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.
Got it. I found the list where PPHM was deleted from the Russell Global Fund. Thank you, Sir.
Carboat, what do you mean with "Russell" and "settled its removal"? I´m no native and didn´t ever hear that. Do you mean the index?
The interesting thing is i´m holding a stake in an other corporation (listed on NASDAQ) which have had a "similar" trading volume (just about 14 mio. shares) in the last trade yesterday. Now there are the same rumors on this message board about "Russell".
Thank you in advance
p.
Maybe Greywolf is out. I think they hold a stake with this volume. But let's wait for a filing.
Well...like i said - you don't understand.
Emotion isn´t a good advisor. The point here you don´t understand is that Mr. Simpson reserved the right to start a petition on behalf of all shareholders. It is uncontroversial that he has the right to do so, i don´t criticize that, but not on behalf of all. Period. That´s a fact and not worth discussing. Your input and consolidation into a lump sum here is not objective and within the meaning of the justice, which you are defending.
He meant the 13F Filers, who actually didn´t bought new shares but had to disclose their holdings because of the NASDAQ uplisting. It is interesting that they are Escrow-Holders too, but didn´t sue anyone... Maybe they are IHUB readers and therefore sedated.
Status update of Washington Mutual Bank Receivership of 01/19/2016 and some reminders (better call it "facts"...)
Regarding the pie-chart-riddle (what excluded WaMu) - it is, symply put, just a "graphic thing", because of the distortion that WaMu´s numbers would cause. If you look for example at the DIF Balance Sheet for the Second Quarter 2015, WaMu is included in the DIF Resolution Activity table. So there is no "conscious exclusion" by the FDIC for a "special purpose". By the way, the recent quoted DIF Report here is not the first report where WaMu´s $299 B were excluded. That´s just one of many.
Second Quarter Report (example):
https://www.fdic.gov/about/strategic/corporate/cfo_report_2ndqtr_15/balance.html
Status update of Washington Mutual Bank Receivership (01/19/2016)
"On September 25, 2008, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation was appointed the Receiver for Washington Mutual Bank ("WAMU"). The Receiver transferred substantially all WAMU's assets and liabilities to JPMorgan Chase ("JPMC") pursuant to a Purchase and Assumption Agreement dated September 25, 2008 - PDF. The next day, Washington Mutual Inc. ("WMI"), the holding company for WAMU, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (assigned to Judge Mary F. Walrath). Thereafter, WMI, JPMC, the FDIC, in its Corporate capacity, and the Receiver became involved in several lawsuits contesting the ownership of over $20 billion in assets.
The parties reached a settlement that was approved by the FDIC's Board of Directors on May 20, 2010, and WMI filed a plan of reorganization incorporating the terms of the settlement ("Settlement"). Several parties objected to WMI's proposed plan, and in particular, WMI's proposal to release its claims against JPMC, the FDIC and the Receiver. At the request of WMI's equity holders, the Bankruptcy Court appointed an Examiner to thoroughly investigate WMI's claims against JPMC, the FDIC and the Receiver, and to determine whether the proposed settlement (which would release these claims) was fair and equitable to WMI. The Examiner found that the settlement was a fair resolution.
On February 24, 2012, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order confirming the seventh amended plan - PDF proposed by WMI and its co-debtor WMI Investment Corp (the "Plan"). The Settlement - PDF, as amended from time to time, remains integral to and incorporated in the Plan. The Plan and Settlement became effective on March 19, 2012. The Receiver received $843.9 million pursuant to the terms of the Settlement.
The Receiver has approximately $2.75 billion to distribute to holders of claims allowed by the receivership, according to the priority established in 12 U.S.C. § 1821(d)(11)(A). Before the Receiver can distribute these funds, however, it must pay administrative expenses and resolve a number of lawsuits that have been filed against it, the largest of which was filed by Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. claiming $6 to $10 billion in damages arising out of WAMU's alleged breach of representations and warranties made in connection with mortgages sold to securitized trusts. (Amended Complaint - PDF). In June, 2015, the court issued a partial summary judgment decision, finding that the Receiver retained liability for Deutsche Bank’s claims, to the extent that such claims were not reflected at a stated book value in the financial accounting records of WAMU as of the failure date. (Amended Memorandum Opinion - PDF). The Receiver is seeking appellate review of the decision. Because the amount of the liability has not been determined, the potential impact on the WAMU receivership is not yet known.
Also, the Receiver must resolve a number of indemnity claims made by JPMC. JPMC has submitted over 100 notices of potential indemnity claims. (Notices can be found at Group 1: JPMorgan Chase Notices relating to Washington Mutual Whole Bank P&A - PDF in the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Service Center Reading Room - PDF and, JPMorgan Chase Notices relating to Washington Mutual Bank Whole Bank P&A at, Group 2: JPMorgan Chase Notices relating to Washington Mutual Whole Bank P&A - PDF). Should the Receiver be found liable on any of JPMC's indemnity claims, under the P&A, those claims will be satisfied as administrative expenses and thus before the claims of general unsecured creditors. Current information indicates that the Receiver is unlikely to have sufficient funds to distribute to holders of receivership certificates issued to junior note holders or equity holders of WAMU.
The financial status of the WAMU receivership can be found at the following link: (WAMU Quarterly Receivership Balance Sheet Summary). Note that the Total Liabilities line item does not include estimated litigation losses that are considered reasonably possible, including amounts that range from $ 1 billion to $10 billion. "
https://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/wamu_settlement.html
Uum..., why no change in the distribution amount? No assets sold...?
