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.
rp: agreed. This is a value play, not a day trade stock.
I added some at 12.02
Picked up some more at 12.26
Thanks, andyya.
Does anyone know how many coop shares one escrow P will get? One escrow K (should be 1/40th of what an escrow P gets)?.
I understand "imminent" distribution (a distribution about to happen);
and even "eminent" distribution (a distribution that is eminent among distributions, the king of distributions); but what in the world is an "immanent" distribution? A spiritual presence may be immanent, but a distribution?
I picked up some more at 12.41. Good job getting some at 12.36.
About as clear an example of a judicial drubbing of a lawyer as I have ever seen.
There is a statute of limitations on legal actions for fraud. It begins running when the fraud is discovered or, by the exercise of reasonable due diligence, should have been discovered.
Under most state laws, once the statute of limitations has begun to run, a plaintiff has anywhere from 2 to 5 years to file an action for fraud. If the fraud is against the US, the US normally has seven years to file the action.
Damn! You're good.
The UWs are not fighting anything. Why do people interpret what is going on in that manner?
The UWs negotiated a deal with the LT that puts their claim in class 19. It would take the mutual agreement of both the LT and the UWs to change that deal. The LT has given no indication that they are inclined to renegotiate the deal. They just want to go with what they have and close the bankruptcy.
Alice then jumped in at the last moment and tried to argue that the deal with the UWs was improper. The LT defended the deal. Walrath agreed with the LT and denied Alice's motion. Alice appealed.
I don't see any evidence of the UW actively fighting to stay in class 19. They negotiated a deal with the LT and then Alice challenged it. The Judge said the deal was OK. Now Alice is appealing, and the LT is again defending the deal.
Why is the LT defending the deal? Put yourself in their shoes: You are heading to the close of an 11-year bankruptcy process. You have worked out the disposition of all claims. The end is in sight, and then someone comes out of left field and says "Wait, you cannot do that." The LT is not going to go back and renegotiate with the UWs just because someone tries to throw in a monkey wrench at the end. The LT is going to let the courts decide this.
This is not that hard to understand if you are not wearing conspiracy colored glasses.
HM:
I agree that Reason #1 is the principal driver, but I think that Reason #2 also played a role.
You are right, hotmeat. This entire episode about the proper classification of the UW's claim is a tempest in a very very tiny teapot that does not make any sense whatsoever in the bigger scheme of things.
So why did AG pursue this? It just delays the bankruptcy closing and does not do anything to help escrow holders; in fact, it almost certainly helped to wipe out the last bit of LT cash that might have gone to escrows.
So why did AG pursue this? There are only two (speculative) reasons that seem to make sense:
1. She is simply personally after the money (the $3 mil) she asked for in her appeal (if she is not interested in that, then why did she ask for it?); and/or
2. She has been a message board cult hero for a long time; but as the bankruptcy process was drawing to a close, the errancy of her views and predictions was becoming more and more evident. She needed to do something - anything - to salvage her status. Even if that "something," when looked at objectively - amounts to little more than an irrelevant valueless annoyance.
Then add that to the list of silly conclusions.
If the 75/25 does not apply, then any money coming into the estate of WMI would go to prefs until they are whole. Anyone arguing something different is either selling something or without understanding.
Why would it go exclusively to commons? I see no justification for even thinking that. If APR were followed preferreds would have to be made whole before commons see a penny. How can commons move in front of preferreds? If I were a commons holder, I would hope that the 75/25 applies to everything.
Thanks The1andonlyt:
"Technical charts are forming some indications that can mean that the COOP stock is about to explode, and the signals are generating curiosity about this stock in the markets. On the charts, the stock’s volume price trend is 3.08. Another important signal of the Relative Strength Index (RSI) is balanced at 50. This shows that after a low period, the stock has a probability of rising high again."
No. The pre-holders sold their stock - and with it all rights to any distribution. If a distribution were made to a pre-holder, that would work a major injustice to the buyer, and it would certainly spark a lot of litigation.
Stop dancing around the bush, it's putting a sour taste in my eye!
(Your turn)
I know that it would take $10 bil to give P's $1000 face. This has all been worked out in detail long ago.
$850 million would only give P's $85 each.
Nicely presented. Member mark for you.
That number is for those who want to participate telephonically, not for those who just want to listen in.
Not possible.
Next.
Vodka, I am far more interested in what, if anything, you might have heard about the discussions, goings-on, at the FDIC. Everything else posted on this board has not been worth thinking twice about.
Nonsense.
Hi V, my thinking is that the prospect of some payout from the FDIC to former WMI shareholders relates to the LIBOR suit. This prospect was also included for the first time in an LT quarterly earlier this year.
I will be happy being only a bit player, as long as we get at least $1 bil.
I will be very happy if $1bil comes back. Far more than I have been expecting.
Thank you, Jerry. Your statement that it cannot go over 9 helped us do just that. Now please repeat the same post next Friday, but this time write that it cannot go over 10.
An increase in interest rates is used to control inflation by two mechanisms:
(1) it reduces the appetite for debt and therefore debt-financed spending; and
(2) it increases savings, and therefore the use of current income for spending.
Then explain to me why Nate - who stirred the pot far more than AG has - should get nothing more than what other escrow holders will receive, while AG should get $3m before escrow holders see anything?
Wo, do you understand that she wants to be paid $3m before escrows see a dime?
And I do not see any reason for her to claim that she has made a substantial contribution to the case.
Nate Thoma, on the other hand, made a huge contribution to the case. Without him, there would be no escrows, and none of us would have received WMIH shares. Equity would have been cancelled out in 2011. If he is getting nothing (and has asked for nothing), Alice's unjustified request for anything is - at a minimum - obnoxious in the extreme.
Who is that?
The logic is compelling.
Maybe we should come up with a script for a movie about WAMU and the post-bankruptcy message board crowd.
I have the title: "Alice Doesn't Post Here Anymore."
It has always been. I imagine some people get some unhealthy sense of fulfillment or satisfaction from having a following of groupies.
The formula is simple: Tell folks what they want to hear ("We are all going to be rich, and here's why....") and a signifcant number will hang on your every word and defend you against those trying to expose your BS.
I have never thought that Bop, CSNY, AG, whatever she is called, had much of a handle on anything; but she certainly convinced a lot of folks that she really knew what she was talking about, her being an attorney and all (eyes rolling).
Tell me about the Rabbits, George.
Or that simply isn't there.
Nonsense.
I am also certain she will lose and get nothing; I just wanted to bring to the board's attention her futile attempt to put money in her own pocket at the expense of escrows. The fig-leaf has now fallen off the statue.
Only if you have a Pacer account.
I am surprised the board is not up in arms about this: