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.
Thank you for the explanation.
I understand that reasoning....but, still disagree with it.
I thought adversaries always take positions that they can negotiate down from!
I am saying that the full 85% should be divided amongst only those that did not Opt In to the agreement.
I believe you are dividing the 85% award by the full number of LTW's prior to the Opt In ....which reduces the potential award substantially. Or, are you saying that JPM gets to keep the value that was given up by those LTW's that took the stipend.
Please explain.
Nod,
Thanks for finding that release. I believe it shows that it did not give JPM any of the LTW's...it just was a release of the rights of those who agree to settle per the bankruptcy.
So, we must still get past this June 2 battle before the value of the 85% to us is determined.
The Opt Out..
I tried to find the agreement. I could only find some messages on this board dated 2/24/12....#6767-6770 that discussed the agreement.
It doesn't appear to me that the opt out LTW's were OBTAINED by ANY party. It was just part of an agreement in the bankruptcy agreement that opt outs could accept some value to give up their rights to suit at some future time. I don't see where JPM gets retention of those LTW's.
Please correct me if I am wrong!
A sad day today ...Memorial Day
Let's think of those that served and lost so much...and still paying the price in many cases. Will take a walk and look for some homeless individuals to drop a buck or two into their lap. Many who came home are still wandering.
Linda,
Thank you for your opinion.
I would like to read the offer made to LTW's for them to opt out of future litigation. Please advise if you have that available.
Marty
brutus,
Thanks for your reply.
I just feel that the original holders gave up their right to litigate for compensation re them....which translates to cancellation of their LTW's in my eyes. In that case 85% of the proceeds would be divided amongst the remaining LTW's. I don't think that JPM became their owner...all just my opinion.
I do think that the cancelled LTW holders may have a case against JPM if they can prove they were hoodwinked in some manner. But, that's a different matter.
I am sorry for my double post...and to Linda who I hope didn't think my post was directed towards her. She has been the best!
Marty
Thank you Linda!
I don't know the total LTW's that were issued (maybe 115 million to my recollection)....nor the remaining LTW's after JPM cancelled the majority for pennies (maybe 10-15 million).
I am of the opinion that JPM is entitled to 15% of the $538 million total after tax up. The remaining $457 million should go to the remaining LTW holders!
Those that sold their RIGHTS to payment should take JPM to court for any amounts they believe THEY are entitled to (which is a separate issue).
We are demanding too little....and I believe JPM will make us fight for scraps. Let's just think back to how some of the facts were misrepresented ...in my opinion.
Should JPM walk away with their 15% cut intact after all that has happened?
No penalty?
Does JPM believe they now own the LTW's that gave up their claims?...or were those LTW's the equivalent of CANCELLED?
Should the LTW holders who accepted payment for cancelling their rights step back in for a second dip...or should they now bring suit separately against JPM?
Thank you Linda!
I don't know the total LTW's that were issued (maybe 115 million to my recollection)....nor the remaining LTW's after JPM cancelled the majority for pennies (maybe 10-15 million).
I am of the opinion that JPM is entitled to 15% of the $538 million total after tax up. The remaining $457 million should go to the remaining LTW holders!
Those that sold their RIGHTS to payment should take JPM to court for any amounts they believe THEY are entitled to (which is a separate issue).
We are demanding too little....and I believe JPM will make us fight for scraps. Let's just think back to how some of the facts were misrepresented ...in my opinion.
Should JPM walk away with their 15% cut intact after all that has happened?
No penalty?
Does JPM believe they now own the LTW's that gave up their claims?...or were those LTW's the equivalent of CANCELLED?
Should the LTW holders who accepted payment for cancelling their rights step back in for a second dip...or should they now bring suit separately against JPM?
TAX GROSS-UP ?
Please...Would someone care to explain just what that term means?
Marty
itsMyOpinion,
I could not access your mail box.
So, you may make a note that myself and wife hold 22,000 wts that were in IRA accounts prior to brokerage cancelling them. We never accepted the offer to release them.
Marty
Linda,
Thank you again for printing the full letter...and all your work.
I am now under the impression that there are two or more objections....all that are necessary.
So, is my letter needed? I am still working off an old laptop ....so, reproducing a letter will be a long process.
Best,
Marty
itsMyOpinion,
Hi....thank you for reply.
I did NOT opt in!
Please add me to your list and thanks again.
Marty
Thank you to all who have worked so hard on this matter !!!!!!
Would someone kindly post a copy of the suggested letter.
I have just returned after 2 weeks away to find all these posts and am working with an old laptop computer which will be replaced by the end of the month. I will also send my protest by priority mail.
Marty
Anyone receiving a positive or negative reply from JPM should please post it.
I like the suggestion of letter to Elizabeth Warren ''''should JPM respond negatively, as I expect.
I might also then suggest picketing Jamie Dimon's residence on Park Ave New York City...which would bring this into the news.
Marty
Linda,
Is there a time limit to demand payment....if it indeed works to get payment?
Would it not be necessary to include the broker who held the warrants prior to them being cancelled?
Marty
Linda,
Thank you for your reply.
I did not realize that our claim is less than $70 million.
Marty
Linda,
Ten days ago I asked the board if anyone had info on Ben Bush's arbitration disposition. 3 dozen posts later no replies...most seem to think asking JPM or sending an invoice to JPM will be fruitful. Even asking Art to take up our cause. I must restrain myself from a testy posting. In the land of REAL, no company is going to send off $300 plus million on a letter asking/demanding payment after a court fight that they consider a triumph.
I still wonder if Mr Bush had a favorable decision....which could be very important to us.
We need legal representation. However, I wonder why a previous law firm that seemed to do a good job of presenting the facts would no long care to continue the fight....and I don't mean Steinberg.
