I want to attach this post to the Educational resources regarding MBS Trusts, so there is easy accessibility to consolidated DD.
CBA09 posts:
Posts#457584
"CBA09
Wednesday, 08/03/16 01:11:28 PM
Re: BBANBOB post# 457551
0
Post # of 539974
Bob,
May be, just may be, the addressed assets in court were those within a "SPE". If designed via a specific manner those so called "hidden assets" would be protected from bankruptcy as follows:
The structured solution to the bankruptcy, true sale, and debt-for-tax issues varies by venue. For example, if a U.S. bank wants to securitize receivables, the structure requires two SPEs to avoid a federally taxable asset sale and to achieve off-balance-sheet financing and a bankruptcy remote structure. In the U.S. SPEs are usually organized as trusts (for tax reasons) under the laws of the state of Delaware or of New York. The first SPE is a wholly owned, bankruptcy remote subsidiary of the originator/seller, and the SPE buys the assets in a true sale. The assets are now beyond the reach both of the creditors of the originator/seller and the originator/seller. Wholly owned subsidiaries are consolidated with the originator/seller for U.S. federal tax purposes, so this achieves the debt-for-tax objective. The second SPE is the issuer of the debt (or ABS) and is entirely independent of the originator/seller. It is a bankruptcy remote entity."
________________________________________________________________________
Post #459827
"CBA09
Tuesday, 08/23/16 12:23:26 PM
Re: tanjazielman post# 459788
0
Post # of 539974
What would make a Big Difference.
I don't see how knowing the investors, vis a via, certificate holders would amount to a Big Difference.
But I do see value in knowing:
1) Years still left on existing tranches within the trusts?
2) Residuals on existing tranches?
3) To whom are the servicing fees going / legal ownership of existing payments of loans being serviced?
4) If there are any Other Real Estate Owned, (OREO)- Fair Market value of Real Estate foreclosed? Especially properties that were securing the collateral of Trusts. To whom has legal ownership when they are liquidated?
5) Any still to come unwinding of remote SPE? Those not consolidated on the financials. "
________________________________________________________________________
Post #459967
"CBA09
Wednesday, 08/24/16 03:49:56 PM
Re: BBANBOB post# 459952
0
Post # of 539975
BBABBOB - Trust Entities.
I see a long list of affiliated entities. It is possible the Trust Entities such as CCB Capital Trust ones are where buildings & respective lands set.
One way to make buildings & lands off both WMI & WMB books is by the following:
1) WMB originally purchased, then
2) Sold to WMI in as sales lease back, then
3) WMI pooled sales leased back assets as mortgage backed assets by transferring to Capital Trust (s) entities.
4) On WMB books Buildings & Land removed.
5) On WMI books Building & Land removed.
Both WMB and WMI benefit from capital injection. WMB from sale proceeds to WMI and then WMI from proceeds of pooling Buildings & Land as asset backed securities.
In turn WMI would have the Buildings & respective Lands off balance sheets and so called there are the hidden assets."
________________________________________________________________________
Post #460216
"CBA09
Friday, 08/26/16 05:01:54 PM
Re: yes9 post# 460196
0
Post # of 539975
Yes9 - Assets Retained
A comment in court of such matter strongly suggest there are / will be assets available.
Hmmm... and JPM bought the whole bank!! Then why not claimed by JPM? Are these non WMB assets?
Possible reasons-
1) Assets totally owned by WMI and unknowingly seized.
2) Assets purchased by WMI and transferred to WMB.
In my auditing days I came across numerous Holding Companies that legally owned the assets then would transfer to their operating entities. Now if these assets were contractually set up as financing agreements with redemption clauses along with being consolidated with WMI financials they could be insulated from WMB bankruptcy.
Being the size of WMB this would be a nightmare accounting / auditing task. Discovery of these types of inter-company transactions would involve auditing loads of data among huge lists of spreadsheets.
Also totally owned SPE (s) of WMI could very well have to be audited to unmask the assets seized and not WMB. "
________________________________________________________________________
Post #460408
"CBA09
Sunday, 08/28/16 06:46:11 AM
Re: wwhatthe post# 460263
0
Post # of 539975
wwhatthe - You can't be serious!
