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.
Before you offer to teach me maybe best to reflect on your endless streak of failed predictions.
For example why dont you report back whether the recent dividend payment for Danish (country, not pastry) pharma company Novo Nordisk had anything to do with Escrows?
This is actually in relation to Vue Entertainment International Limited, which is why they put Vue Entertainment International Limited in the Subject line of the document and which is why they printed Vue Entertainment International Limited in bold at the top of the text.
But maybe that was not obvious for a “retired College Finance professor“?
Thanks for posting - this fits the picture really quite nicely.
Of course as usual there is not a shred of evidence to support your claims.
But who needs evidence when you already bought Super Bowl tickets from your Escrow payout, which literally only you and no one else received?
Of course, the 9 month DTCC testing program of its settlement system is a definite sign of Escrow payouts.
Good thing that you a “retired College Finance professor“, right?
Is there any update on the interim dividend for the Danish Pharma company Novo Nordisk which you expected to be paid to Escrows?
In reality of course there is no Plan 6 in force - because no such plan was ever confirmed. If Plan 6 had been confirmed , there would have been no need for Plan 7, which was confirmed.
This is not complicated.
Why don’t you post a link to the 307B lawsuit by WMI against the FDIC if it’s all documented?
Shouldn’t be difficult.
It is really quite simple:
COOP denies that a parent “XXXX” exists. You claim that it does.
One of you must be lying, as clearly you can’t both be right.
So who is it?
Somehow I would expect that a “retired College Finance Professor” would understand that the dividend for Novo Nordisk, a Danish (!) pharmaceutical company (!), will be paid out to the shareholders of Novo Nordisk - and not former Escrow holders.
But let’s just wait another 10 days and see another of your “theories” disappear.
Nothing to do with Escrows, of course.
Just as the dividend payment for a Danish pharma company or changes to the DTCC settlement schedule.
But as a “retired College Finance professor“ you know this of course.
AZ is giving his fan base exactly what they want - and facts are not wanted.
XXXX does not exist - as literally one single email to COOP would demonstrate
(double post)
Just ask COOP and post the answer here..
AZ would be amazed
Sure, your original post was about a company from DENMARK and now you write about NETHERLANDS (that’s two different countries)
But who cares?
Facts are just so inconvenient, it’s much better to live in a phantasy land as a “retired College Finance professor”
Claiming a link between Escrows and a Danish pharma company’s dividend payment or the modifications of the “Amended and Restated Stock Options and Futures Settlement Agreement” by the DTCC is not Due Diligence.
It’s just b/s.
The size is NOT the tell - because there is no size.
This is just a modification of the “Amended and Restated Stock Options and Futures Settlement Agreement” by the DTCC as it says very clearly on page 1 of this 115 page document
It has nothing to do with Escrows.
You don’t even read your “sources” or you simply don’t comprehend them - but of course you are “retired College Finance professor”, right?
But you’ll continue with this nonsense - and you will insult anyone who call out this incessant b/s.
Zero
The interim dividend for Novo Nordisk shares goes to Novo Nordisk shareholders - or holders of their ADRs.
Sure - you (of course) haven’t presented any Due Diligence linking the regular dividend payment for a Danish pharma company‘s ADRs with Escrow payments.
But nobody cares, right? We just wait for the date and new “theories“.
Insulting me won’t change the facts, “professor”.
Where is the “Due Diligence” to link an interim dividend payment for a Danish pharma company with Escrow payments?
And when the date comes and goes without anything for Escrows you’ll just make up another “theory” - correct?
This is the interim dividend payment for a Danish (country, not pastry…) pharmaceutical company.
JPM’s only involvement is that they have issued the company’s ADRs and therefore will pay the dividend on behalf of the company to US investors.
But as a “retired College Finance Professor”, you know all this - right?
You have made hundreds of predictions.
Success rate: 0%.
Pointing out the sheer lack of basic logic or even reading comprehension is certainly not hating
It is utterly ridiculous for a “retired Finance Professor” to cite forthcoming 2024 changes to the DTCC’s settlement schedule or the end of the “Wilmington Trust Company” as evidence pointing to Escrow payments.
It’s not an educated guess to link the end of the “Wilmington Trust Company” with potential Escrow payouts, it’s just nonsense
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=172578565
But you will just move on without further comment to many more hundreds of new predictions
And of course you are a retired Finance Professor.
Don’t forget that (only!) AZ already got paid in Feb 23 for his Escrows following a personal intervention of Brian Rosen and invested in SB tickets from the proceeds
One single phone call to COOP would reveal that XXXX simply does not exist
It’s not complicated
There is no link - and there never will be.
This entire theory of XXXX is laughable
“The WMB Notes currently show that they are "already" being managed and serviced by a Sub of (XXXX) ...“
This is awesome - you literally make all of this up without any link or proof, but you simply don’t care.
RD has literally made hundreds of these predictions, whether its transactions in Brookfield, BofA, JPM etc doesnt make a difference - they are all Escrow-related if you listen to him.
Even changes in the DTCC settlement system in 2024 are a sign of Escrow payouts.
You would need to ask RD to explain…
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=172476486
Sure - linear understanding won’t help, but changes in the DTCC settlement procedure in 2024 are a sure sign of Escrow payouts…
Sure - linear understanding won’t help, but changes in the DTCC settlement procedure in 2024 are a sure sign of Escrow payouts…
Sure - you‘re a retired Finance Professor, who has literally been posting hundreds of entirely unrelated events as a sure sign of Escrow payouts like this one here, a combination of some Brookfield payments and changes to the DTCC settlement system
Neither of which obviously has anything to do with COOP Mr Professor
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/replies.aspx?msg=172476486
Why dont you explain who the secret ‘XXXX‘ parent of COOP is?
Why dont you explain why COOP itself doesn‘t report anything about this secret ‘XXXX‘ in its official, legally-binding SEC filings?
Because you can‘t.
But of course you will continue with these claims.
Why don’t you send an email to COOP asking them if they are the subsidiary of another entity?
Takes 2 mins - or less…
No - he is not, because COOP is just simply not the subsidiary of any other entity, as a simple phone call to COOP‘s IR department would confirm.
He should also let COOP know that they are only a subsidiary of ‘XXXX’
I’m quite sure they would disagree
Bucket 1= Now to July 31th
July 31th is actually TODAY - but who cares, right? Just put out more random dates…
Just send an email to COOP‘s Investor Relations team and ask them.
You‘ll be amazed what they will answer on the record…