|
How Long Until We Quit talking About Big WMILT Payoff?
www.boardpost.net/forum/index.php?topic=6248.msg79508#msg79508
Zitat myadad:
As much as I would love to see a big payoff for equity for my claim shares, I have been very clear from the beginning that I didn't expect much. For the past two months, I would guess that 90% of the posts have concerned research into old documents and speculation that we would somehow receive a large payment from the FDIC-R once the 6 year anniversary of our bankruptcy passed. I know that nobody here wants to set a date when this windfall is coming our way but if nothing shows up, how long are you willing to wait until you decide that nothing or very little is coming? Maybe we can get back to discussing what KKR is planning, possible merger candidates or at least something to do with WMIH. IMO, that is where the real money will be made.
-----------------------------
Zitat Uncle_Bo:
Myadad,
I understand your point, but in IMHO we might not see capitalization through equity raise until March of 2015 due to the IRC section 382 and at least my understanding of the 3 year rule for ownership change. We might see some smaller interim deal funded with debt and existing cash before that, who knows ? May be we will also up-list on NASDAQ. This would push up the stock price and get it ready for the next year. It is nice if we issue fewer shares at a higher price with less dilution, isn't it ?!
As to the escrows, what I see is that the FDIC has refused to list any receivership certificates (as a liability on their balance sheet) for the WaMu equity holders (of the WMB). Now, we know that the bank had a single shareholder which was WMI - go figure! Yet their language on the site for the status of the receivership sounds like they have issued such. Here it is:
"Current information indicates that the Receiver is unlikely to have sufficient funds to distribute to holders of receivership certificates issued to junior note holders or equity holders of WAMU . "
This one statement is crazy if you think of it. JPM has current information, since they officially hold the corporate records. How often do they give updates to the FDIC and is it possible that at some point the "current" information may change ? I personally believe, that the expiration of the term of the PAA brings us closer to the answer of some of these questions. But frankly, do not expect multiple of par for the Ps and Ks - simply because this is going to make the FDIC look horrible. May be they dispense money if available to what is considered debt/preferred to "restore" the faith in the system. Investors have fled from the bank stocks and this is part of the reason. But again this is a huge number 11B WMB bondholders + 7.5B for preferred and TPS.
Uncle Bo
--------------------------------------------------
Zitatende
MfG.L:)
FDIC, JPMorgan Pare Some WaMu Tax Liability Claims
www.boardpost.net/forum/index.php?topic=6278.msg80029#msg80029
ZItat CSNY:
Not necessarily. If any money was due the FDIC-R yesterday either it was paid or it wasn't. If it was it will appear on the FDIC's website in due course. If it was not paid and the nonpayment was a default, given that the P&A was a material agreement it will have to file a 8-K.
This news piece suggested to me that the parties are not increasing the acrimony. -----------------------------
ZItat dixdeau:
Quote from: govinsider on Yesterday at 07:32:35 PM
tru dat...I think its the same case (although diff case #) rolled to Rosemary M. Collyer?
General
blogs.reuters.com/alison-frankel/files/...nvfdic-complaint.pdf
"25. In or about November 2008, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation ("Freddie Mac", and together with Fannie Mae, the "GSEs") similarly demanded that JPMC commit to repurchase loans WMB sold to Freddie Mac to the extent the loans breached representations and warranties that WMB made to Freddie Mac in connection with the sale of those loans.
26. Unbeknownst to JPMC at the time, the FDIC was secretly working behind the scenes to assist the GSEs and to impose these liabilities, unnecessarily, on JPMC. (editorial- LMAO )
Tax Specific
www.scribd.com/doc/238673161/JP-Morgan-v-FDIC-12-Case
"NATURE OF ACTION
1. JPMC brings this complaint for indemnification and declaratory judgment against the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in its capacity as Receiver for Washington Mutual Bank (―WMB‖) (the ―FDIC-Receiver‖) and in its corporate capacity (―FDIC-Corporate‖) (collectively, the ―FDIC‖) arising from a payment from JPMC to the Connecticut Department of Revenue Services (―Connecticut‖) in settlement of a tax assessment by the State of Connecticut against WMB. Under the terms of the Purchase & Assumption Agreement between JPMC, the FDIC-Receiver, and FDIC-Corporate, dated as of September 25, 2008, a true and correct copy of which is attached as Exhibit A hereto (the ―P&A Agreement‖), payment of the tax assessment underlying this action was and is the responsibility of the FDIC-Receiver."
--------------------------
Zitatende
MfG.L:)
Re: Article: AIG isn"t only megabucks case
www.boardpost.net/forum/index.php?topic=6305.msg80500#msg80500
Zitat ron_66271:
Theses Docs are FDIC's version of the P&A and rebuttal to JPM's version.
