Democracy starts with you, tag your it! ...Thom Hartman
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.
Those who released were given tracking cusips......markers.
There is something. There was something big enough for large hedge funds to risk equitable disallowance over. Pick whatever number you want, it does ZERO to prove that the markers were given for no reason.
Happy Trails.
I know you didn't ask me, but imo, IF escrow markers stay markers, then we all get paid together at the same time - whether it all comes at once or in a trickle over time.
The only way retail gets shanked, is IF there is some kind of shares for value exchange - or any type of structure that is exchanged for those markers, by which they all of a sudden are tradeable in their new form. With all the games played and lies told, you know that upon any initial values that return, there will be a renewed push to pretend that there is no more. People will sell out early, insiders will scoop it up and multiply their money off the backs of retail who've suffered for a decade now.
Either we believe that somehow our EC and MW set us up with escrow markers that will literally never be tradeable as advertised........or they will become tradeable in some form in the future.
These clowns told us WMIH would never trade initially also......These clowns told us we had a merger years ago, but fail to reveal any specifics. I could go on and on.....
Personally, based on the fact that WMIH has traded since day 1 despite being sold a bill of goods to the contrary, I find it impossible to believe MW and that judge insider really gave us 100% unsellable tracking markers. I think something is yet to come, and people will sell out early - all to MW and friends benefit.
Those terms are only regarding JPM's payment. DB is on a 'payment plan' so to speak.....according to the FDIC summary
The FDIC states as I quoted earlier, an "interim dividend distribution to DB", and others. Further, that the FDIC anticipates sufficient funding for remaining distributions to these same creditors.
Its almost like DB is getting their reimbursement in one infusion, like JPM got theirs?
Why?
Is DB holding up disbursements to its constituents like WMB bonds, until it is reimbursed for the last 10 years of expenses? And by extension, the FDIC is the real entity responsible for holding up disbursement, as it is dictating the terms and schedule for disbursement.
It's an interesting oxymoron that JPM who still is on the hook for LIBOR rigging, gets 100% of their expenses paid out thru the FDIC, and DB accepts a drawn out payment plan.
IF DB is paying itself first from the receivership distributions, AND, the FDIC wants to drag anchor on the WAMU saga yet, all the FDIC has to do is drag out DB payments and their ability to reimburse themselves quickly before attending to their legacy WAMU constituents.
Maybe the FDIC figures the only way to bury the story is to drag things out long enough where there is 100% cash liquidation of ALL securitization trust assets. No more trusts with mortgage assets, than no more paper trail. All liquidated Cash goes straight to legacy interests as provided, and noone sees anything except us and them.
Granted, the FDIC summary on WAMU hasn't been updated in nearly half a year, and using the word 'updated' is like saying hell hath frozen over......
The FDIC states (circa March 2018) that:
"......the Receiver paid JPMC $645 million and issued DBNTC an allowed unsecured receivership claim of $3,006,929,600 on September 8, 2017...."
and
".......After paying JPMC in full, the Receiver made an interim dividend distribution on September 26, 2017, on all approved senior unsecured claims of the receivership, including the claims of DBNTC, general trade creditors, and the WAMU senior bondholders. This distribution represented approximately 95% of the receivership’s remaining total current assets. The allowed senior unsecured creditors shared equally (on a pro rata basis) in this distribution. The remaining funds in the receivership are expected to be sufficient to cover future expected and potential losses and expenses."
Sounds to me like the FDIC is the holdup. Sounds like DB received a partial distribution sliced from a pie shared with other creditors of WAMU. JPM of course is paid in full - and received fdic attention like a house on fire.... If you are anything - of legacy Washington Mutual ownership, you are last in line.
Its as if the FDIC is making installment payments to DB, and DB most likely is reimbursing themselves first, before downstream distributions to their constituents such as WMB bondholders.
Now 6 months later, who knows what that FDIC/DB disbursement schedule looks like......annually? bi-annually? quarterly? You haven't seen a distribution yet since March, so quarterly might be out the window?
Makes me wonder if all trusts are under the same heavy hand of the FDIC? And when it does start to flow, it'll be the same trickle released by the FDIC, as the other trust's strustees cover their last 10 years of expenses first, before legacy gets theirs.
