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 figure comes from the fact that there were 3,000,000 shares of Preferred Series P (WAMPQ during BK) with a face value of $1,000. This would be true given the absolute priority rule. However, after POR 7 the absolute priority rule was not followed and Ps, Ks, and commons are in the same class. For every $1 that comes into the trust $0.75 goes to K and P and $0.25 goes to the commons. This means that the preferred shares are not capped. They will receive face value at approximately $10 billion.
No, I believe it is 2.5% OF return to class 22. In other words, for every $100 that comes into the LTI class 22 will have a total of $25. Class 22 will receive $24.375 (97.5%) and WMIH will receive $0.625 (2.5%).
A purchase of assets with cash or some other equivalent instrument is neither a reversion or distribution to the buyer.
The implication of the line you quoted is that the assets belong to the trust and not the reorganized debtor. They cannot leave the trust without compensation or some type of exchange of value.
[Mordicai]
"Moreover, such an exchange would make the liquidating trust an investment trust subject to trust taxation at rate of 39.6 per cent"
That may or may not be true and is a much larger discussion that goes beyond the line you quoted. I believe there is a reason the BOD now has individuals with experience on this very issue.
Please bear in mind that the trust would eventually dissolve after distribution of the value received (cash or shares) to the escrow holders. The cost basis would be the original purchase price. I believe taxes are due upon a sell.
My prayers go out to your family Aladin.
That is simply inaccurate. I'm a pre-seizure holder and I remember that day and the days leading up to it very well. It was trading at $0.40 after the seizure was announced. It was trading up to $5 a share just days before.
Wachovia went down to $0.01 when it was believed it would be purchased by Citi. Instead Wells Fargo made a deal and it went up to $7.00 within 2 days. By your logic their assets were worth nothing.
You can clearly see Washington Mutual Inc (the holding company) had 30 billion in assets by looking at the 10Qs. TPG invested 8 billion shortly before the seizure. JP Morgan offered $8/share a few months before the seizure. Did the assets somehow lose all their value in those short months? No. Did the OTS seize the bank because they went under their tier-1 capital ratio. No.
Read the OTS fact sheet.
Ihub Post with OTS Fact Sheet
They were concerned about a run on the bank. Of course, it didn't help that media outlets were shouting fire by showing pictures of long IndyMac bank lines and claiming it was WaMu.
It's hard to believe you share the same feelings when you rationalize away the value in an attempt to "defend the deal".
By the way, most of the financials that were trading at Washington Mutual Inc. level back in 2008 are now $30+. Look at Wells Fargo they went down to $12/share and are now at almost $60/share.
Boris, I disagree. I remember people expressing the same sentiment about forming the Equity Committee. We all know where we would be now if we had just relaxed and let the system work it out.
JWW, I believe you need to ask for a specific document. They won't answer questions. Also, here is a section on fees and when they can be waived:
www.foia.gov/faq.html#fees
Can I ask that any fees be waived?
You may request a waiver of fees. Under the FOIA, fee waivers are limited to situations in which a requester can show that the disclosure of the requested information is in the public interest because it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations and activities of the government and is not primarily in the commercial interest of the requester. Requests for fee waivers from individuals who are seeking records on themselves usually do not meet this standard. In addition, a requester's inability to pay fees is not a legal basis for granting a fee waiver.
The market makers will offer a block regardless of your sell or buy request. Just watch level 2 quotes. They can and do trade between themselves regardless of your requests. They control the prices based upon the value they perceive not your buys/sells. It is not controlled by a series of average joe trades.
You can easily see the separation if you watch level 2 and request slightly above on your bid or slightly below on your ask.
Ex, I don't agree with the following statement.
You are correct that JPM bought all the WAMU balance sheet items including the servicing rights on the loans
It is obvious these MBS were sold before BK.
I understand some believe these are unaccounted for assets that will be returned to our escrow accounts. I wish it was true but it is not. Good luck to all of us here especially the pre BK holders.
EX, you said you don't know who bought the MBS assets but assert that they were sold. Yet, Washington Mutual's 10-Q from June 2008 shows that they still had 18 billion in MBS assets on their books. If you compare December 2007 to June 2008 you will see that they only sold 1 billion of MBS over the course of 6 months.
