News Focus
News Focus
icon url

tanjazielman

09/07/16 8:42 PM

#461516 RE: clawmann #461514

Obviously, many folks are more willing than me to look at a phenomenon and explain it in a way that is pleasing by assuming facts not in evidence.



Look I'm not saying that at all. That's what you read into it.

It's not a pretty story at all. But it's based on the actual numbers and your own pro rata hypothesis!
icon url

hotmeat

09/08/16 12:48 AM

#461532 RE: clawmann #461514

Could you please explain this statement in the context of the FDIC/DB agreement?


"will not subordinate or otherwise diminish the Trustee Allowed Claim"



Relevant paragraph from the agreement


"The FDIC-Receiver will treat the Trustee Allowed Claim proportionally with all other allowed general unsecured claims and will not subordinate or otherwise diminish the Trustee Allowed Claim. Any and all distributions on account of the Trustee Allowed Claim will be made by the FDIC-Receiver to the Trustee as and when the FDIC-Receiver makes distributions to other general unsecured creditors holding allowed claims in the WMB Receivership Estate"



To subordinate or diminish the DB claim has totally separate meanings in the context of their usage. IMO by using "diminish" to refer to the DB claim, the FDIC is stating that they will not compensate DB less than the $3 billion that was agreed to.