News Focus
News Focus
Followers 2
Posts 44
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 07/25/2016

Re: CBA09 post# 500991

Monday, 12/18/2017 4:56:15 PM

Monday, December 18, 2017 4:56:15 PM

Post# of 749756
Couple of questions for you.

In post #498826 you made the comment

WMIIC's role was two fold:

1) Provide / Solidify assets "MBS" as bankruptcy remote. By way of "WMB" (Originator) to WMIIC (Depositor) to Trust. In effect a TWO TIER protection. Totally taking WMB out of any risk of substantive consolidation.

2) WMIIC being the depositor would also be the provider of credit enhancement. Having what is referred to as residual interest. Holders of subordinate certificates & overcollaterized loans.

Are you making an assumption in your comments above?

In all of the trusts listed in the DB lawsuit as well as numerous other trusts I have seen WMB or a sub of WMB has been the originator & depositor.

If WMI or WMIIC was neither the originator or depositor for the trusts how does that benefit the estate of WMI/WMIIC?

Also, On a previous post #498722 you said:

2) WMI abandoned it's stock as worthless on record with the Estate. The Estate in turn diverted all future benefits back to WMI. A clever astute move by WMI.

Where are you seeing that WMI is receiving any future benefit from WMB with regard to the trusts or are you making an assumption?

Thanks








Discover What Traders Are Watching

Explore small cap ideas before they hit the headlines.

Join Today