InvestorsHub Logo

WaS

Followers 33
Posts 1272
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 07/23/2008

WaS

Re: mordicai post# 20731

Sunday, 04/25/2010 5:48:06 PM

Sunday, April 25, 2010 5:48:06 PM

Post# of 42851
"In a reorganization u's might have gotten part of the preferreds slice, but the hedge fund owners of the preferreds are going to slap the u's hands as they reach for part of the slice in a liquidation scenario."

The hedge fund "ponys" are 1 vote of 5 on the EC.

If you think the prefs could have taken a haircut for the sake of the commons, then why not the bondholders?

The post seizure bondholders bought impaired debt.

Shareholders who bought part ownership in the company, bought shares of a company that we believe is owed restitution. The bondholders have likely made more off of those bonds already than they could have had they bought unimpaired bonds and held to maturity.

They can already sell on the market for for face value and some.

I'm not going to say your argument is invalid, but there are certainly too many variables to present such statements as if they are anything more than your opinion.

After a little 2019 disclosure and upon appointment of an examiner, watch for the POR to be substantially modified.

I was warning people to beware of Weil long before anyone else which as it turns out, was my greatest prediction and one I was truly sorry be to right about. It's certainly not something I look to flaunt.

I hold far more value in Ps than in Qs but it's my opinion that there's just too much up in the air to definitively know anything yet. If you choose to use this POR as a worst case scenario, which we all should be doing... then we're all screwed anyway.

But its illogical to attribute extra clout to the hedge funds, since they hold but on vote and the EC chair (also 1 vote) has 0 prefs. You'd need to know what the other 3 parties are holding to even speculate on such a statement as the hf and chair effectively cancel one another out.

We'll know more as we see and hear more from Susman, specifically his reasoning to justify an examiner.

But it is notable that he mentioned the "settlement" is calling for giving up the lawsuits which are the estate's most valuable "assets". The court does in fact view lawsuits as assets and that in my opinion will make selling this POR far more difficult for Weil to pull off.

Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.