?
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.
That post nor any other post made does not change the plain fact that no one has made a single legal claim for any missing assets. How do you explain that? There is only one logical explanation IMO, there are no missing assets.
FW thanks for reinforcing my point.
I was thinking about the time starting after the approved plan, but you are correct all the evidence from the start supports my conclusion that there are no missing assets.
There are two groups of loans originated by WAMU. Loans securitized and sold, and serviced by WAMU, now JPM as successor with the loans held as collateral in various Trusts. Loans retained by WAMU as Portfolio loans on the WAMU balance sheet then purchased by JPM. There are no missing unaccounted for loans. Just my opinion based on almost four years of disclosures and the fact that not a single claim action has been made by anyone for missing assets, and my personal experience in the Mortgage Business.
Senior and Subordinate interests in private MBS sold in Tranches were structured into multiple tiers that separate the credit risks into risk priority groupings with higher risk pieces priced to provide higher yields and lower risk pieces sold at lower yields. As in issuer of the private MBS the mortgage lender could retain a piece especially if it was thought to be more valuable than the price available in the secondary market. In that case, the asset would be on the balance sheet, so in this case, any such assets would have been sold to JPM.
BK your time spent highlighting all the disclosed facts is appreciated. The logic of questioning why all the parties in interest with all the capability to seek legal discovery of any missing assets seems irrefutable. I have not seen any answer to why there are no attempts by any of the large stakeholders to find these missing assets so many hope are there. It seems obvious the answer is there are none. I believe the WMILT has just what they have disclosed and our escrows will benefit no more or no less than what is left to us according to the waterfall priority as specified in the plan.
This is one myth that has been repeated over and over without any support. And, the required disclosure statements don't disappear. Just saying it was posted is not valid support. It can't be found because it did not happen. Nothing was returned to the FDICR from JPM.
jPM does not have off balance sheet mortgage assets.
This has been discussed and debunked many times. The schedule of mortgages JPM is servicing relates to their potential liability to repurchase defaulted mortgages that were securitized and sold by WAMU prior to BK, and now serviced by JPM as successor to WAMU. The schedule was supporting potential repurchase liabilities which were and still are the subject of lawsuits between JPM, the Security Trust and FDIC. All facts have been disclosed, No claims by anyone have been made against JPM for any "hidden" assets. Old story, nothing new.
Liquidity was excellent! 4.5 million shares purchased is a positive
Market value of loans determined by multiple factors
Loans, specifically mortgage loans have market values dependent on at least three primary risk factors. Credit risk, interest rate risk and duration risk. Credit risk is of course evaluated prior to closing, but also by secondary market purchasers based on the loan classification prime ,subprime conforming nonconforming and since the new Dodd Frank rules, QM or non QM. Interest rate risk is evaluated primarily by comparing the loan note rate to current market rates on new mortgage loans of the same type, that is fixed rate 15 or 30 year new mortgage rates, 3, 5, 7 year Adjustable rate loans,ARMs etc.So the interest rate risk is basically a mathematical adjustment that results in loans with higher than current interest rates being valued higher than the principal amount, a Premium, and loans with rates lower than current rates are sold at a discount below the existing principal loan amount. Duration risk is more complicated and caused by the fact that mortgage loans generally have no prepayment penalty with the borrowers having what amounts to a free put as they can prepay at anytime in the future. Again more complex mathematical modeling is used to calculate the expected loan duration based on historic experience factors, loan type, even geographic location. Of course, higher rate loans are expected to have shorter duration in a low rate market environment and therefore would also require a discount.
dmceng No there are many non bank mortgage companiew
Safe Harbor Rules
The rules protected the investors who purchased MBS securities issued by Banks from loss resulting from a BK of the issuing Bank. In the case of Agency MBS, Fannie/Freddie guaranteed issued MBS there were no subordinated tranches in the MBS structure to be held by the issuing Bank. In the case of Private MBS usually collateralized by jumbo non conforming mortgage loans it was common practice to securitize with multiple tranch structures with yields to investors based on credit risk priority positions. Usually all the risk tranches were sold to a Wall Street Broker Dealer and subsequently sold to investors in the Secondary market. A mortgage originator and MBS securitizer could and might hold high risk Tranches of the private MBS they created if they thought the Secondary market was under pricing the Tranche. If that was done, the retained investments would be on the Books of the Bank potentially impacting the investors of the lower risk tranches in the case of a BK of the issuing Bank. The FASB change in 2009 had no impact on us as investors and Estate successors in the WAMU BK.
Goodie Yeah hard to argue with Big Boy Curtain evidence lol
Clear Obvious supported by all disclosed facts
WMIH has disclosed their M&A strategy, now disclosed recent activity saying time and money spent on unsuccessful deal
New BOD employment contracts disclosed strong financial reward for successful M&A, not for anything else
WMILT has disclosed exactly what assets are available for potential waterfall disbursements, no Legacy Assets
The FDICR disclosure has stated it is unlikely anything will be left for equity
These are all legal disclosures required by law and regulations
NO ONE HAS CHALLENGED any of these facts. NO ONE has made any claims for missing or stolen assets
LOGICAL CONCLUSION:
All the theories put forth to convince us of mega billions for beloved escrows are rediculous and totally unsupported by any facts whatsoever
Ask yourself why so much time is spent to convince us with ever changing theories that all prove untrue?
It's just the beginning for WMIH and the beginning of the end for wild escrow theories AT LAST.
Obviously, WMIH is all about M&A as originally disclosed, now updated.
All the theories about buying missing non disclosed assets and mysterious links between WMIH and the WMILT will need to be abandoned or reimagined in some new way as usual. We have the NOL position to leverage and the capital available to make a deal. The BOD is very financially motivated to find and complete a good deal. There contract is all about successful M&A, nothing else. Again, it's clear and obvious not theoretical.
Wow you are right
It's not stealing if it's legal. They bought it all. It was a great deal for JPM but it was done and approved by regulators, the Court and by vote of all the parties in interest. Legal, Done and Over years ago. No theft alleged
or claims made by anyone concerning missing assets. Reality wins sooner or later even on this Board lol
More repeated Large Bold escrow advertisements
Old story of JPM deposits somehow returning to us. Deposits as everyone knows belong to customers. What motivates repeated obviously incorrect posting about escrow potential? Stuff that makes you go hmmm
Fred my post was about MBS not unsold loans
I believe what has happened and what has not is a result of POR 7. EOD
hotmeat all MBS were sold
As a mortgage lender, the reason you securitized mortgage loans was to sell them at attractive prices to investors. The trusts were part of the securitization process with title to the underlying mortgage loans collaterilizing the Security. The Servicing function was retained by WAMU and the servicing rights, "MSRs" on the books of WAMU were sold to JPM. So, the MBS were sold to investors prior to the BK. The only reason they have been repeatedly mentioned on the forum is the schedule shown in the JPM disclosure to support potential repurchase obligations that were and still are the subject of the DB litigation. There are not any MBS assets to be returned to anyone.
LG that is old news not what he asserted at all
You know deposits go back to the account holders. He said assets were returned to FDICR, but I know you know that.
Fwh 10Qs are permanent records.
Corporations cannot erase disclosures once filed they are ubiquitous, available to anyone with access to the internet. I have read the first quarter 10Q and there is nothing in it to support your memory about assets or cash returned to the FDICR.
Fwh the deal is done and over with
Great deal for JPM, we don't like it but it was and still is legal, and unchallenged by anyone. So, the assets are gone, JPM bought all left over after WAMU BK. Simple as that. Your assertion about the assets given back to the FDICR is not in any 10q. That is a fact. By the way, in my opinion, I think you should take your own advice you offered to another poster about " clogging up the Board" Good advice for all of us I guess.
The Emotional Curve
I would say the Board was much to excited after the NAZ announcement and today it seems way to disappointed. There is a plan as disclosed to seek and evaluate acquisition opportunities. Management is richly and appropriately motivated with their compensation contracts to complete a transaction. Potential transactions are not disclosed so we won't here about what is happening until there is an agreement in place. So, in terms of our WMIH stock, it seems to be the beginning of a potentially positive result. That is the good news. The bad news for those that have been buying in to the latest theory about escrow payments being linked to WMIH in some way through a purchase of the mythical missing assets, and then returned to our escrow accounts. The NAZ uplisting is likely the beginning of the end of that theory just like all the others that did not happen. There is no compensation to management for returning money to our escrow accounts, only for the successful completion of an M&A deal which will reward management and Our investment Bankers, and depending on the deal structure, us to some degree as well. When a deal is announced we will get a chance to evaluate the potential future value growth of our resulting ownership share after dilution. The announcement will also make it cristal clear that the WMIH plan had nothing to do with the escrow markers tied directly to the WMILT.
Uplifting is part of the plan, the WMIH plan.
