Even more important, as Linda had pointed out a day or 2 ago, is that there was a provision that, in the event of a "combination" with/by Dime, the warrants would be entitled to the same method/mode of consideration as the underlying common Dime shares would receive.
And that if the consideration were for cash and/or common of the surviving company, consideration would be payable in the same proportion as would be payable to the Dime common.
And even more importantly, if Dime common were to receive all cash, then the warrants would be payable solely in cash.
This is hardly the stuff of an "equity warrant."
But this matters not, because, even as to all the ambiguities that WMI and wallstreet61 would have you believe exist in these Warrant Agreements, the Agreements are construed AGAINST the drafting parties (Dime, WMI, and the various BOD's that did NOT act in good faith) that did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to ensure that the intent and principles of the Agreements (i.e., coveying to the holders of Dime Ltw's, the value of the 85% net of any Litigation Recovery), were carried out.
If there is a provision in either of the Agreements that contemplated a combination, wherein Dime common would receive all cash, and that either Agreement said that the Dime Ltw's would be paid their proportionate interest in cash (as the vehicle conveying said value), it is clear that the Original Dime BOD comtemplated that these were liabilities, regardless as to the manner in which the payment(s) originally called for.
Most importantly, there were provisions in placing calling for, requiring, that adjustments be made by any/all BOD's, acting in good faith, and acting in a manner that is/was consistant with the intent/principles of the Warrant Agreements. Adjustments were something that did not require a vote by the Dime Ltw's, as it was PRESUMED that BOD's would be acting in GOOD FAITH to maintain the spirit, priciples, and intent of the Original Warrant Agreement that distributed the Ltw's to Dime common holders in December 2000.
And when A&M turned over negotiating duties to the Insider Trading SETTLEMENT Note Holder Hedge Funds, and allowed these CRIMINALS to gift away our Litigation interests (and thus, any potential for any future Anchor recovery), WMI, A&M, et al., violated every principle that would be required of a fiduciary.
And instead of continuing to negotiate to KEEP the Anchor goodwill litigation on the WMI side (as WMI had initially asserted ownership of both goodwill litigation lawsuits), A&M caved in and allowed the SHN Insider Trading Funds to gift away the Anchor asset to JPMC, so that they could negotiate a better return for themselves . . . and tellingly did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to ensure that the Dime Ltw's liabilities would follow the Anchor assets, as had historically been the case when WMI first merged with Dime about a decade ago . . . as this would have required moving other liabilities back to the WMI side as per the testimony that A&M gave in September. And they CAVED IN TO THE SNH's, knowing that these Insider Trading Hedge Funds had purchased BLOCKING POSITIONS, so that whatever these criminals wanted, WMI/A&M would have to agree to.
And of course, the Insider Trading SETTLEMENT Note Holding Crooks "allowed" the other goodwill litigation lawsuit to stay on the WMI side, as there were NO Ltw's associated with the American Savings that WMI, A&M, the SNH crooks could screw over.
So, look at the actions (and lack thereof), of the WMI BOD, a Board that supposedly consisted of several A&M stooges that never discussed the impact on the Ltw's, never asked the Ltw's for their input to see how they felt about getting screwed over by the SNH Insider Trading Hedge Funds, never gave a second thought to what they had done in allowing the SNH Insider Trading Funds to gift away assets in their self-dealings with JPMC, never had a meeting to at least discuss the issue of any fiduciary duties that might be owed to the Dime Ltw's, and they never called for a vote by the Dime Ltw's to see if they'd be cool with being adversely and materically impacted the Crooked Hedge Funds self-dealings. Then decide for yourself if there was a breach of duties by any/all of the Defendants in this case.
This doesn't even begin to touch on the issue of whether the Dime Ltw's were debt or equity.
The Plaintiffs can win on ANY of several legal theories, with breaches of duty by ANY of the Boards of Directors being but one of several avenues of recovery.
AI