Quote from: govinsider on October 06, 2014, 11:55:13 PM
1. blogs.reuters.com/alison-frankel/files/...stee-jpmSJmotion.pdf
2. blogs.reuters.com/alison-frankel/files/...tee-fdicSJmotion.pdf
3. blogs.reuters.com/alison-frankel/files/...fdicSJopposition.pdf
This one has the newest date; July 31, 2014
I don't believe Hon. Rosemary M. Collyer has ruled on the SJ.
Please correct me where I'm wrong....
WMB serviced the RMBS mortgages for profit
WMB had to buy-back the non-preforming mortgages
DB claim is $6B to $10B due to buy-back of non-preforming mortgages
The non-preforming mortgages was about 3% to 8% of the portfolio
DB's claim is regarding the Covered Bonds,DB is a European Bank
The total Covered Bonds portfolio was?... a big number.
JPM serviced the RMBS mortgages for profit
JPM should be required to buy-back the non-preforming mortgages
I love the footnotes.
From 1, Footnote 2;
... In resolving the institution, the FDIC is required to use the resolution type that is the least costly to the Deposit Insurance Fund and that maximizes the return on these assets, ... and may take any action that it determines to be in "the best interests of the [failed] depository institution, its depositors, or the [FDIC] ...
WMI is a creditor to WMB through WAAC and WMMSC.
Are you as tired of my posting of this same Doc as much as I'm tried of re-posting it?
Please see; Court Docket: #9301 Document Name: Motion of the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors to Alter or Amend the Court's Opinion and Order Regarding Subordination of the Claim of Tranquility Master Fund, Ltd.
Date Filed: 1/3/2012
www.kccllc.net/wamu/document/0812229120103000000000017
"Here, although the Trusts were "issuing entities," they were not the "issuers" of the securities as a matter of law. The "issuers" were the depositors, WaMu Asset Acceptance Corp. ("WAAC") and Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp. ("WMMSC"), both wholly-owned subsidiaries of Washington Mutual Bank ("WMB"). Accordingly, the "issuers" of the securities were indeed affiliates of the Debtors. The correction of this error of law will lead to the proper subordination of Tranquility"s claim.
" RELIEF REQUESTED
9.
The Committee seeks to alter or amend that portion of the Court"s Opinion and Order in which the Court ruled that the Debtors have not stated a basis for subordination of the Claim. The Committee requests entry of an order finding that WAAC and WMMSC were the issuers of the Certificates, and that because WAAC and WMMSC were affiliates of the Debtors under section 101(2)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code, section 510(b) applies to subordinate the Claim. --------------------------------------------------
Zitatende
MfG.L:)
Banks Agree to Overhaul Rules Governing $700tn Derivatives Market
www.boardpost.net/forum/index.php?topic=6314.msg80470#msg80470
Zitat bgriffinokc:
www.ibtimes.co.uk/...overning-700tn-derivatives-market-1468969
Markets
Banks Agree to Overhaul Rules Governing $700tn Derivatives Market
JERIN-MATHEW
By Jerin Mathew
October 8, 2014 08:03 BST
1 4
Goldman Sachs
18 major banks including Goldman Sachs agreed to revamp derivatives market.Reuters
The world's major banks have agreed to change rules governing the global derivatives market to avoid future problems related to failing institutions like the Lehman Brothers.
Financial Times, citing people familiar with the matter, reported that 18 major banks, including Credit Suisse to Goldman Sachs, have agreed to give up the right to "close out" deals on derivatives contracts if a financial institution runs into trouble.
The decision comes after several months of complex talks, involving regulators and asset managers, and led by dealers under the umbrella of the International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA).
The ISDA earlier said that a contractual solution for a temporary stay on derivatives close outs was progressing well, after US regulators had demanded banks come up with a plan to stop their counterparties terminating derivatives contracts in the event of a crisis.
The agreed changes to the protocols that govern the $700tn (£435tn, €554tn) derivatives market will take effect from 1 January 2015.
US regulators have been looking to revamp rules of the financial market following the 2008 crisis, which revealed the drawbacks of the existing system.
According to a report from the US Government Accountability Office, 80% of Lehman's derivatives counterparties closed out their deals with the bank within five weeks of its bankruptcy filing.
While that helped companies solve their counterparty risk with the bankrupt bank, Lehman's estate had to spend years in court trying to claw back collateral from its partners.
The recent changes come in line with regulators' thinking that the core of a failing institution should be preserved, the FT noted.
Related
Mis-selling Derivatives Scandal: HSBC Compensates Victims £139,000 on Average
EU Commission Suspects HSBC, JPMorgan and Credit Agricole Ran Rate-Fixing Cartel
Mis-selling Derivatives: RBS Lags Behind as Banks Only Pay 20% of Compensation Fund
While the changes to the ISDA protocols would cover the vast majority of derivatives contracts, there are several elements yet to settle, according to banks.
