Replies to post #534014 on Mr Cooper Group Inc fka COOP

[clawmann]

LG: The only issue I have with your post is this sentence:

"Now, when WMILT is advised they are owners of actual assets, both beneficial assets and cash, then they will approach WMIH and make a deal for the beneficial assets."

Why would the LT do a deal only with WMIH for any beneficial (non-cash) assets? Seems to me they are obligated to maximize the price they get by putting such non-cash assets up for bid (btw, I don't think there will be any non-cash assets). If they don't do that, how could they maintain that they have maximized the value of those assets? How could they ever justify doing a deal exclusively with WMIH? Especially if WMIH is not giving cash, but shares?

[jerrylev]

Re: Now, when WMILT is advised they are owners of actual assets, both beneficial assets and cash, then they will approach WMIH and make a deal for the beneficial assets.

This is not possible since the "deal" with WMIH will benefit 80% or more of people who never signed release.

Why are we so obsessed that WMI assets have to go back to WMIH?

If you own both, plenty of escrow markers and plenty of WMIH shares, you want the trust to sell at the highest price as possible to maximize the return to escrow, and you want WMIH to buy the assets from ANYONE at the lowest price as possible to benefit WMIH . RIGHT?

Mortgages have no color and do not smell any different if it came from the old WAMU or from FNMA. Just like money bill.

So you will get the best of both world if WMIT and WMIH have no relationship with each others and have opposite goals..