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 am just starting to look into creating a couple of Trusts for myself. I do not believe that I can create a Trust for me. Someone else has to do it. Could be wrong.
Therefore, I find it odd that LBHI could create a Trust for itself.
My sense is someone else had to do it.
OT: The quick fix to Social Security and Medicare financing problems.
Make sure most people are dead by age 62.
With Trump's cabinet sacked with Goldman executives, I would think LBHI will be treated in the new admin like old admins run by Goldman Executives.
Ala, like how Paulson would treat LBHI.
From an article from CNBC.
We are LBHI.
We have a stellar record of losing money. Not only for shareholders, but for bond holders too.
We have done such a good job of losing money that there just might be $60 in NOL, that's Negative Operating Losses.
We need assets, money making assets, profitable assists. Give us your profitable assets so we can use our NOL's.
Of course, we, LBHI, will be in control with our 51% of this venture.
And you are just S*** out of Luck.
LOL.
When I read the posts of the negative posters on this board, from Ines to Joe, the message is THE CTS MUST DIE. Key word MUST.
Why?
What harm have the CT's done to anyone?
The CT's are shares of a Trust, a Trust that has not borrowed any money at all.
So, why must these CT's DIE?
The only answer I can come up with is , To benefit short interests.
If shorts buy and cover their positions, a transaction is completed.
They would have to pay taxes on their gains.
But, if the CT's just die, the shorts never have to cover. And never have to pay taxes on their gains. Or the money they received.
My best answer. Open to others opinions and thoughts.
Again, WHY MUST THESE CTS DIE?
Can creditors who have received payments from the BK Estate be Reaffirmed?
Can a creditor receive 30-35% from the Estate, and still be Reaffirmed?
Dont know, just asking.
Just rambling.
But, when these Ct's first came out, were issued, who in their right mind bought this shit? $1.2 Billion of it.
Money managers who get paid a lot of money
If everything the naysayers say is correct, no guarantee, no nothing. Third Class citizen statas. Dirt to walk on.
I seem to recall, could be wrong, at one time CT's were touted as BK proof.
SHOW ME.
Maybe that's why JPM included the CT"S in their Collateral back in 2008. To cover their ass on any and all fraudulate dealings they had with LBHI. Knowing full well LBHI was a piece of Sh**. Knowing full well they were lying though their teeth.
And now that piece of Sh** LBHI has been taken over by Hedge Funds, well? Do you really think things are better now?
Last point, for Joe.
I fail to understand if,how, Judge Sullivan can fine Kurtz if the case is done, finished.
If it is done finished, that's it.
IMO, no Judge can, or, have the authority, to levy a fine with respect to a case that does not exist.
That being said, I look forward to more of what Judge Sullivan has to say.
IMO, it is only LBHI who needs the blessings of BK court Judge Chapman. No one else is in BK.
She doesn't create law . She just approves agreements. Nothing more, nothing less. She has no authority over any non-Bk entity.
IMO.
All IMO.
Time for a Sinatra, as Jimmy would say.
Thanks for listening to my rant.
No. This have nothing to do with Classes in the LBHI BK per the POR.
Notes, Preferred Stock, and CT's all listed in Exhibit C.
All connected to JPM, somehow, and listed in Exhibit C. Keep in mind what we are talking about here.
The Collateral. Going one step further, the Collateral JPM holds.
The Collateral monies JPM did not return to LBHI. The monies they are, or should use, to cover their a**, which is why the Collateral was secured PRE BK to being with.
But, all these securities in Exhibit C must have something in common. Or, they would not be in Exhibit C.
What is it?
Nice post. I agree.
jimmyt99, are you refering to this?
'indepth05' , your post has me thinking, something I've had in the back of my mind for some time.
Duties, responsibilities, and liabilities thereof.
Are these transferable?
JPM may have sold-exchanged, their Trust business, an ongoing concern, but, it does not mean that they are relieved of their Duties, responsibilities, and liabilities thereof prior to the sale.
Example.
I run over Camero with my car. I then sell my car to Jersey. I now have no responsibilities to Camero because Jersey now owns the car.
And it is the car that hit her. Sweet deal for me. But, that's not how it works.
Another example, could be bad example but I'll do it anyway.
Two parents. of a child. We, Ct's have two parents, per Indepts court docs, JPM and LBHI. Do the Duties, responsibilities, and liabilities thereof ever go away? Can they be sold to someone else?
Is the role of a Trustee any different?
Is it a sellable asset or a responsibility?
Because that is what any Profession does.
wayne49, that's how I see it too.
OT.
Recently I've been getting these ads on my I-Hub web pages.
Don't know if it is just me, or if others get it too.
It shows a man with 3 sun flowers. And two words.
Can't help but think of ***.
Nice picture, ***.
Agree.
Nicely stated Suetta915.
'jimmyt99',
I tend to agree. Would love to have heard that conversation.