InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

Upperlippy

10/04/13 11:14 AM

#390342 RE: islandcat #390340

That seems correct to me ( have to be cautious, Catz is reading with us :-) ) Therefor ....did they or did they not pay a fair price?

From Catz: "after #1 and #2 are satisified, does any monies go to equity.

In our case, the 1.9b will not make it past the WMB (bank) bondholders. ''

Correct. 1.9B is not enough. That was known before the ''auction'', 1.9B is not something fallen out of the sky, we are not dealing with very dumb crooks. There is a reason for that. Would it scare people off? Yes. What would have happened if they would have offered 10-30b for instance. Think about it.

From Catz:''Regarding the $4b -- that final disposition was clearly stated in the POR -- was part of the overall GSA and was kept by JPM as stipulated in the POR.''

It was stipulated in the POR, it was part of the overall GSA...... so...., let JPM keep it?

That would make a nice fairytale... so in short they have been looking after our company and got 2.1B for that. Made a few B profit per year. So far so good. Now they pay money to F & F and others. That is not good for us. Deals will be made. We have to be careful now. They did not pay a fair price. They will not give it. We will have to do more to get it. But we will get it. We will.



icon url

PickStocks

10/04/13 1:20 PM

#390345 RE: islandcat #390340

of course they did not, why would they when 308 billion was in the waiting.....FDIC would pick up the tab....