Again some facts from the FDIC and Brian Rosen to requests on my part regarding different issues. Take it unbiased:
FDIC regarding P&AA expiration date...
01/22/2015
Do you work in the accounting department at the FDIC? If you don't, how could you know that the $ 299B belongs to us?
"$3 to $15 will be a bargain"? could you explain please.
...right BK. That means an additional dilution. But I don´t know - is "legit" a suitable adjective to describe a character of an HF? Would just say they are merchants with their own ethics.
As regards the "floor", i don´t think they aren´t so brazenly to trade it down on $1,75 (or lower). That would be too conspicuously. If so, I would rather assume a range between $1,90-2,00. But it´s quite hard to speculate about. I´m just curious about what will happen. If they don´t want to dilute the stock more, they could convert at 2,25 everytime.
Legit or not, we will see...
The break through the $2,25 wall - this is what one could call a "potential sign". I´ve waited for. Remember the Series-B conversion range (1,75-2,25) - I guess they will exhaust it until the floor. Theoretically, then, after 20 trading days, which timeframe is necessary for the calculation, they will have the VWAP (Volume weighted average price) for conversion and maybe we an acquisition. Well, let´s wait for the floor...
That doesn´t sound negative, but realistically. KKR is a "Permanent-Buyer". Btw, some doesn´t read exactly the circumstances of this KKR purchase...
...Pardon. Don´t got it.
What´s new?
"what" is "on hold"?
WMIH did never made a public statement of the name of the acquisition target. It was just whisper down the lane over message boards...
Net operating loss-selling is disallowed since 1984. Before that it was a business practice. But today, no chance. Hence a public company must prevent a change of ownership. Otherwise it would risk its useable NOLs. The NOLs would be restricted by the IRS.
It was discussed here many times.
...sometimes this board drives one to despair.
...which stock?
i see... maybe you should argue that in a court room, not in a message board.
The letter to the politicians - does anyone know if this shareholder already sent it (15th?)? If not, i would suggest in any case to attach a signature collection of shareholders as many as possible. This kind of requests, and that of just one person, will not have any impacts otherwise. Most of all the three, respectively two (forget Kosturos) addresses are definitively insufficient.
no, actually. but define "recently".
December will be a big month. Mark these words.
W3, may i take the liberty of stating a question? What are you talking about ? Emails to WSJ, Law firms, new parties ... for what? What should they know ?
How about the SEC archive?
No link available, because Tepper didn´t make any public statements about WMIH in the last two months.
you are welcome.
yes, i do. appaloosa held approx. 17 mio shares after reorganization. they are stated as a beneficial holder (above 5%), together with greywolf, in the enclosed proxy statement (PDF page 22/36). both hadn´t to file a 13F because WMIH was not officially traded and the OTC didn´t require it. now at the NASDAQ they had to. hence you saw the massive filing of institutional holders in the third quarter.
http://wmih-corp.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Proxy-Statement.pdf
ps: btw, an average shareprice of $2.00 is not possible for this quarter.
tcr, he bought definitively not. it was imo a "misinterpretation" (deliberately or not) by GURU Focus, who is responsible for the Forbes article.
Tepper filed his released shares, like other investors this quarter.
hedge funds ?????????
Yes, they hold. At least a part of their initial position.
Would say, with Yahoo´s "sentiment": Strong Buy.
:) IMO
GREYWOLF CAP. filed the 13-F Doc too. So, Appaloosa didn´t open a new position as already presumed. The article in Forbes is not correct. Unfortunately. But Greywolf seem to have bought some more (green number) in the third quarter.
http://whalewisdom.com/filer/stock_history/greywolf-capital-management-lp/wmih
SC 13G 2012-04-05 WMIH CORP. COMMON STOCK WMIH 14,938,315 New N/A
SC 13G/A 2013-12-31 WMIH CORP. COMMON STOCK WMIH 14,929,515 -8,800 N/A
SC 13G/A 2014-12-31 WMIH CORP. COMMON STOCK WMIH 14,812,056 -117,459 N/A
13F 2015-09-30 WMIH CORP. COMMON STOCK WMIH 15,596,887 784,831 6.65
Additionally, GREYWOLF Cap. should make the same 13F Filing within the next days for its 14,... Mio stock in WMIH. Would be the confirmation that it was not a new buy of Tepper.
By the way, the author of the article is not Forbes itself. It was GURU Focus...
Royal, i think you are correct. The Forbes article is inarticulate. They announce a buy by Appaloosa in the third quarter but if you look at the average price of $2,00 you recognize that they are don´t talk about a "recent" buy. I was a little bit confused by the 13-F Filing from yesterday and the different share amount which they stated in the Proxy Statement for the shareholder meeting this year (16,9 vs. 17,02 Mio)
$300 - 350K or so.
@Compensation Filing - not really something new, except a billing of $13,704.09 of Phillips, Goldman & Spence, P.A., a new lawyer firm from Wilmington / Delaware.
Quote of their major areas:
"Phillips, Goldman & Spence specializes in two major areas of practice: civil litigation and business transactions. Our litigation practice includes the representation of defendants in patent, toxic tort, automobile liability, civil rights, insurance coverage and commercial disputes. The business transaction section offers expertise in bankruptcy, corporate and business planning and transactions, commercial document preparation and real estate transactions including zoning and land use matters."
http://www.pgslaw.com/
Does anyone know them?
you have to ask rosen, fdic, dimon - anyone of that caboodle.
good luck.