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.
Because some of us here have tens of thousands of escrow markers?
And then we can make a NEW date! My favorite part!
Told ya.
I just finished analyzing the documents and we are definitely NOT getting paid tomorrow.
Friday close < .70 you watch
Yes. I am referring to escrow markers--i.e., Class 19 and 22. These are the old KQ, PQ, and UQ shares, I believe, that were converted to markers following our 2012 release elections.
There has been talk on this board about a Dec 15th distribution to holders of escrow markers since JPM was moving some money around--as if the only reason a multi-trillion dollar global banking monopoly would move money around would be to pay escrow markers left over from a bankruptcy.
I think one of the main issues with the perpetual posters here is that they have an aggrandized sense of self-importance, and project that onto this forum. In other words, they think big trillion dollar monopolies are hiring people to come on this tiny little forum for this one specific stock to manipulate rhetoric of like, fourteen investors tops.
Ridiculous.
No class is expected to receive distributions on December 15th.
I've noticed that this board is more geared toward the WMIH crowd who are hedging their bets on this stock--when in reality there are a handful of us who are 100% only here because we have escrow markers.
That's just part of the discussion folks. You'll have to take away from different people whatever applies to you.
THURSDAY: Open at $0.60; High of $0.65; Close at $0.5895.
Whoever is buying on this upswing is going to be very disappointed when it sinks to $0.50 lol
I've owned K series preferreds in one form or another since 2006.
If you really want to thank Veterans, support public policies that provide funding and attention to mental health, homelessness, and access to medical services and care. I took two bullets to my body and lost half my hearing in an IED explosion; I'd really like Americans to treat other Americans a little better.
$0.68 open on Monday, $0.50 by Friday!
This is the best comment I have ever read on this board lol :)
Confirmation bias is a hell of a drug.
You all might think about investing in gold for all the mental gymnastics I am seeing to rationalize WMIH's decline. :D
I used to write about penny stock scams a lot, and while I don't think WMIH is a scam per se, I do see all the signs of an impending pump and dump.
I don't see how that's possible; in POR7 there was a dismissal with prejudice of third-party (non-releasing) claimants, wasn't there?
Strategic use of NOLs (tax law DD)
The IRS created Section 382 to deter acquisitions of companies with substantial NOL solely motivated by tax avoidance objectives, without any valid business purpose. To accomplish this, Section 382 severely restricts the buyer's use of acquired NOL following a change in ownership, limiting annual use of such NOL to:
Purchase price of target's stock × IRS long-term tax-exempt rate
The Section 382 limitation may be circumvented if the target and buyer collaborate to sell unwanted target assets with unrealized built-in gains before the acquisition occurs.
The target may then use its NOL to offset the gain on the sale without limitation.
If the unwanted asset disposal occurred after the transaction, on the other hand, the NOL would be subject to limitation under Section 382 would not go as far in shielding the gain.
To find the current long-term tax-exempt rate used to compute the annual limit on NOL utilization under Section 382, visit the IRS' web site and search for "Applicable Federal Rate." Download the IRS' most recent revenue ruling on Applicable Federal Rates to find the long-term tax-exempt rate. The long-term tax-exempt rate for ownership changes in any given month is the highest of the adjusted federal long-term rates for that month and the prior two months.
According to the IRS document I found for 2017, the rate is < 2%.
To the extent an acquirer is unable to maximize its use of Section 382-encumbered NOL in a post-acquisition year—perhaps because a one-time charge in that period substantially reduced taxable income—the unused portion of the limitation is carried forward and available for use in subsequent periods.
For example, if the Section 382 limit is $10 and taxable income is just $8, the unused limitation of $2 is carried forward so that the limit next year will be $10 + $2 = $12.
Here is the actual explanation provided by Section 382:
Section 382(b)(2)
"If the section 382 limitation for any post-change year exceeds the taxable income of the new loss corporation for such year which was offset by pre-change losses, the section 382 limitation for the next post-change year shall be increased by the amount of such excess."
When a company has both encumbered and unencumbered NOL, Section 382 calls for using the former to offset taxable income—to the extent possible—first, before using the latter. Section 382 explains as follows:
Section 382(l)(2)(B)
"In any case in which a (i) pre-change loss of a loss corporation for any taxable year is subject to a section 382 limitation, and (ii) a net operating loss of such corporation from such taxable year is not subject to such limitation, taxable income shall be treated as having been offset first by the loss subject to such limitation."
More Facts about Section 382
* Section 382 is triggered when a change in ownership occurs, defined loosely as an increase in ownership interest of at least 50% by shareholders owning 5% or more of the target's stock, over a 3-year period. The precise definition of a qualifying ownership change is complex, but it is sufficient to assume that in any taxable or non-taxable business combination, a qualifying ownership change under Section 382 occurs.
* Companies with unused NOL seeking new equity financing should be careful not to issue so much new equity as to trigger a change in ownership under Section 382. For example, an IPO of a biotech company that accumulated substantial NOL during its start-up phase might trigger a qualifying change in ownership. Companies seeking to raise substantial equity financing should consider issuing straight preferred stock (no voting or conversion rights or participation in future earnings) rather than common stock.
