this is round 1 of an actual negotiation process that we have been waiting for since october of '08. long and strong.
by the by, love the action here today, nuts, nuts, nuts!
the country might not care, the sec might not care, but thjmw does! ruling to be rendered is pinning the fdic and jpm down on a two count. will they wait til friday for the three count, or will they tap out with a global settlement?
it's great to see the culmination of the months of waiting and reading and tolerating nay-sayers - can't wait til casual friday in the home office - boxers, fuzzy slippers, and a ton of cash in the account.
"On behalf of the FDIC and JPMorgan, a WaMu attorney asked the Delaware judge for a one-week delay on Thursday."
we all know "on behalf of the fdic and jpmorgan" means sj for wmi. if that falls to wmi, then the implications for criminal charges sticking to the fdic and jpmorgan become a lock. maybe this weekend, maybe next, the walls are coming down and they're gonna roll over settlement style. cash money, dollar, dollar bills y'all!
yeah, sorry, saw you guys touched on this after i posted, it's always a waiting game until it isn't - then we'll all be dancing in the streets!
i agree with both of you, but this seems the most transparent language that has been used to date. the implication is not that it will be resolved tomorrow, but that the only thing keeping summary judgment from going to wmi is the claim for relief - and i think most of us feel the lawyers for wmi have that pretty well debunked. it is the writing on the wall to the fdic if you ask me. thjmw is saying, "anything else? if not we're going to go ahead here."
just put this on the k and u boards, didn't want to leave anyone out.
taken from the agenda for the omnibus tomorrow:
"The Court indicated at the conclusion of the February 5, 2010 hearing that it would reserve ruling on this matter pending the outcome of the FDIC's motion for relief from the automatic stay. The Debtors respectfully request that the Court render its decision on this matter at its earliest convenience."
it seems like the word here is if the fdic has no claim to relief from the automatic stay, than summary judgment falls to us. there would be no reason to delay the ruling if it was against wmi, and the only real way the outcome of the fdic's relief from automatic stay would affect the summary judgment is if it is in favor of wmi.
i haven't posted in a while or followed the boards too closely lately, so if this was discussed sorry for the repeat info, but i'm excited that the result of summary judgment has been so clearly revealed(unless you actually believe the fdic's claims to relief from automatic stay - ha!)
just posted this on the k board, but thought i'd share the word.
taken from the agenda for the omnibus tomorrow:
"The Court indicated at the conclusion of the February 5, 2010 hearing that it would reserve ruling on this matter pending the outcome of the FDIC's motion for relief from the automatic stay. The Debtors respectfully request that the Court render its decision on this matter at its earliest convenience."
it seems like the word here is if the fdic has no claim to relief from the automatic stay, than summary judgment falls to us. there would be no reason to delay the ruling if it was against wmi, and the only real way the outcome of the fdic's relief from automatic stay would affect the summary judgment is if it is in favor of wmi.
i haven't posted in a while or followed the boards too closely lately, so if this was discussed sorry for the repeat info, but i'm excited that the result of summary judgment has been so clearly revealed(unless you actually believe the fdic's claims to relief from automatic stay - ha!)
taken from the agenda for the omnibus tomorrow:
"The Court indicated at the conclusion of the February 5, 2010 hearing that it would reserve ruling on this matter pending the outcome of the FDIC's motion for relief from the automatic stay. The Debtors respectfully request that the Court render its decision on this matter at its earliest convenience."
it seems like the word here is if the fdic has no claim to relief from the automatic stay, than summary judgment falls to us. there would be no reason to delay the ruling if it was against wmi, and the only real way the outcome of the fdic's relief from automatic stay would affect the summary judgment is if it is in favor of wmi.
i haven't posted in a while or followed the boards too closely lately, so if this was discussed sorry for the repeat info, but i'm excited that the result of summary judgment has been so clearly revealed(unless you actually believe the fdic's claims to relief from automatic stay - ha!)