Your Quote:
I believe it’s the Common Shareholder who will walk away with all the spoils…
$279.6 Billion Dollars
Banks, unlike most entities are measured by deposits vs. assets. Deposits are the "Life Blood" of banks. Deposits come in many forms, such as Time Deposits, Demand Deposits, and even Fed Funds if necessary. Banking is all about asset / liability management. Therefore banks must keep percentage of loans to deposits at a safe percentage. Generally no more than 85 %. If this gap gets higher than Fed Funds are obtained.
Now to book value:
Banks and Savings and Loans are different animals vs non bank / s & l. Here book value is would really be misleading as deposits are the measurement of such entities. Remember deposits are liabilities from which loans are created and the underpinning of such assets. Thus liabilities are to me subtracted. So with banks and s & l we would used "Net Book Value" - Assets less Liabilities.
Net Book Value was @ 28 billion June 2008 as follows -
As of June 30, 2008, Washington Mutual Bank had total assets of US$307 billion, with 2,239 retail branch offices operating in 15 states, with 4,932 ATMs, and 43,198 employees. It held liabilities in the form of deposits of $188.3 billion, and owed $82.9 billion to the Federal Home Loan Bank, and had subordinated debt of $7.8 billion.
I too want to see a great return for all here that have been hurt but lets keep it real! "
________________________________________________________________________
Post #486990
"CBA09
Friday, 09/08/17 09:02:03 PM
Re: Large Green post# 432522
0
Post # of 539975
Ref - ***The Holy Grail*** (retained assets)
They will still be there; they can be carried through.
What on earth can still be there as a "concept of retained assets?!?"
My opinion - Trapped residual value of magnitude within SPE / Trusts.
Two elements that can significantly enhance residual value:
1) Excess spread ( difference between yield of receivables over expenses paid.)
2) Extent of over collateralization ( Receivables moved to the trust and never sold to certificate holders/ investors.)
Few know the treasures that lie within each securitization Trust. I can state from my professional career SPE / Trusts have done very well. "
________________________________________________________________________
Post #463161
"CBA09
Monday, 09/26/16 02:47:35 PM
Re: Evintos post# 463137
0
Post # of 539975
BBANBOB - Agree!
Your Quote:
Ordinary income rate does not apply to WMILT Escrow. If you received Q, K, or P shares for free you will still have a cost basis.
Commentary:
I agree with your comments as Escrows are Capital Assets with a Cost basis. And, because there is a cost basis what was surrendered had value. Thus ones cost basis is the stock value surrendered. I take it you used the "Free" comment just as a narrative comment.
Any future cash distributions that would exceed ones cost basis would follow Long Term Capital Gains Treatment. "
________________________________________________________________________
Post #489606
"CBA09
Friday, 09/29/17 09:09:43 AM
Re: Large Green post# 489600
0
Post # of 539975
Ref: $ 615 Billion- The U.S. Senate Sub-Committee (Levin – Coburn Report) reveals in its findings of fact that WaMu sold and securitized at least $615B of residential mortgage loans through its subsidiaries “WaMu Asset Acceptance Corporation” and “Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corporation” who acted as “Depositors” in the securitization transactions.
Commentary:
Sold means $ 615 Billion removed from WMB balance sheet. Legal title transferred.
Ref: The U.S. Senate Sub-Committee (Levin – Coburn Report) reveals in its findings of fact that WaMu sold and securitized at least $615B of residential mortgage loans through its subsidiaries “WaMu Asset Acceptance Corporation” and “Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corporation” who acted as “Depositors” in the securitization transactions.
Commentary:
Trust Sales accounting solidified! Reason - Two Tier SPE Entities. First tier (i.e., Depositors - “WaMu Asset Acceptance Corporation” and “Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corporation), Second Tier issuing Trusts.
Conclusion:
$ 615 Billion were removed from the Balance Sheet of WMB in true sales. Neither WMB / JPM nor the FDIC receivership has any claim to these securitized Trust assets.
Further, revenue that has & continues to be generated remains captive within each respective Trusts.
