InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 10
Posts 956
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 12/20/2009

Re: longhaulq post# 225574

Sunday, 07/25/2010 5:48:38 PM

Sunday, July 25, 2010 5:48:38 PM

Post# of 731545
I think what the EC filed under seal was something that showed more assets or money was out there. Ilene said that the lawyer that was next to her was getting texts and one party was upset and saying that they should have held out for more. I doubt that would be the EC, as they seemed to be the only ones not on suicide watch after the meeting.

Another poster that was at the hearing said that he talked to a lawyer that was in chambers, and he said that the EC probably should have held out for more, but they decided to take what they could get.

I think the party that Ilene was referring to was WAHUQ. Like I said, if more money and assets were uncovered, they would be upset as they're getting a small % of the money. I think the chamber meeting was about the examiner, not a settlement, and the comment that the EC should have held out for more was a reference to the scope of the examination, as by 7/20 there was a virtual consensus about what the examiner would look into.

Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent COOP News