InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

sf

01/10/11 12:11 PM

#269791 RE: fsshon #269786

when i posted and talked of jpm, i mean chase. since wamu was directly shifted to chase i felt the subject was moot. i know jpm is the holding company. i guess for everyone involved i'll need to be more concise next time. sorry don.
icon url

robigus

01/10/11 12:20 PM

#269800 RE: fsshon #269786

Fsshon, you have really outdone yourself with great thinking these past couple days!!!

I keep saying to myself,"I never thought of it that way. That's brilliant!..."
icon url

hestheman

01/10/11 12:26 PM

#269806 RE: fsshon #269786

Please explain about Wampq being converted in to commons. In your scenario.....how would that play out in a stock swap with JPM ratio wise? Thanks
icon url

jhdf51

01/10/11 12:30 PM

#269809 RE: fsshon #269786

<I would expect 4:1 being 4 WAMUQ for 1 JPM>

Old JB and I would love that. I still believe we have quite a fight left.
icon url

SlyOne

01/10/11 1:15 PM

#269869 RE: fsshon #269786

JPIG is JPIG, she didnt draw that line. She was wrong.


Check your email... myinvesco@gmail.


icon url

robigus

01/10/11 1:23 PM

#269878 RE: fsshon #269786

Board as you talk about JPM you are not talking about the bank Chase, you are talking about the Holding Company. THJMW said "bank collapse" not holding company collapse. She is saying Chase could suffer from the reprecussions and therefore cause a "run on the bank" that could result in the FDIC having to take regulatory action and therefore the economy will be driven off a damn cliff again.

On that note, don't you think the FDIC would allow JPM to use their billions to inject money into Chase to keep it from going under? Unlike what they did with WMI and WaMu.