Now the caveat - The holding company generally receives the cash flow from Trusts either directly from the Trusts or indirectly thru it's Depositors. From here the holding company will past "on an as needed basis" cash to it's banking entities. To safeguard and protect the assets received by the holding company it will not have an expressed contractual rights to pass on what it receives. "
________________________________________________________________________
Post #489618
"BBANBOB
Friday, 09/29/17 10:09:44 AM
Re: CBA09 post# 489606
0
Post # of 539976
Ref: $ 615 Billion- The U.S. Senate Sub-Committee (Levin – COBURN Report)
Remember that I got a call from COBURNS assistant shortly before his announcement to leave the SENATE
BOBOPHRASED
Sen Coburn wanted me to call you and tell you "THIS WAMU THING IS NOT OVER BY A LONG SHOT, and it will be taken care of and made right
When I tried to get him to field other questions all he did was repeat "This is not over by a long shot and will be taken care of"
________________________________________________________________________
Post #463722
"CBA09
Monday, 10/03/16 08:37:45 AM
Re: hotmeat post# 463715
0
Post # of 539976
hotmeat - Turnover Proceeding.
Regarding Equity and Assets-
WMI vs. WMIIC ( Turnover Order ) is clearly telling the whole world they have the "Sole Legal" unconditional rights and privileges to said assets that others do not have!
My career has involved many years in the banking industry. Some auditing, strategic planning, call reports and valuing both banks and S & L for acquisitions. Thru my empirical experience I know all to well how these depository entities and parent holding companies operate to secrete assets and income ( all within the confines of regulatory statues; both legal and accounting ). "
________________________________________________________________________
Post #464598
"CBA09
Tuesday, 10/11/16 12:44:14 PM
Re: BBANBOB post# 464591
0
Post # of 539977
BBABBOB - Reason for filing.
Your Quote:
I see no other reason for them to have filed first........
Commentary:
An entity does not have to be insolvent to file for bankruptcy protection. I can think of one reason a solvent entity would be filing - to preserve it's going concern.
Maybe WMICC had rights to future non financial assets (i.e., future revenue stream ) then that would be a valid reason to file. "
________________________________________________________________________
Post #464678
"CBA09
Tuesday, 10/11/16 10:13:55 PM
Re: W3Research post# 464626
0
Post # of 539978
W3Research - Escrow Compensation.
Your Quote:
When will Escrow Share Marker Holders start to see this compensation?
Commentary:
I believe a relevant part of escrows windfall will come from SPE's / Trusts. Therefore, available $$ will be subject to pooling & service agreements related termination of trust funds.
Based on the level / manner of participation in the pooling & servicing agreements $$ of revenue are deposited each distribution date to specific earmarked accounts. Here the $$ amounts remain and accumulate up until the termination of trust funds. Generally they remain within the SPE's Trusts for both credit enhancement and in turn protected / isolated from a sponsors bankruptcy.
Surely one would surmise that some of the SPE's / Trusts have reached maturity and thereby terminated. It would not surprise me if a separate cash account has already been set up to pool cash from those SPE's / Trusts that have reached maturity.
Escrow being paid -
Maybe we will see some return this year and on a yearly basis from this year forward until final trust terminated. Circumstances will dictated when we get paid and not if we get paid."
________________________________________________________________________
Post #490881
"CBA09
Friday, 10/06/17 03:55:45 PM
Re: BBANBOB post# 490863
0
Post # of 539977
Ref: Our interests are in what was OUTSIDE OF THE WMI BK CASE, not what was in it, now we'll be glad to take that as well, but the MONEY AINT IN WMI BK CASE, it's outside of it in our/my opinion.
Comment:
Yes exactly -- Outside, specifically bankruptcy remote assets. Those within SPE's classified as "True Sale" securitized assets.
Simply put, "Off Balance Sheet Assets" reflects assets that WMB gave up the legal ownership rights and complete control to SPE's which in turn is owned by WMI.
WMI being the parent, it is highly unlikely the court will dispute of the final ownership of retained assets to WMI. Just look at the Facts:
1) Off Balance sheet assets are removed from WMB. (Legal ownership given up)
2) Off Balance sheet assets initially transferred / sold to SPE # 1
3) Off Balance sheet assets subsequently transferred to SPE # 2 / Trust.
4) Neither SPE # 1 & # 2 are subsidiaries of WMB but rather WMI.
5) Generally SPE # 1 is the credit enhancer within SPE # 2. Thus SPE # 1 would have ownership in the form of subordinate tranches, namely called a equity ownership.
6) Both the SPE's # 1 & # 2 along with assets and income generated within are isolated from WMB. "
AI