The best idea mentioned was for journalist exposure.
All the above is just my humble opinion.
Marty
I believe there was arbitration in process by a large LTW holder over his LTW holdings. Anyone know the results...did he collect?
Marty
Linda,
Thank you for your reply.
So, another year of waiting ....unless some negotiations between DOJ, JPM and the big LTW holders come to some agreement.
The LTW holders that took compensation to sign away their rights did OK and some want to come back for a second taste. However, I think they would be excluded....but could always bring suite claiming whatever.
Best,
Marty
Hi Linda,
It seems odd to me that the large LTW holder is apparently hiding his intentions.
He he may be trying to work a deal for himself, or has given up. We continue to get screwed around after our original council did a poor job on our behalf.... just my opinion.
Regards,
Marty
Linda,
Good letter...I was going to also suggest that we give our opinion re. some conflicts of interest and possible improper/illicit acts surrounding this case...all in my opinion!
Anyone alledging improprieties should state "in their opinion"
However, you covered this nicely in your letter.
Shouldn't we individualize each of our letters...or, just send copies of the letter you proposed?
Marty
Linda,
Thanks for all your work. You have been our champion!
Do you think Ben Bush is still working towards a solution...that would include all current LTW holders? Or, a deal for himself (which would exclude us)?
I am concerned that we may have no one litigating OUR LTW interests.
We seem so close...but so far away without representation, in my opinion!
We really could use some publicity...in the court of public opinion. Anyone with media connections to shame Goliath for their actions??
Marty
I can't imagine that JPM's attorney would answer an opponent ...and agree that the opponent is right!
A letter to Judge Block might be more productive.
I assume that council for our largest LTW holder will move forward.
Linda,
I am also of the opinion that some people would like this to end quietly!
So, a law suit against JPM and then a settlement...or, maybe some discussions now...knowing what is coming.
Marty
cubs,
I don't know why JPM people would help you/us!
Would it not be against their own interests?
You could picket Jamie Dimon's residence on Park Ave at 94 St in New York and possibly force a response/bad publicity for him and his bank. Keep in mind that the building has several friendly guards in front. However, I don't suggest the picket unless a group of 12 or more.
I hold a good scoop of these LTW's.
All these figures are fun...but, why would JPM pay up without a fight? They would possibly make an offer to settle with us for a sum less than hoped for....after we bring suit.
However, I believe there is more to this whole situation that would embarrass certain parties,IMO.
So, let's hope JPM makes a fair offer to end this battle.
If the LTW owners that accepted the offer (for consideration) have any beefs THEY can sue JPM ....
Are there any lawyers here...for their opinions?
Linda,
I also don't see the reason for the LTW's having any bearing on their situation...unless they are anticipating a challenge from the LTW's....or the value they want to establish at a very low level for taxable gains on their acquisition of our rights, IMO.
Marty
Linda,
Thank you for updates.
Do you think that they are building a case for possible settlement bases on the LOW value of the LTW's at the date we were on the ropes? Or, is this just an accounting game to lower their taxes on this gain by valuing their gain at that early date?
Marty
Linda,
I don't understand why S avoided those senior executives. .....although I have my opinions re all that. I also have suspicions re that judge W...again,JMO.
We'll see if Karma takes hold...I'm a believer.
I have my Accent 13 months and only have 4500 miles...mostly because I drove it to Florida this past winter.
Best
Marty
Linda,
Thank you for your opinion....it's hard for most of us (I believe), to grasp the situation from all those pages of legaleeze.
I believe there were several cloudy circumstances that were used against us in bankruptcy court such as when the LTW's were actually transferred (before or after declaring) and whether the LTW's were debt or securities....along with the missing executives that should have testified. A boondogle of suspicion re our lawyer and certain hedge funds...in my opinion. I hope this is adjudicated or settled to our satisfaction in my lifetime.
Until then, looking forward to any updates and information you may offer.
Many thanks...and how you doing with your Hyundai?
Best,
Marty
Linda,
So, what do all these court papers boil down to??
Seems they affirmed that Anchor Bank which is owned by JPM now owns the law suit...not the FDIC. Good for JPM...but, where does that allow the LTW wts (us) to collect our due? I thought we LTW's were considered securities that died in bankruptcy...although I always thought we were an obligation (debt) of the original bank that would carry through to new owners (JPM)....if they prevailed.
What do you expect from here....?
Marty
Linda,
I think you will be happy with the Accent. I bought the hatchback with A/C and automatic transmission which included power windows and door locks for $15K plus tax.
I checked 3 dealers and an internet site and bought from the cheapest dealer...who happened to be the closest to home.
Besides riding well...the size is also perfect for parking here.
Enjoy it...and hopefully DIME will eventually pay for it.
You're young enough to wait this out. I am going to have to make a Note to my final will to watch out for a settlement.
Best,
Marty
Yes...just under $15K plus tax for hatchback automatic. My only choices were small cars as I park on street...garages here are $400 plus a month, just me and wife.
Marty
Linda,
Great weather after a horrible winter.
I did buy a new 2014 Hyundai Accent...smooth ride for a small car.
Marty
Linda...thank you for your response and opinion.
Marty
Linda,
How does Judge Block's ruling on ownership affect us and our current case with Judge Sleet...in your opinion? Are we in a better position challenging the FDIC or the bank?
Best regards,
Marty
Linda...thanks!
Mike,
I was hoping Linda would answer...she keeps up with this subject.
Incredible that the judge can't make a decision after all these months.
Marty
Linda,
Thank you for reviewing the "Motion" and our view as to why the motion should be denied.
I bought the Accent GS (hatchback). Parking is tight here in Manhattan and its size makes it easier to find parking....which is an astounding $500 a month here.
Best Marty