News Focus
News Focus
icon url

Large Green

02/05/19 3:37 PM

#557905 RE: Dmdmd2020 #557903

Dmdmd2020, this is about as much proof as one needs to prove not ONLY is there a lot of very LARGE GREEN here,

BUT it also suggests the LARGEST RETURNS are class 19 (Former WaMu Preferred-both WAMKQ & WAMPQ) and not former common

from the very ones with the inside information and who also has underwritten these types of investments before.

______________________________________

FROM Dmdmd2020

Yes, IMO...the underwriters will do very well with their $72 million Class 19 claim.

They had more than a year after the Effective Date (March 19, 2012) to settle their $92 million claim which was Stipulated on March 28, 2013.


Not only did the underwriters have all the insider information, but they had the benefit of settling a year after the Effective Date so they can do their final DD on their claims.

It’s a rigged game, so I’m thankful that the underwriters stipulated a Class 19 claim (which retail are aligned with) instead of the $24 million Class 18 claim.



icon url

jhdf51

02/05/19 4:44 PM

#557914 RE: Dmdmd2020 #557903

What determines the low end versus the high end of a return to escrows? It seems you have done a good job of determining alot of money is returning...why such a big spread?

JHD
icon url

PickStocks

02/06/19 9:47 AM

#557957 RE: Dmdmd2020 #557903

Question:

we are looking at cash value from the trusts. You have suggested anywhere from 10b - 400b.
Is this the cash value we would get back from the trusts,

There were over 700 billion in all the underwriters wrote......where does the additional 300+ go? or why is that not accounted for?

is the max 400b the converted cash out price?

I think the underwriters were looking at the 10b minimum return but did see the value in cash being alot more to want to be in class 19.