my wife and i had a finch that for several days would peck at the glass of our bedroom window starting from sunrise and continuing for most of the day. a houseguest told us it was a mating behavior - attacking the other male in the area(the other male being his reflection). i tried scaring him off and he flew around to the other window(where my house guest was sleeping) and attacked the bird he found there. he had no fear of me and returned again and again to the windows. my plan was to get a b.b. gun(not humane - but my altruism was severely impaired by lack of sleep) but my friend said let's cover the windows so we did and he stopped, though i saw him in our yard often and realized he did have a nest close by.
at least the dove seems to be a pacifist, in keeping with its reputation. good omen for the holiday season and you and yours!
what'd i miss?
hard to believe five years gone by - guy was awesome!
it might seem like a long time to watch and wait, but omnibus is all pre-trial action, this could very well go to trial if resolution can't be reached without it.
i'm not one who believes it will go that far, but court time is so slow - their work week takes a couple of months. my faith is in thjmw and wmi.
i think sj is a prod for negotiations and that the 4billion are part of the negotiations. if jpm stalls or reneges on negotiations than thjmw will put sj where it hurts.
if you bought a month ago, or even a week ago, that's harsh, but this one could be a gold mine @.10... hold out for final victory!
if there were public signs that point to settlement, you wouldn't need me squawking about it on the forum, but imo, there won't be much movement until confirmation of the fact, not just speculation.
read the billing docs, though. the negotiations are ongoing, and we have nothing from the courts that says jpm will get away with this. so far, the courts have been setting the tone for wmi victory and letting that fuel negotiations. if it required more stimulation, than the judges would provide them with it, i.e. sj in favor of wmi.
all the signs point to settlement and that means wamuq through the roof! hold or add, but don't get left out in the cold.
hope everyone's holiday was as good as mine!
if you compare money invested to money returned, the upside is far greater for wamuq, i.e. less money would be needed to make a lot more. the bonds are trading ~90% of face. the real point is that big money, or real money has invested in bonds and equities pointing to the belief in success of wmi in the courts.
the objection to the fdic's motion to modify the automatic stay, if upheld is the 4billion dollars. the screws have been tightened down, and what we don't know is what talks are happening behind closed doors. to me, it is a sign of good faith negotiating and that the 4billion is part of the discussion. people complaining about pps are just flippers, because if you're here long, as was stated earlier, than you don't much care if the price fluctuates or languishes, your eyes are on the prize.
knocking the judicial system that you have placed you're faith in to deliver a desired result just doesn't make sense. maybe, a step back and a breath of fresh air could be good. thanks are in order that for the great families we share, the community we have here, to be alive and able whether rich or poor, to be presented with an unbelievable opportunity for financial gain, these things are unique and wonderful. the journey is always more valuable than the destination, and a long arduous journey is what will make the result sweet and savory.
wamu execs, jamie dimon, sheila bair, several attorneys and thjmw will be meeting at my house at 6pm this evening to discuss among other things how much money will be awarded to me for having been a poster on ihub for the last 30 days or so. they will cite my dd and sterling character as reasons for the massive windfall. all other shareholders of wamuq will be handsomely rewarded for their patience and faith.
that's 6pm, nov. 20th.
by the way, i told a german about this recently, he said he could keep a secret. hmnph!
one trading week before the word is out - buy up at .12 while you still can! wamovin on up!
"there is no doubt in my mind that the DC court will be re-valuing the sale"
and that doesn't make you think that wamuq at .12 isn't worth even a speculative investment? or have you added to your 1 share since coming to this certainty?
the point of many, which you seem to bristle at, is that if nothing else(although there is plenty else) the potential of this stock outweighs the risk of cancellation or loss in court. you admit that the dc court is concerned about the way the fdic conducted this sale to the point you are convinced they will re-value, yet you don't have any faith that judgement and/or settlement could be in favor of wmi, and maybe, just maybe, the commons will take a large jump in price.
there is big money from big fish invested in the commons, so why not you?
will that be posted on ghost of wamu? tia.