* Section 382 requires that the buyer meet the continuity of business enterprise requirement; continuing use of the target's historic business or a significant portion of the target's assets in an existing business for 2 years following the transaction. If the continuity of business requirement is not met, the annual NOL limitation is zero. The continuity of business requirement, together with the annual NOL usage limitation, effectively discourage acquisitions of loss companies for their NOL alone.
When marking the acquired balance sheet to fair value under purchase accounting, the acquirer must consider whether it can fully utilize the acquired NOL. If not, the target's DTA attributable to NOL must be written down. Whether or not the NOL can be fully utilized is a function of the Section 382 constraint and the remaining life of the NOL. For example, suppose that the target has $20 of NOL that expire in 6 years. A buyer acquires all of the target's stock for $40, and the long-term tax-exempt rate is 5%. The annual limitation on the use of the NOL is $40 × 5% = $2. So, the combined company can utilize only 6 × $2 = $12 of the target's $20 of NOL. Assuming a 35% tax rate, this implies a ($20 - $12) × 35% = $2.8 write-down of the target's DTA.
Recall from the equation above that the Section 382 annual limitation is a function of the purchase price. If a prospective acquirer of a distressed, publicly traded target with large NOL waits until the target's stock price falls further to seek a deal, Section 382 may be more punitive and the NOL worth considerably less than had the acquisition been consummated at a higher purchase price. Therefore, where a target's NOL are important to an acquirer, the acquirer should be somewhat less sensitive to price and may prefer to act quickly in securing the deal before the target's stock price falls too much and destroys the value of the NOL.
I will go on the record and publicly declare that November 1st 2017 is a HUGE DATE for ESCROW SHAREHOLDERS because of the fact that NOVEMBER 1ST 2017 is the first day of ANOTHER MONTH in which we will not see a damned thing coming our way.
Thankfully, I get to say the same thing in december, too.. I'm really looking forward to the JANUARY 1ST conspiracy theories.
Mark your calendars!
The following dates are HIGH PRIORITY:
December 31, 2017: This is the LAST day of the year of 2017, which comprised of 365 days... Notice anything INTERESTING? 365 minus the average age of WaMu's Board of Directors as of 2006 (~65) = 300... That's the $300B we have been waiting for! COINCIDENCE? I think not!
March 31st, 2018: End of Q1! We all know that the SEC/FDIC/JPM are all just waiting for their Q3 reports to publicize this merger. I mean, why else would HEDGE FUNDS own this stock? HMM? HEDGE has 5 letters, FUNDS has 5 letters. COINCIDENCE? I think not!
April 15th, 2018: The secret merger will have to go into effect by this date because something something tax advantages. 4/15/18... interesting? 4+15+18 = 37... 2017+37 = 2054... 54-20 = 34... There's the $34 Billion we've been waiting for! COINCIDENCE? I think not!
Have I told you lately how much my love for conspiracy theories grows each and every day?
October 27, 2017 LOOK AT THE MATH...
Think about it:
October = 10, 10*2 = 20, and 20B is...... a number someone keeps writing.
The year is 2017... 20Billion on the 17th? We have to dig deeper...
The date: 10/27... 10+27? That's 37. Well at one point we know that commons are getting 25% (from the 75/25 split)... 37-25 = 12... 12, as in DECEMBER.
So $20B coming our way on the 17th of December! Mark your calendars!!!!
(This is what every post on this board feels like. Conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory.)
No, escrow marker shareholders are not entitled to any stock of anything, only cash distributions if there ever are any.
This is the most uplifting thing I have read about WaMu in 10 years. Thank you.
Actually it looks more like we're starting to decline:
http://d.stockcharts.com/school/data/media/chart_school/market_analysis/wyckoff2/wyss-02-markdown.png
Requests for confidential treatment are generally granted when the disclosure of such information could adversely affect the company's business and financial condition, usually because of the competitive harm that could result from such disclosure. Common examples of this kind of information include pricing terms, technical specifications, and milestone payments.
In most instances, the CTR is made with respect to sensitive information contained in a contract or agreement that is required to be filed as an exhibit to a registrant’s SEC filing, such as a registration statement,
Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q or a Current Report on Form 8-K. The obligation to file such contract or agreement stems from the requirement in Item 601 of Regulation S-K under the Securities Act (“Regulation S-K”) that a registrant file all material contracts not made in the ordinary course of its business in a Securities Act or Exchange Act filing with the SEC.
An issuer typically seeks confidential treatment in its CTR on the basis that disclosure of the subject information will cause it substantial competitive harm. In fact, the Staff requires the registrant to include this statement as one of its representations in the CTR, along with a representation by the registrant that the disclosure of the confidential information is not necessary for the protection of investors.
The specific exemption that was requested is (4); Documents which would reveal "[t]rade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential." 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(4).
The plot thickens.
I can't believe this forum is going crazy over a cold call to sell you services. No one has received a cold call from someone at their bank trying to sell them something? Holy monkey, my dudes.
