Mr Cooper Group Inc (COOP)

[tcr7309]

willwin, this is interesting. In the context of the fdick it's interpretation can mean the following imo.

When the fdick seizes an entity, they may not necessarily know if that asset is worth more than the liabilities. So in fdick simple terms, if money transfers from acquirer to the fdick, that could mean that they paid a "premium" for that asset, premium meaning that in the acquirers eyes the assets was worth more than the liabilities, thus jpm thought the assets were worth more than the liabilities by 1.88 billion so they paid a premium to acquire that asset.

There is no way, the term premium means that there will be future payments made to the fdick from jpm, That just does not makes sense especially in these types of deals. Both parties want to be done with the deal once the money changes hands and the assets are turned over. If that was not the case, every deal would drag on. Fdick wants deals done quick so they can close them out and assure that no insurance funds will be used.

The more I think about this, the more ludicrous it sounds that jpm would pay more or for that matter have stewarded holding company assets and give them back.

all imo