I'm sure Catz has seen it, lol. He probably recognizes a few names on there. lmao
Maybe we should remind Catz and others on that list?
AZ, I sent you an email.
I've had some communication with someone there. I'll ask your question, and let you know if they answer it.
Interesting reply from Rich.........it appears the reverse split verbiage was intended at the very least to induce/scare the market to wait for SEC filed numbers next quarter. I doubt they are really working on it.....it is by design. SO, imo, during this current quarter is where and when the magic will happen.
I feel like we are sitting in place such as this:
One can have money rightfully due to them, held in a third party owned custodial bank accounts, yet appear broke, AND all they have to do is ask for it when they want it. Is the bank account ours? No, it is the managing trustee's custodial account - In fact, in this possibly self-imposed limbo land, we can't literally declare it in SEC filings.....because we dont control possession of it.....yet...until its in our OWN account. Is the money ours? Absolutely 110% Yes. All that separates us from it, is a simple authorization to transfer. We just have to ask for it.
So what's the logical holdup? 1) Either our people are not asking for it back just yet, or are refusing to take possession for reasons good/bad, OR 2) there is still a regulatory heavy hand sitting on top of the pile, not ready to let it go yet.
If its 2), what can one do but wait. But I dont believe its this anymore. DC litigation is resolved. The BK has a DCR. I tend to think this lack of movement is due to Our people now.
With regards to 1), keep in mind that SEC filings reflect the prior months ending in JUNE, and a lot of ground has been covered since July, where it could be possible that an authorization to transfer cash/assets with various custodial trustees has/is taking or scheduled to take place. If there is some share exchange for value with legacy who released, and rumors of a reverse split..........maybe the market cap not being updated yet for weeks, is because the foregoing (in some order - cash/assets returned => shares4value => reverse split) is in execution right now as we speak.
Or, maybe there is another merger/buyout of something else necessary to this puzzle - coming soon, that dictates an occurrance prior to an authorization of transfer by our people, for legacy assets.
One interesting add, is that I was only opening and looking at the obvious Washington Mutual trusts in the scroll down window - those 10 we were just describing.
Now, I just opened up another random one "SVHE07NS1", https://www2.trustnet.com/Investments/Article.aspx?id=201202021542417200W, and there are WAMU trusts amongst others as well.
such as:
WAMU 04-AR10 B1, WAMU 04-AR11 B1, WAMU 04-AR12 B1, WAMU 04-AR13 B1
WAMU 04-CB4-B1
WAMU 05-AR1 B1, WAMU 05-AR1 B3, WAMU 05-AR1 B6
WMALT 05-1 1A4
I do get access to this website, but its only NSM related. Apparently on the WMIH site there is about 10 times the trusts listed. Which implies, WMIH has more interests in securitization trusts than just NSM.
I dont even have the option. I get everything else on the website, but not the select box
WMAR trusts viewable to 8-1-18
Interesting tip. I tried entering through that, and got a step further to the ABS Investors page....however mine is still blank with no trusts viewable. I''m still locked out from viewing.
Can you post a link from WMIH's ABS Investors Report directly,....here.? TIA
I got to here through a google link. http://www.snl.com/IRW/CustomPage/4401869/Index?KeyGenPage=430641
from: http://nmlsconsumeraccess.org/Home.aspx/MainSearch "Welcome to NMLS® Consumer AccessSM, a free service for consumers to confirm that the financial-services company or professional with whom they wish to conduct business is authorized to conduct business in their state. Users of NMLS Consumer Access are subject to the Terms of Use Agreement."
But, again, my WMIH page linked from nils.com is blank - no trusts displayed
I'll take your and ND's word they are there, but darn, I'd like to view them big time!
I cant wait to check out the ABS Investor Reports from the WMIH website !!
If ND is seeing thousands of them, things are really moving in the right direction. Holy Cow!
EDIT: Google chrome, nor Safari is working for me. I can access every link on WMIH website, except ABS Investors. AZ and I are banned, lol.
ok, will try, thanks.
I tried clearing browser history to no avail. I can click any link on the whole WMIH website except ABS Investor reports.
OK thanks for your thoughts. I'm mostly Class 22 anyway, so cool.
