imo. Either JPM's lawyers really suck (not likely) or JPM is in dire straights (more likely) that they are making them look like fools. Thats a shame because when this is all over and Dimon is gone their new potential clients will look down on S&C for this...
".......JPM now has no hope of saving settlemnt dollars by buying up bonds on the cheap. I guess the noteholders drove common up in price fivefold too based on the low ball settlement offer. Kind of tells me we have no downside risk."
Why would noteholders drove common up in price?
If JPM could not save settlement dollars, how would that increase the chance that commons would get anything? I would think that if JPM could not save any money on noteholders, would not that decrease the $$ amount commons would get?
Mordi.... Didn't JPM sign a confidentiality agreement with WMI in Sept regarding the release of documents needed to determine a "fair value" for WAMU? Also didn't that agreement expressly state the JPM could not purchase the banks without the Boards approval? So in essence did they break that legal document when they WAMU from FDIC? Shouldn't they have waited to purchase the seized/solvent bank after FDIC actually determined what was to be conveyed as per the P&A?
How can JPMC cite any kind of confidentiality agreement when they are being sued for Breach? Ludicrous in my opinion! For JPM to cite anything about a confidentiality agreement is kind of like the pot calling the kettle black. They have a catch 22 legal problem on thier hands. Wait till THJMW asks them about this one.
YOur thoughts? ~Fish~ P.S. Your advice on this board is welcomed, appreciated and usually spot-on. TIA