InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 53
Posts 6752
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 11/18/2016

Re: DaJester post# 792143

Wednesday, 05/01/2024 3:13:58 PM

Wednesday, May 01, 2024 3:13:58 PM

Post# of 797761

At no point did I claim that I intended to sue anybody.



Which makes your continued discussion of possible future lawsuits that much more hypocritical. Are you really basing part of your common investment thesis on the idea that someone, someday, might bring a lawsuit and that said lawsuit would succeed in such a way as to make the common shares worth appreciably more? That is a very hard needle to thread with many potential points of failure, especially in light of the long string of court losses in the cases against Treasury.

The current sweep of the profits is into the LP.



No, this is wrong. The companies really are building capital. The LP ratchet is not a continuation of the 2012 NWS; this is exactly why the Supreme Court denied prospective relief in the Collins case.

It would follow a similar logical argument that the action does not allow the shareholders to realize the benefits of their shareholder agreement.



The 2012 NWS already removed all shareholder economic rights in the future by making it impossible for FnF to ever build capital. Any amendment to that agreement which extends that extinguishment of value is not cause for future legal action because the extinguishment was already challenged in court. Suing specifically over the LP ratchet in the 2019 and 2021 letter agreements would amount to double jeopardy.

Possibly more so than a cash sweep because the LP sweep means they need to pay down the LP being taken (same amount as cash sweep), PLUS also paying 10% dividends on the LP amount or the entirety of the increase in net worth until they can pay it off.



That makes no sense: the LP is not and never was repayable.

Got legal theories no plaintiff has tried? File your own lawsuit or shut up.

Posting about other posters is the last refuge of the incompetent.