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.
What to do, what to do.
Look for further delays and a rise of the shareprice in anticipation of new developments.
From the same article:
Dish is “disappointed” because the FCC’s decision delays introduction of “new mobile broadband competition” Aaron Johnson, a spokesman for the Englewood, Colorado-based company, said in a statement last week. He didn’t elaborate on the network plans other than to say Dish would complete the DBSD and TerreStar airwaves acquisitions as soon as possible. A separate company spokesman, Marc Lumpkin, declined to comment further yesterday.
"as soon as possible" is not the same as the real quote: "as soon as practible".
So where does this leave the confirmation plan? Is there a March 20 deadline now for Dish to close the deal?
I'm sure the Judge would want to know what they are going to do.
I believe that the FCC approval was a condition for the transaction with Terrestar. So now that Dish didn't get this approval, the Debtor will try to find a new buyer, with DISH guaranteeing the original purchase price. As of Jan 1 2013 however Terrestar can find a new buyer without DISH involvement. So were does this leave the confirmation plan? Not sure, the market seems to think nothing has changed, so it probably hasn't.
Since the deal with DISH will probably not close before the debtors find a new owner (the meaning of 'as soon as practible' as I see it), as per the contract with DISH, I don't see the POR confirmed yet. And if it takes longer than January 1 2013 there will be a whole new ballgame!
Things could get interesting if somehow the exclusive period would end and other POR's could be entered. I think there was a motion for an extension of the exclusive period but I haven't seen a signed order yet.
This will creep up into the pennies before March 7.
You were talking about 20%. I guess that 20% of face value, not?
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=71390716
I'd rather base my opinion on the court documents and news.
That's why we are talking about 20%, aren't we?
AHUM, but yes I know you can't compare securities...
hardasset
Share
Thursday, January 19, 2012 10:37:04 AM
Re: clawmann post# 40157
Post # of 40618
I dunno Clawmann, but I think you are reaching. Which is ok. Long ago I felt that preferreds would need to see at least 70% before commons got a bone. Commons got a bigger bone, relatively but the best way I can reconcile that is the pre-seizure holders are deserving, if that enters into the equation anywhere. I suspect it did, because of the massive fraud involved. I remember in the Worldcom case, the SEC took $750 million right off the top and distributed it later to the commons on a sliding scale, depending on how long the shares were held. No one argued with that, even though senior creditors only got a 23% recovery. And Bernie Ebbers rots in prison, where Jamie is destined.
So the market is 100% correct on the future outcome of this BK case?
And to add: in other BK cases a $ 200 preferred shareprice could send commons through the roofs.
Who says there is a 20% recovery for preferreds? Is it in the POR? And is the POR confirmed yet, aren't there objections by preferred and common shareholders and maybe some Icon and preying investor looking into this mess?
Again, it's just the current shareprice in a tightly held class with no volume at all.
Then tell me why at this point preferreds should be trading much higher. In this case it either happens or not. And with happening I mean that in the next two months the POR is voted down and other plans are being allowed.
There is almost no volume on the preferred shares, so they are probably tightly held. WAMU preferred shares traded for 1.5 to 3 cents on the dollars for three years and commons are getting some distribution now as well, if their POR is being confirmed.
It's not that more money will come here every day and you can watch this over some period. If enough money is suddenly flowing in, which seems to be the gamble here, both preferred and common shares can profit at the same day. If it's not enough, you will see only the preferred shares rise. And that will probably be the end of the story, unless an examiner will be appointed on the appeal, but that is not very likely.
If equity is out of the money now by just a several hundred thousand dollars I believe that's actually not too bad. I'm sure I saw the transcript before and now it is locked. I saw a post about this before, maybe two weeks ago,and I checked the transcript then because I found that hard to believe, but I cannot find the post either.
Just went through the docket again, but I'm sure it was the hearing about amongst others the examiner motion (so it must have been nr 287, my bad) and the judges remark was related to the request for an examiner.
