Retained Assets...
Your Honor. We're not really -- we
14 understand at one end of the spectrum there are creditors
15 and we'll talk about that, and I'm sure they'll be heard as
16 well -- that very much want to see the plan move forward as
17 quickly as possible, because there is a settlement that has
18 been negotiated by numerous parties around the table that would
19 provide over 6.1 to 6.8 billion dollars of value to creditors
20 who at the beginning of this case were looking at potentially a
21 de minimis recovery. And at the other end of the spectrum we
22 have the Felatively newly formed equity committee who has been
23 doing an investigation of the claims and causes of action of
24 the estate, both the ones to be settled and the ones that are
25 still being retained by the estate, for whoever's benefit that
and
Moving on, the next step is part (b), and that would
18 be "such other claims and causes of action which shall be
19 retained by the Debtors, and the proceeds thereof, if any,
20 distributed to creditors and equity interest holders pursuant
21 to the Plan, and the claims and defenses of third parties
22 thereto," and we've defined that as the "Retained Asset
23 Component"
and
We also have in there the part (b) of what is to be
14 retained, and that is because in negotiations that we had with
15 all of the settling parties, with the equity committee last
16 week, with the FDIC, we did talk a great deal about the concept
17 of the retained assets. Now, it's my position, Your Honor,
18 that the examiner doesn't need to do much with the retained
19 assets other than say the assets are retained and therefore the
20 liquidating trust can go ahead and pursue them. They will
21 still be there; they can be carried through. But I understand
22 that the equity committee is very interested in having a
23 neutral third party do an investigation of those retained
24 assets. And if that's what they'd like, then that's going to
25 be fine with us as well.
and
However, it's very important not to lose sight of the
4 timing, again. And so what we've built into this order as well
5 is a mechanism where the report of the examiner would be
6 divided into two parts, or it could come in two chapters: The
7 first would be the issues that are necessary on the settled
8 assets component for purposes of voting under the plan, and
9 then we provided in our proposed time frame that three weeks
10 later the examiner could produce the second chapter of the
11 report on the retained assets, so that the examiner would have
12 a little bit more time to work on the retained assets after
13 getting the part finished on the settled assets.
I think Alice is guided by another one... She knows more than we ever will... All she wants is justice... She knows exactly that the outcome will be more than 10B... All she wants to know, if there is a 75/25 till the end, to proof, that the underwriters got more, then they should...
If readed the transcript again, there is an agremment about the retained assets, thats why the examiner didn't investigate these ones...
the outcome was clear in 2011, thats why Sussmann an co. suggested us to vote for the plan, and that there will be a fair and reasonable recovery
Stay tuned....
