Mr Cooper Group Inc fka COOP

[Dragynn]

On the topic of pre- vs. post shareholders, I agree Fish, that some here tend to jump on new posters too quickly. Especially in light of the fact, that this is a valid question. And the fact is, that "a share is a share is a share", is nonsense until proved otherwise, proof that no one here has, and likely will not have any kind of decent time frame, especially now that the judge has approved the big iron curtain to cover-up the proceedings...IMO there is way too much "redaction" and "confidentiality" going on here.

The BofA-Merrill-SEC case has some important parallels and precedents being set as we speak (feel free all to tell me how it absolutely is meaningless and has no bearing on this case, the more thoughtful folk will doubtless see where i'm coming from).

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/23/business/23bank.html?hp=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1266933851-aUvptFsrSbmffHfaVfPMEQ

The Judge just approved a 150 million dollar settlement, a paltry amount in his view (and mine), but the point here is, the money will be divided up and paid out ONLY to "legacy" shareholders, that is, people who were holding shares at the time the deal went down, NOT post-merger buyers.

So you see, a share is not always a share in the law's eyes.

And again in this case, despite it being GUILTY FRAUDSTER EXECUTIVES who are to blame for the VIOLATIONS OF SECURITY LAWS, it will be the shareholders who wind up and have to pay the penalty, just like it will be JPM shareholders and not DIMON or JPM, that actually pay any damages here.