It was in one of the initial statements and recovery for the estate doesn't have to mean commons. Hopefully it does, but it doesn't have to.
And if that happened to be a cryptic clue as to hoping there would be money for equity, then it's more of an update than a contradiction.
I only mentioned the initial statement because I hope people will "keep it real" and try to understand the risks here as well as the vast room for recovery and reward.
I personally believe WMI isn't going to get squat and we're screwed or they're going to damn near run the table in which case we're all going to be very happy and some of you will be very rich.
Judging by WMI's legal team's comprehensive understanding of law and their obsession with quoting from precedents set in prior cases I would say we've got the best chance possible to see significant recovery... which in my eyes means money all the way down to the commons if not a reborn WaMu with escalating share value.
But it's far from a given and based greatly upon my hopes and limited understandings of this and all forms of litigation. If I said anything other than that I'd be lying.
"Do you remember how "they didn't expect recovery for the commons" was communicated to the shareholders since it does contradict court docs that say they expect significant recovery for the "estate"."
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
