Hate to disagree, but no, Judge Jones is not 'on the side' of shareholders. He made a careful, cautious, calculated decision to allow an AD HOC equity committee for the time being.
IF he were on your side, he wouldve appointed an official equity committee.
Jones is a debtors' kind of guy. He is not a shareholder friendly judge at all. He is in favor of banksters and bondholders. Thats just a damn fact.
This JCPNQ case MAY turn out to be different than his previous rulings, simply due to the popularity of it.
Additionally I dont think this 'OpCo PropCo' scam of Sussbergs' is gonna fly, given all the eyes on this case.
Too many objections to it already, this may be that 1 case where Jones must capitulate and allow shareholders some recovery, or shares in the new company. Debtors here have simply made way too many glaring errors, and tried to push way too far, too fast.
Time will tell, another hearing tomorrow.
This is my 1 allowed post for today on the JCPNQ board, GLTA.
Oh BTW uptick, yeah I still see ya. Even though I happen to agree with you on Judge Jones, your ad nauseam pumping of a SA article from May 29th is weak. The plan has already changed (see the docket filings of the changes agreed to by US Trustee Hobbs and Sussberg), so for you to continue to thump the original plan is somewhat ridiculous. In the end, you MAY BE RIGHT, and current classes 5 thru 12 may be erased as the original plan calls for, but JCPNQ is not there yet. Come up with a talking point more recent than May 29. Seriously.
