InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 9
Posts 1239
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 04/13/2007

Re: Fanatical Infidel post# 84217

Wednesday, 06/05/2019 10:03:09 AM

Wednesday, June 05, 2019 10:03:09 AM

Post# of 111251
Below from Newflow, I divided 1 bill by 48mil shares

13. The indenture trustees for the Subordinated Debt linked to the Trust
Preferred Securities filed proofs of claim on behalf of the holders of such securities prior to the
Bar Date. These claims, identified in the chart below, were subsequently Allowed against LBHI:
Claim No. Allowed Amount Plan Class Applicable Trust
21805 $314,207,499.10 LBHI Class 10B Capital Trust III
22122 $311,742,937.05 LBHI Class 10B Capital Trust IV
22123 $416,013,746.69 LBHI Class 10B Capital Trust V
67753 $234,250,517.60 LBHI Class 10B Capital Trust VI
14. Thus, as was intended, in this case, the indenture trustees for securities listed
on the Bar Date Order’s “Master List of Securities”(CTs are there as per my research) filed a global proof of claim on behalf of all
holders of such securities. It is therefore of no import that the Trusts appeared on the Bar Date
Order’s “Exempt Entities List” but did not file proofs of claim. The beneficial interests of the
Trusts and the individual holders of Trust Preferred Securities were represented by more than
$1 billion in Allowed claims against LBHI. [See Bar Date Order at 3, 5.]
15. Wu didn’t file a proof of claim prior to the Bar Date – because he did not
hold any claim against LBHI prior to the Bar Date. But more than 1,725 proofs of claim were
filed by other parties who purported to hold the Subordinated Debt and/or Trust Preferred
Securities. The Court disallowed and expunged each of these claims as duplicative of the Allowed
claims filed by the indenture trustee referenced above