Large institutional investors such as BlackRock are still not covered by the changes, and regulators are working to compel them to accept the new protocols. --------------------------------------------------
Zitatende
MfG.L:)
www.boardpost.net/forum/index.php?topic=6315.msg80509#msg80509
Zitat Uncle_Bo:
The way I see it, pretty even partnership:
1. What do we have ? $75MM cash + $10MM (KKR) = $85MM Access to $125MM credit line
2. What does KKR have invested (potentially, besides the 10MM above to buy the preferred) ? $85MM (these are the warrants if exercised) Provide $150MM in credit via PIK notes
MW emphasized paying off the debt, I expect that the next 10Q shows improved profitability. No 13% interest after mid-July 2014.
Both CFO and MW emphasized making progress on meeting the filing and audit requirements. My read - up-listing on a different exchange coming to theaters near you soon.
Size of the deal ? Honestly - have no idea, but based on the above finances $500MM seems small to start eating rapidly through the NOLs.
On the flip side, larger deal with too much debt kind of negates the NOLs purposes, however, possible course of action is initial debt and as the stock price rises over time, deliberate and careful equity raises to pay off the debt and increase the utilization of the NOLs. I think, KKR are in this for the long haul and they intend to make a killing on their $95MM investment over the next 3-5 years conceivably.
Do not believe in any of the reverse splits talk going on currently, buyout not likely either IMHO. MW said "build equity value for ALL shareholders". I know the price has dropped recently, but I should say it was not unexpected for me.
Looking forward to it, really - it's about time! Turkey in the oven for Thanksgiving, anyone ?
Uncle Bo
GLTA
----------------------------
Zitat bgriffinokc:
Their vehicle was WMI Holding Corp INC., A Delaware corporation....you know ,the one that has their Trade Mark on our Company's Web site.
Here's the Delaware Document:
drive.google.com/file/d/...TejVyVGc0TFZVeTRUMkNtS015OWpB/edit
Open the above WMI HOLDINGS INC. DE Stock Information.PDF...on page 13 you will find the name Western Marketing and PNC BAnk....On page 16 you will see that Robert E. Sullivan in President.
Then get pen and paper and watch the ceodallas.com Video.
ceodallas.com/advisoryboard.html
Open and watch third video on top row....Robert E. Sullivan,
Pay particular attention to the Mention of James Schwab which ties the two of them together in Crimstone Partners. Richard E. Blum,aka Dick Blum, aka Sen. Dianne Fienstein's husband. has done several deals with Bonderman. and is a partner in Crimstone Partners.
"About CrimStone Partners, CrimStone Partners is a special purpose private equity partnership designed to find, acquire and build companies."
[sound familiar?]
"The fund"s investors consist of more than 35 highly distinguished business leaders, senior investment bankers and private equity professionals from firms such as Morgan Stanley, LazArd, Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein, Bain Capital, AEA Investors, Allied Capital, Seven Rosen Funds, Blum Capital and CIBC."
If you want the big picture take time to read this entire article and the pieces of the puzzle come together for the real Prize.
www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/21/...n-crisis/?page=all
In part.....Feinstein and the legislation
Mrs. Feinstein introduced her bill Jan. 6, seeking $25 billion from the government"s bailout fund know as the Troubled Asset Relief Program to help bankroll an FDIC proposal to systematically prevent home mortgage foreclosures by expediting loan workouts and expanding federal loan guarantees.
The proposal was a pet project of FDIC Chairman Sheila C. Bair, who wanted expand a program the agency had used successfully with borrowers of the failed IndyMac bank to help reduce foreclosures.
Records show Mrs. Feinstein"s public support for the Bair proposal surfaced Oct. 30 in letter to Mrs. Bair as CBRE was still competing for the FDIC contract. Mrs. Bair responded in late November pointing out that she had not been able to get the Treasury Department to adopt her program and authorize bailout funds for it, according to the correspondence released under FOIA.
Mrs. Feinstein"s legislation would have required the government to finance Mrs. Bair"s foreclosure plan.
"The FDIC estimates that roughly 2.2 million home loans, worth $444 billion, could be modified under this plan, with 1.5 million foreclosures avoided," she said in her statement on the bill. Read more:
www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/21/...sis/#ixzz3Fc7I9CPW
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
----------------------------
Zitat sometimes_wrong:
I wonder IF Robert E. Sullivan is somehow related to John W. Sullivan a.k.a. W3Research on I-hub and fairly recently became a Mod on their WMIH stock mb and almost immediately began dogging the stock and spreading "reverse split" * "scam" rumors??? He apparently also runs a stock picking service which currently is also dissing WMIH, naturally. So my supposition is that IF John Sullivan is related to Robert Sullivan (how coincidental if not?)... I think we are dealing with something more than your typical FLIPPER "bash & steal" shares from nervous retail scheme... Perhaps the insiders really want to own as many shares of WMIH as possible and are willing to do it by any desperate means again???