First you have to wait until the 19th. Then it will be Oct 1st, start of Q4. Then it will be Dec 31/Jan 1, start of new year. Then it will be April 1st, end of Q1. Then it will be... Then it will be...
That's exactly what's going to happen. People on forums like this will see posts like "triple bottom reversal!" and then follow the volume to buy more, driving the PPS up. It will hit a ceiling, something in the order of .05 or .10, then they'll all sell and tank this back down. This is how WMIH has always been. Pump. Dump. Repeat. PPS variances in this stock have been due to investor psychology and nothing else.
If it's not obvious from the "former" part, this is not the same username I used back on the old board. Duh.
What happens in 8 days?
JB, I'm going through the archive.org versions that I can see and I'm not able to see it either. I see the yellow boxes redacting signatures on the latest link, but I'm not seeing a larger redaction in any previously available ones. Maybe we need special glasses?
I sold my WMIH share as soon as I got them. I am here for my escrow markers only. Sorry that upsets you. I was not aware the examiner's report was dismissed (with prejudice?) but I'm going to keep drudging until I can find where. Thanks!
It's been a long-standing conspiracy theory of mine that this examiner's report had an ulterior motive. If it didn't, then the examiner operated behind a wool curtain that was dangling over his head. (My opinion, obviously).
I am aware of footnote #39.
Where was the Examiner's report thrown out? I don't remember that. Thanks!
I'm sorry, but I've been here about that long, too. Was on the WAMKQ board before it turned into WMIH, and was there for quite a long time as well. And this is two personal attacks to my credibility without actually discussing the items we're supposed to be discussing. Thanks, though.
Summary of Return Likelihood for Common and Preferred Shareholders from the Examiner's Report.
Following the odd discussions on this board recently, I've pulled out some key elements of the examiner's report regarding common and preferred shareholders.
For the record, In 2007 I sold a home in southern California and all of the proceeds from that sale went into preferred shares of Washington Mutual ("invest in banks" they said.. "it's safe" they said.. live and learn!). I want face value+ as much as anyone, but that doesn't mean we should disregard the facts in front of us.
Examiner's Report, Part I
Link: http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/WM-Examiner-Report-pt1.pdf
Page 1: "The Examiner further finds that the proposed Settlement will most likely result in no recovery for any classes of Shareholders under the Plan. The Examiner also concludes that further litigation concerning any disputed asset is highly unlikely materially to benefit classes that are 'out of the money.'"
Page 4: "Following careful analysis, the Examiner finds the Estates' claims to significant assets, including Tax Refunds, TRUPS, BOLI/COLI, and preferences, all face legal impediments that negate any realistic possibility that further litigation of those claims will result in any meaningful distribution to Shareholders."
Page 26: "As part of his Investigation, the Examiner evaluated the impediments to obtaining through litigation sufficient funds to make distributions to Shareholders. The Settlement creates the appearance that WMI settled for just enought o pay unsecured creditors. Shareholders, who received nothing in the Settlement, understandably believe that better results could be achieved through litigation. / The Examiner finds that it is highly unliekly that there is any scenario which will result in substantial distributions to Shareholders. The following chart shows the classes (in order of priority) and amounts of hte various classes of claims:
[See Chart on p. 26, indicating Preferred Shareholders @ $7.5B in claims).
Page 27, continued from previous: "Setting aside any potential claims by JPMC or the FDIC against WMI, WMI would need to recover $16 billion in order to satisfy all creditor claims and preferred shareholders just to reach the common shareholders. Given the more than 1 billion outstanding share of WMI common stock, it would take substantially more to make any meaningful distribution to them."
Page 29: "Pursuant to the proposed Plan and Settlement Agreement, WMI preferred shareholders are at least $500 million "out of the money" and WMI common shareholders are at least $7 billion "out of the money." There is a small chance of modest distributions to some Preferred Shareholders but virtually no chance of distributions to Common Shareholders."
Page 30: "Although the Examiner is sympathetic to Equity's views, the Examiner finds no rememdy that will enable the Debtors to obtain sufficient assets for a distribution to Shareholders. It is highly unlikely that the OTS and FDIC decisions to seize WMB and sell it to JPMC can be successfully challenged. In any event, it appears that their decisions were reasonable under the circumstances."
Are you saying you haven't read the examiner's report?
Also, you're "most interested" in the fact that I don't post here all day every day? To what purpose would that serve? Conspiracy and conjecture are fun and all, but I'd rather come to the boards after significant court action and filings. Which I do. (I've got a post history; go on, I'll wait).
I'll create a separate thread specifically pulling out the pieces from the Examiner's report that I think are relevant to the discussions here.
Have a great day!
Yes, he did. In multiple places. And also literally on the first page of text after the table of contents.
Well if you read the report, in more areas than one (including just the first page, if you don't want to dive through it), he explains that the commons and preferred shareholders are extremely unlikely to receive anything back, as any leftover funds would go to the senior note holders and creditors.
What do you mean his findings were based on unaudited financials?
Wouldn't arguments to the contrary necessitate a refutation of the examiners findings?