I'm curious about your source which states that 18 billion in MBS assets were sold over the course of 3 months.
JPM clearly didn't by them. They purchased and service the loans.
The process is very well defined and the FDIC regulations have been discussed in detail here. It is not a question of who is valuing the assets but who controls them. The valuation certainly matters when it comes time to talk about liquidation (assuming they even need to be liquidated).
There is evidence to strongly suggest that the Receivership holds assets which JPM did not purchase. Who knows what will happen to those assets and how much they are worth. We each have our own opinion, but I don't see the recent AIG ruling as being relevant because there are no additional claims to assert or win in court.
The Receivership will hand back whatever happens to be leftover. Only time will tell. You can look at the 10-Q and court documents for clues.
I'm not sure what lawsuit you expect should be filed to assert a claim. To my knowledge there is no conflict between the parties of interest. There is no claim to assert. The question revolves around interpreting documents and if the FDIC has assets on hand that were not purchased by JPM.
This discussion is greatly influenced by the precise meaning of language in formal documents such as "an/the Asset".
In other words, this isn't a question about reversing what was done, but understanding the scope of the assets that JPM purchased. If you believe that there is nothing in the Receivership left to distribute back to the holding company WMI then that is a question of interpreting the language in the documents.
It is not a question of asserting additional claims.
tcr3709, you are implying that the government can get away with whatever they want. Namely, the purchase and assumption agreement will stand.
I don't think anybody here is disputing the finality of the P&A. It is a question of what JPM received as outlined by the agreement. THAT is the relevant topic.
It is a simple matter of comparing WMI's 2008 (pre-seizure) 10-Q and BK filings that have already been discussed and listed.
The purpose of a guarantor is to increase confidence that the loan will be paid back. What value would the signature of a guarantor have if they have no assets? Their signature would have no value and they would be useless as a guarantor.
I had a typo. I was making dinner and missed my edit window.
$2.093206 for each WAMUQ (per $10,000,000,000.00 to the trust)
The calculator is very nice though. I usually just use $2.00 since the asset amount is just a guess anyway.
Royal, thank you for the link. I have seen that template before. It's very nice.
To those that are interested the difference between the document and what I presented - it is the number of released shares:
(again using German delimiter convention)
1.192.340.178 shares
This results in $2,083206 for each WAMUQ share per $10.000.000.00,00 coming to the trust.
Deepcut, I hope the following summary helps. I have used the German convention for "." and ",".
1.) approximately 1.2 billion (Milliarde) WAMUQ shares released
2.) WAMUQ receives 25% according to the payout matrix
So, each share of WAMUQ would receive the following for every $ that comes to the LTI:
1(USD) / 1.200.000.00,00 (released shares) * 0,25 = 0,00000000020833 $/WAMUQ/$_LTI
For 430.000 shares: (430.000 WAMUQ * 0,00000000020833 $/WAMUQ/$_LTI)
0,0000895819 $/$_LTI
For $1.000.000.000,00 incoming to the Trust:
$89.581,90 (USD)
For $10.000.000.000,00 incoming to the Trust:
$895.819,00 (USD)
etc…
OR a much simpler way is 10/4/1,2 = $2,083(3) for every $10 billion (Milliarde)
EDIT: If you follow the various speculation going around the estimates are from nothing to $30 billion to $100 billion. So, it is a wide range.
I personally believe there is around $36 billion in assets at the FDIC that could come back.
FINRA Corporate Actions FAQ
http://www.finra.org/industry/faq-upc-corporate-actions-faq
Basically it is either a name change or a split (in either direction). I believe the flag means they have submitted the required documentation.
I'm guessing most of you don't know me. I spent my time on the google board pre-seizure. I moved to the yahoo board immediately upon seizure. I had a minor role with helping Joyce in the early stages of trying to push for the EC and I contacted the court as well.
I joined astocks' board but I quit posting shortly after I realized I was the only one that wanted to see the same level of involvement in the reorganized company (WMIH) as we had in the bankruptcy.