Just an important step in the disclosed steps to pursue M&A to take advantage of the NOLs. The compensation plans for the CEO and COO payout big if all the steps are completed. There is no WMIH plan for our escrows. They are strictly a WMILT marker for leftover assets at the bottom of the waterfall and WMIH shares to be released if claims against the shares held in trust are released. There is no evidence that escrows can expect anything from the uplisting. All the facts support this and there is no support for all the conjecture about escrows. Period.
Newbie the absolute documented facts
You can easily find all the documents BK mentioned. Find them, read them and make up your mind. The point is his opinion is based on factual documents that have been followed to the letter and no one has legally challenged the documents the process or what has happened.
The RED LETTER mystery! LOL
You keep talking about the JPM 10Q . Where is it? Has any one else seen it ? Can you, can any one give us a link. You have ignored repeated requests to produce it? I don't Think it exists. A 10q is an easily accessible document. I can't find the one you keep ranting about.
Goodie Just read the POR7
That is the result of all the negotiations redacted or not. The rules are there, like it or not
Pick Your statement is incorrect!
I have escrows. I believe there will be some small amount of distribution at the bottom of the waterfall. I have not seen any evidence to support very much certainly not Billions.
IHub there is your answer!
Thanks to bk for posting it once again for all to see. It has all been explained before and there it is with all the clear documentation. All about disputed Liabilitities, repurchase obligations now in dispute between DB and the FDIC since the Court ruled JPM is not liable.
Smug your right she said it
She said it a long time ago. Since then, She approved the POR which has been followed to the letter and all the entities involved in the BK have made and continue to make the legally required disclosures that have identified what has happened and where the Assets and Liabilities are. By missing, I was using the word to describe the undisclosed, often mis identified and theoretical assets often discussed here but not supported by required documentation.
Thanks, I read this when you posted it.
If there were obligations concerning missing and or miss allocated assets or Liabilities, I believe there would be claims for such as in the DB claim against JPM and FDIC.
WEAK Answer Boris!
You are making my point for me. Instead of believing the Court approved, Stock Holder approved POR 7, and all the legally required disclosures, you choose to believe a theory about unnamed hedge funds negotiating with unnamed parties to explain why there are no claims for the theoretical missing assets. Really? Seems like, IN MY OPINION< that is just another unsupported theory.
Boris Read all the documents yourself.
The answer to your questions are clear to anyone who reads and believes in what is written, disclosed and documented. If you don't read the documents and or if you choose not to believe what has been clearly disclosed then you are left to believe speculation and theories one by one until each is discredited, does not happen etc. until the timeline is extended and new theories and predictions spring forth from the forum. Question for you, why isn't there a lawsuit or other legal claim for these hidden assets if there is a credible argument for there existence. Answer that.
There are no hidden Assets!
All The discussion about the "missing and hidden assets" has not produced any credible evidence to support such. Like it or not, the BK process is clearly documented and all the entities involved such as the FDIC,JPM, WMIH, and the WMILT have disclosed everything that has happened, and the amount of assets left are a matter of disclosed record, as well as the remaining claims to be settled by the FDICR and WMILT. If there was any real or suspected credible evidence to support missing or misallocated assets, the various parties in interest would be litigating for control and return of such. It must be clear to everyone outside of some in a few forums, that there will be no surprise event to change the fully disclosed path of the BK already approved by the Court and the Shareholders. Just my opinion of course, but the evidence is clear and compelling supporting what has happened and what will happen.
Shomid. Read page 300
This is from the 10k annual report filed last February. It discusses LIABILITY disputes between JPM, FDIC and DB. Nothing about disputed ASSETS.
Don't know, don't care!
I don't believe the answer has any relevance to anything that has happened or not happened, or any impact on what will happen. IMO
Escrows have not been paid
The only fact that you can rely on is what has happened and what has not. what has happened is supported by the POR , and all the disclosures. The fact there are no claims for hidden assets also makes it very unlikely that there are missing assets. The fact that all the prior theories about missing, hidden assets and assets discovered at JPM being returned to us, have simply not come true. That fact certainly seems to discredit the old and new theories being moved out further in time. Attempts to discredit posters who have come to the logical conclusion that escrows will only get modest waterfall leftovers are useless. Opinions based on hope and cynicism about the system are understandable but difficult to believe in based on the same old unsupported arguments. IMO
Nothing to do with the LG link I posted about.
Diamond I would be interested in your explanation
Read the link, the document is clear
LG I did not reply to KMart post
LG No assets here for us as usual
This is just another example of a Trust holding collateralized mortgages previously securitized and sold and now serviced by JPM. The document serves as a limited power of attorney for JPM to execute the normal servicing functions as outlined. Simple fact.