objection was already filed on the 11th,
http://www.ghostofwamu.com/CaseHeader/08-12229Header20091101.htm
docket# 1872, wherein the wmi team crushed the fdic's claims to the 4 billion deposits, imo.
volume on this board is comensurate to the volume trading today, seems a little early for lunch. i would think with the import of the decision whether to sustain or overrule the objection to the fdic's motion that people would be more into this stock. with the dd that's been done, it seems to me the decision on sj is the same as the decision here on this objection.
objection sustained=sj awarded=4billion back to the coffers of wmi=1 huge step closer to settlement!
if that objection is upheld(imo, it will be!), the price of all the wamu family is going up, and .12 will seem like a long lost lover, gone forever save in our memories. don't lose the dollars chasing the cents.
you've been waiting on that .119 for awhile - i like you're confidence but there's no shame buying at .121 which you could've done last week - glty.
it'll take a little more than being oversold to bounce this puppy, it's been oversold for months now, the real deal is will thjmw uphold the fdic's motion to modify automatic stay or deny motion based on weil/quinn's objection. that objection upheld will point directly to the decision of the 4 billion if she doesn't give it the same day. 24th will be a great day for wamu!
kermit predicts green - and i like it!
jpigs............... in.......................space!!!!
well put. i have been trying to convey that the last day or so, but you're forthright and eloquent post hit the nail on the head. if the objection to the fdic's motion is upheld that is tantamount to awarding wamu the 4 billion and a huge step toward admitting that wamu was grossly undervalued - we will have much to be thankful for come the 24th.
as posted earlier by drrugby, the defense team already filed their objection.
http://www.ghostofwamu.com/documents/08-12229/08-12229-1872.pdf
they also have failed to provide the fdic with schedule 3.1a which includes a list of all assets and liabilities to be assumed and by which party, receiver or jpmc - something that would also be the death knell of both parties legal arguments.
"It[jpmc] not only gobbled up Bear, it added $310 billion in assets by gobbling up Washington Mutual Inc. in a government-led deal."
for 1.888billion!? that's not GOOD business, that's UNFREAKING-BELIEVABLE business savvy. or theft.
yeah, i recognize that and am a holder of p's and u's, i just found the wording so ambiguous as to include almost all things material in the universe. wamu will have it's day, and that right soon.
http://www.fdic.gov/about/freedom/Washington_Mutual_P_and_A.pdf
"the Receiver hereby sells, assigns, transfers, conveys, and delivers to the Assuming Bank, all right, title, and interest of the Receiver in and to all of the assets (real, personal and mixed, wherever located and however acquired) including all subsidiares, joint ventures, parnerships, and any and all other business combinations or arangements, whether active, inactive, dissolved or terminated, of the Failed Bank whether or not reflected on the books of the Failed Bank as of Bank Closing."
from the p and a agreement, this sounds like they may have assumed control of the united states and passed it over to jpmc... it wasn't reflected on the books as of bank closing, but it was there - and according to this p+a agreement, it rightfully belongs to jpmc. ridiculous.
saw this, wondered, 'was this what they intended for the 4billion?'
"Please note that any deposits that have not been claimed within 18 months of the failure of WAMU will be sent to the FDIC by JPMorgan Chase Bank. If the FDIC is unable to locate the deposit customer, the unclaimed funds will eventually be escheated to the state or according to Federal Law (12 U.S.C., 1822(e)) will no longer be available when the WAMU Receivership is terminated."
http://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/wamu.html
this i think is elementary to everyone here, but i was trying to read up on wmbfsb and came to this, taken from fdic press release PR-85-2008 - "JPMorgan Chase acquired the assets, assumed the qualified financial contracts and made a payment of $1.9 billion. Claims by equity, subordinated and senior debt holders were not acquired."
"They[Washington Mutual FSB] have combined assets of $307 billion and total deposits of $188 billion."
within a two paragraph press release about the "transaction"(used loosely - hence the quotes) they stated the entire case for wmi. paid 1.9 billion, assumed no claims by equity, subordinated or senior debt, got a company with 307billion in assets. the press has known all along.
http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/press/2008/pr08085.html