I don't understand, so maybe, yes, I'm totally inaccurate.
What happened to docket nr 327? Halfway the document the judge concluded that equity was out of the money by several hundred thousand dollars.
http://www.terrestarcorprestructuring.com/maincase.php
Transcript regarding Hearing Held on 12/14/2011 10:07 AM
Thanks! So voting is a condition for the conversion to Newco, but there is no relation with the number of shares you have?
If I buy more shares later this month (I'm already a shareholder), can they be conversed if I give releases? Or only the ones that are on record today?
I believe it was a shareholder calling his office about the voting deadline and Susman picked up the phone himself and said to him not to worry about voting: 'it's all over'.
Yes, she said that and than corrected herself, or rephrased, that that alledgedly were insider trading.
Like I said, it probably would have been a closed session, let's say at 9:00 AM (open session started at 10:00 AM)
FDIC Consumer Protection Issues
+Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) (F.R. Page 34230) - Meeting
10:00 am
06/14/2011
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) (F.R. Page 34230) holds a meeting of the Board of Directors.
Agenda includes: Disposition of minutes of previous Board of Directors' Meetings; summary reports, status reports, reports of the Office of Inspector General, and reports of actions taken pursuant to authority delegated by the Board of Directors; memorandum and resolution re: Enforcement and Transfer of Regulations of the Office of Thrift Supervision Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010; and memorandum and resolution re: Final Rule on Risk-Based Capital Standards: Advanced Capital Adequacy Framework-Basel II; Establishment of a Risk-Based Capital Floor
Location: FDIC, 550 17th Street NW, Board Room, Washington, D.C.
Contact: Walter Johnston, 202-418-0807, Walter.Johnston@FCC.gov [Note: Meeting will be webcast at http://www.vodium.com/goto/fdic/boardmeetings.asp] (+WAFE900+)
The FDIC has a board meeting on June 14th. It is open to the public, but a closed meeting could conviently held the same day.
I apologize, I'm sure its a bank holiday in Germany tomorrow, I didn't know they followed the US and Canadian schedule.
Markets are closed tomorrow in Germany because of ascencsion day. Maybe this would make tonight a good night for news?
Fsshon, unfortunately a lot of young people in Europe suffer from Lyme disease without knowing this and this disease can mimic several serious conditions and be very hard to diagnose. Please let them check this, if she has been exposed to ticks.
Would post-seizure holders be able to participate in such an action? And would such a tactic not be against the purpose of an EC?
In my opinion Rosen had no business negotiating the GSA.
The ruling was that Debtors did rely on councils advice!
Contrary to what they said in court.
So Debtors know they cannot try again, buth their face is saved.
Doesn't this by definition make the GSA unreasonable?
JPM is turning the money over, but they want something back in return. How reasonable is that????
So the transfer was completed on Friday, one day after WMI filed for bankrupty?
The examiners assignment, isn't that the problem? The hidden assets didn't need to be investigated, just the ones in the plan?
Sly, it is a weird answer from a lawyer, you never say that you "try" something, you just do it. Even juniors are trained to never write "try" or "hope", you just do it or you expect.
So this anwer must come from an absolute junior or is misleading.
If it is a real answer Sussman should be held accountable.
I'm a laywer. First thing we learn is to never write down that you "try" something, you just do it and you are supposed to be confident in doing it.
So it is a bit of a weird answer, maybe it is supposed to be weird.
Chessman, I can't open them.
That would be nice, can you post this?
Chessman, there are more forms as far as I can see, one of them has the $1.8B bid on them.
The first two forms we have seen and discussed before on the boards. Notice that the Citi bid was non-conforming (so it did not count). Maybe JPM's bid should actully be be held non-conforming as well, as the made certain agreements before the made the bid(see the examiners report).
I'm not able to read the last form fully.
you don't know what you bought?
Thanks WitzCatz!