Huh, Yep I can't do that for some reason. I get to your second to last step, and the ABSlink is unclickable.
I can only view from the Nationstar ABS investor portal. WMIH website is broken for me apparently. Sounds like you're seeing way more trusts on WMIH website, than I see on Nationstar.
Your Welcome AZ! Are these 10 trust backing the old P preferreds?
Sorry, its been a busy summer and I haven't even begun to start tracking which trust backs what security.
From WMIH? or from the Nationstar ABS website. I can only access nationstar. And I can only see maybe a 100.
That's extremely encouraging you see more. not sure why my access is different? bummer
WMIH corp has an "ABS Investors" tab on the "Investor Relations" page (start from 'Menu' on 'Investor Relations').
When you hover over 'Investor Relations', a title bar pops up, and "ABS Investors" is one link a person can click on. However for me, there appears to be a website glitch and I cant get to it.
Maybe the website is still under repairs, OR maybe we are not supposed to 'see' the Nationstar washington mutual ABS investments....quite yet.
The fact that "ABS Investors" even exists on the WMIH website right now is awfully interesting!
What is odd, is the only contact info on the WMIH Investor Relations website page, is to an anonymous Nationstar shareholder email contact in Dallas TX. shareholders@nationstarmail.com
these spreadsheets dont detail who the trustee or servicer is. I've always assumed JPM with the loan file, had the ultimate responsibility to replace or 'put-back' performing loans in lieu of failing loans, when the trustee/servicer made the request while performing its legal obligations to protect the certificate holders income stream when mortgages fail to produce income while in foreclosure.
I tried to find the loan info through king county website, whereas I could then track the title history which would show who the trustee/servicer is/has been. As far as loan substitutions, that is a direct unviewable transaction between private Delaware trust and the the loan custodian - and I dont think it can be tracked on an individual loan basis.
But logically, JPM got the servicing rights to the Washington Mutual loan file. They are legally bound to substitute loans as requested by the trustee for the benefit of the certificate holders. Additionally, JPM had 10 years to cherry pick thru refinance, Washington Mutual loans into JPMChase loans - but if so, those monies are due. Refinance means JPM pays off the Washington Mutual loan. This is what contributes to liquidating the securitization trusts quicker. Liquidated Cash is due the certificate holders.
Who the trustee is, isnt even a spreadsheet option. No trustees are listed, as no information column is offered. So not necessarily a dead end.
Also Washington Mutual wise in the Nationwide ABS Investor Reports page, There are also......."2006-WMAR1, 2006-WMAR4, 2006-WMAR5, 2006-WMAR7, 2006-WMAR8, 2006-WMAR9.
To clarify, just pulling up one of these reports (2006-WMAR9), they are named as ......"WMALT 2006-AR9". This particular trust is stuffed with mostly current mortgages - as opposed to the the 2007 series WMAO1 - WMAO4, which seemed mostly liquidated.
I've had an account to Nationstar's ABS investor reports portal for a few years of past DD.
If what you show as ....."WAMU ASSET BACKED CERTS. SERIES 2007-OA4"
Is listed at Nationstar as........ "2007-WMOA1", "2007-WMAO2", "2007-WMAO3", and "2007-WMAO4".....then Yes!
Just started looking, and so far I dont see any other 2007 WM series.
More on Assurant's Mortgage Solutions sale to WMIH. Deal also includes 'American Title' (acquired in 2016) & valuation firm 'eMortgage Logic' (acquired in 2014).
"This acquisition accelerates Xome's goals for third-party growth and brings more value to our company, valued clients and shareholders." Jay Bray
"Going forward, the majority of Xome's revenue will be derived from third-party business." Jay Bray
https://www.nationalmortgagenews.com/news/xome-buys-assurants-mortgage-unit-a-day-after-wmih-deal-closes
Maybe the Acquisition of NSM had to occur and close first, before any other movements that could jeopardize said M/A?
I'm thinking this could be akin to a house closing. For example, all paperwork is signed by all parties in escrow, money is escrowed by 3rd party closer for release upon completion of all signatures and documents, etc....are completed. The keys to the house and the funding proceeds dont go thru until 24-48 hours after the technical closing is documented and recorded.
If the homebuyer takes out new debt like a car loan just prior to closing, the lender can pull the deal. If buyers paperwork significantly changes, the lender can pull out of the deal.
I think the Acquisition of NSM was a critical, but simple step - that had to be completed on its own 2 feet first before all else. We had to nonchalantly get inside, close and lock the door.....before the party starts.
Just thinking that any major 'Newco' events, S4V, etc. could never occur amidst the closing of a significant acquisition involving multitudes of shareholders anticipating a 'particular' value that their exchange is based on. There were lawyers already banging the lawsuit drum.....
The LT delays in reporting are telling.
I think this will be a slow week until the new LT filings are in.
It says NYSE in the PR blurb yesterday
Mr. Cooper Group is the new name. Soon to be trading at the NYSE under 'COOP'. Sounds a lot like 'poop'....
Contemplated in the near future ..........."is a reverse stock split, which would require a shareholder vote."
Wow, that was a lot of trading volume today! tomorrow will be interesting.
I disagree and I've explained why before. I'm not gonna argue with a friend any further about it. It doesnt matter other than what ends up in your account. Either way, I got major money coming.
Suffice it to say, and I think we can both agree.....
If one released, there will be a Happy Life Changing Event - regardless of ratios - whether I'm right or wrong on the distribution process. I only need to be right that these markers are not worthless. And they are not.
If you released, you win. Right ?
Read up on AZ and Rons past posts - sum it up perfectly, imo.
FDIC needs to complete their contribution to the GSA. CIC
The 'To-Do' list needed to wrap this turkey up, is getting awfully short. thank god.
imo, only the assets under which the LT has jurisdiction---- is what Rosen is talking about here. Not the bankruptcy remote assets, legally held Off-Balance Sheet, in legal isolation.
the proof? Could the examiner discuss the mortgage assets in his bankruptcy court ordered report? No.
Could the examiner discuss the mortgage assets in open court? No.
Could Rosen discuss the same examiner related assets in open court or document? No.
Could/did Justin Nelson discuss the mortgage related assets in open court or document. No. In fact Judge Walrath stopped him multiple times from even getting close to that subject.
LT assets.... are different from..... Bankruptcy Remote assets (which will utilize the LT only as a 'Pass-Thru Trust). Bankruptcy remote assets are just like a check showing up in the mail one random day.
Prediction: There will be more heartache in the coming months for those who misunderstand this distinction, and soon to come, will wonder why again, ....so little is coming directly via the LT's specific assets as is their SEC reportable mandate.
In the end, understand it or not, if you released your legacy interests in order to participate in POR 7, you will have a happy life changing event.
You can also reach it at KCCLLC as a tab, under the whole WMI file.
Schedule conflicts eh? Weeeeeee, lol. Scheduling an acquisition that is.....
Haha, I'm sure they aint talkin !! But thanks for trying at least.
Thx AZ. Appreciate your thoughts on this. I haven't revisited this in years.....
Thx AZ! interesting pop in PPS today. .... we'll see if the E.D. function is still in play or not
Dave / LG, you're quoting text that ONLY relates to 2 things:
1. WMIIC bankruptcy
2. WMI bankruptcy
Dude... safe harbored trusts and participation interests are outside of the bankruptcy box !!
* The judge only rules over bankruptcy specific assets.
* The judge can NOT rule on bankrtucy remote assets. They are outside the courts jurisdiction.
* The LT is only trustee for "certain" bankruptcy assets.
* The LT is NOT trustee for bankruptcy remote assets in safe harbor
This is not hard to understand.
Seriously, you guys are arguing over the bankruptcy S^&%T sandwich Rosen decoy designed comprised of ONLY "certain" assets of the LT, and missing the wine and cheese platter at the end of the table.
Bankruptcy remote, is bankruptcy remote. LOGIC. You can recite the whole POR, GSA, etc. till your blue in the face...........THEY DO NOT GOVERN bankruptcy remote trusts.
You cant claim to believe in Safe Harbor and bankruptcy remote trusts for legacy who released, by antithetically using bankruptcy document quotes and LT propaganda, that have zero influence or control over that very thing.
It's like trying to apply England's Parlimentary governing process in our United States Senate and House. Doesnt work. One doesnt control the other. Each is designed to govern over its own jurisdiction.
Axel