Replies to post #10074 on Lehman Brothers Financial SA (LEHNQ)

[hestheman]

I respectfully disagree. Maratanyo certainly has experience and knows what he is talking about but in the Lehman case he is thinking in black and white. The Lehman bankruptcy is a little more complex than that. Maratanyo talks LIQUIDATION....I talk REORGANIZATION. In his post, Maratanyo says it is ALL for the good of the SENIOR CREDITORS. He does not specify senior secured creditors are being paid 100 percent on the dollar. So, I will assume he is speaking of senior unsecured creditors whom are being paid around .20 on the dollar as a capped recovery. Maratanyo is correct that any additional MONIES that come about in the result of liquidation (that would have went to us) would be reallocated to senior unsecureds to advance their recovery. But in a reorganization, our big payday will come from the debt for equity swap (see Mirant BK chapter 11). So, all in all I disagree with Maratanyo on why this bankruptcy is structured in the way it is. We are all entitled to our opinions though and I do respect Maratanyo's point of view on it.

[hestheman]

Also, Maratanyo's post 9947 he seems to think this is a full on liquidation with no hope for reorganization and no recovery. If that was the case, why keep capital trust and equity securities alive to preserve NOLs....there would be no use for them. Maratanyo's reasoning is that we are there as somewhat of a "money link" for monies to be reallocated to senior unsecured debt....but if that were true they still would'nt have needed preferreds or commons in the one big share rollup....they could have cancelled them outright. We know it's not true also because Judge Peck's order to delist securities was all about PROTECTION OF "TAX ATTRIBUTES" (NOLS).