Replies to post #39304 on Washington Mutual Preferred fka WAMPQ

[clawmann]

The 70/30 proposal was not reached through negotiation or an agreement between P's and commons. Therefore, I have been thinking that the judge may have a tough time not applying APR. I can see her asking:
"On what legal basis am I to decide whether this split is fair or not? My own "feelings" of what should be? There is no negotiated settlement agreement between preferreds and commons, so I cannot apply the F&R test. If you leave it to me and don't give me an agreement, I'm going to have to apply APR, as that is mandated by law unless I have some other lawfully cognizable basis to avoid APR."

So I believe that TPS is going to be in a strong position to move the split needle significantly in the direction of the P's.

I would imagine that TPS and the EC are likely already discussing this.