Replies to post #121046 on Mr Cooper Group Inc fka COOP

[drrugby]

Lastly, NOL's defined: Property of the Estate.

It is ordered back in Nov 2008

http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229081117000000000013.pdf

GO WAMU..

DrR..

[dmceng]

drrugby

I see this tpye of reporting more of the same inaccurate hogwash that has been circulating for the last year regarding WAMUQ. This guy doesn't have a clue.

Take care
David

[dannoninvest]

Nowhere is it indicated in that report about JPM having to pay more money to WAMU. All that it states is that JPM bought more than what they read into. Meaning that JPM will have to pay more of WAMU debts that will cost them money in excess of what they paid for WAMU. I dont see anywhere that you could even assume that JPM would have to pay more money to wamu or any shareholder. But since the media is a crock of s#$@ most of us adhere to the court documents and how the legal course is proceeding. Wamu is in the lead as of right now and that points to more money from one or both of the villains. Also the media is garbage. For example the incident at Fort Hood. On CNN it said 13 were killed including the gunman. Right below that it stated that 12 were killed and the gunman was alive. Trust the media, not hardly. Trust wamus legal team, Diamond Guru and ABighammer, absolutely!

[YoungMillionaire]

I like the sound of this article very very much. It means the media is starting to pick up on this scandal. Right now, nobody knows about this! nobody! its not big news to anyone but us in this chatroom and yahoo's comparable version.

If the big media outlets start to pick up on this and start to tell it like a david vs. goliath story then JPM will likely panick and give a settlement offer to keep this bad press out of the mainstream...

JPM is sitting nervous right now - this could affect the long-term image of their organization if it starts to be mainstream news....trust me.

[climberprof]

DrR

That article has nothing to do with the lawsuits against JPMC and the settlement etc. It does not even mention that at all. It just says that The risk of WAMU going to cost JPM more becaus of adapting the mortage unit of the WaMu etc etc.

I am sorry but it has absolutely nothing to do with the lawsuits or illegal takeover of WaMu. AIMO.

I really wish that it were actually talking about the thins goig on in the BK case.

Best
Climbe

[sf]

they have to keep the mortgage risk facade up because that was the guise by which they were taken down. systemic risk due to bad mortgages. this is a total setup to throw the american people off the scent of crap coming off this story. there was no systemic risk except for the social security fund entrusted to jpm that they overleveraged to make a quick buck. or so they thought. madoff scam got their funds frozen and ponzi schemes in alabama and california got them sued. jpm was the systemic risk not wamu, not wmi, and not their mortgages. mortgages can be written off as losses but stealing a solvent company? you can only try to cover up. the press releases are setups to "explain" why monies are being returned for ill gotten gains. barclays is in the same boat with lehman. and our attorney, weil is handling both cases! how cozy. hope they take advantage of bk and merge their holding companies. alot of foreign holdings worth billions still untouched. a force to be reckoned with if that happens.

[cashgrinder]

very ironic considering FBRC has been buying up lots of shares with NITE. I always see them on level two and here it seems like they feel it will take time but that JPM is going to be paying a lot more then they thought. Of course some of this is losses attributed to the mortgage assets they bought but the rest if they are going to pay up for the assets they stole.

[acountmakr]

This actually gives me the impression that WAMU was toxic andthat JPM shouldn't have bought the bank. Did anyone else get that impression from the article?