John W. Sullivan a.k.a. W3Research FaceBook account (linking name with alias)
www.facebook.com/W3Research
(same photo as I-hub poster named W3Research)
investorshub.advfn.com/boards/profile.aspx?user=33935
-----------------------------
Zitat azcowboy:
The Trust Markers may all be locked down within' a retail shareholders accounts ~ however ~ the patterns leading up to transition are important for everyone to consider' ... to understand the future, one' must study the past' ...
...Our debtors representation continued through to the very end pushing their view' that equity was worthless, as the mediated result took effect beginning in February 2012 ...
Those same misunderstood' views of ... "equity's worthless result'" ... have continued to be spread among numerous message boards since those transitional days' ...
Now' as we watch the obvious manipulation of the newco shares ... it seems quite apparent to me that the patterns thru out have been consistant' ...
Equity' was unable to be discarded within the bankruptcy, as the mediated result took hold ~ and now the manipulation of the newco shares is an obvious attempt to gain as many of these 200m ish shares as possible ... again from retail shareholders' ... some one is buying them'...
these are interesting times my friends' ... AZ ain't goin' nowhere
Now that the PA&A has expired ? ... JMP's exclusivity rights to WaMu are finished' ... this should begin to get interesting ...
(I see the recent ending of the PA&A and the manipulated price drop, in an effort to shake the tree' ~ as somehow connected') ... (but' that's just what I think ~ just another "dumb ass hillbilly biker" .. )
just sayin'
----------------------------
Zitat Kszabo:
Next Tuseday, October 14 before the bell, JPM will issue their earnings data, it might prove to be interesting, in light of the recent PA&A closure.
Company Actual Estimate Year Ago
JPMorgan Chase JPM -- 1.38 1.42 --------------------------------------------------
Zitatende
MfG.L:)
www.boardpost.net/forum/index.php?topic=6325.msg80729#msg80729
Zitat Skidor:
Please see below.
Has the Purchase and Assumption Agreement between the FDIC and JPM been closed? Should we expect a press release anytime soon?
A true and correct copy of the Purchase and Assumption Agreement among the FDIC as Receiver of Washington Mutual Bank, the FDIC, and JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, dated September 25, 2008, is published on the FDIC.gov web site. Section 13.12 of that Agreement states the Agreement will be in effect until the sixth anniversary of the Bank Closing (Bank Closing was on September 25, 2008). So, the term of the Agreement expired on September 25, 2014. However, Section 13.12 also states that expiration of the terms of the Agreement shall not affect any claim or liability of any party with respect to any amount owing at the time of such expiration, regardless of when such amount is payable.
The FDIC as Receiver for Washington Mutual Bank has not terminated the receivership estate because of numerous pending litigation matters. Those matters will directly affect (1) indemnification payments to JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association under the Purchase and Assumption Agreement; and (2) the final receivership distributions on claims that have been accepted as filed timely and proven to the satisfaction of the Receiver.
The expiration of the term of the Purchase and Assumption Agreement does not affect any pending litigation. And at this time, it may take years before the pending litigation is resolved. Consequently, the amount of funds available for distribution under the receivership claims process is contingent on the outcome of the pending litigation.
No press release is expected anytime soon. If one is issued, however, it will be published on the website for this receivership at www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/wamu.html
When can we expect the balance sheet summary to be updated?
The website for the receivership of each failed bank (including that of Washington Mutual Bank) is updated with new information on a quarterly basis. In most cases, new information will typically only be for changes in the summary balance sheet, or perhaps changes in dividends paid on claims to date. Each year, the balance sheet information will reflect data as of the most recent quarter-ending dates of March 31st, June 30th, September 30th, and December 31st. However, it takes a few weeks to update the balance sheet to the next quarter-ending date due to the volume of receiverships and data involved. Therefore, the most recent balance sheet available as of today (October 10, 2014) is that of June 30, 2014. The next balance sheet summary as of September 30, 2014, should be available soon (most likely by the end of October 2014).
In the future, please refer to the receivership website for any new developments at the following link: www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/wamu.html And, if you still have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to contact us using our e-mail address at mailto:NonDepClaimsDal@fdic.gov
Respectfully,
----------------------------
Zitat Kszabo:
It took them 17 days to get the 6/30/2014 Balance Sheet out, so dont expect anything before 10/17/2014. --------------------------------------------------
Zitatende
MfGL:)
www.boardpost.net/forum/index.php?topic=6325.msg80748#msg80748
Zitat Skidor:
The FDIC as Receiver for Washington Mutual Bank has not terminated the receivership estate because of numerous pending litigation matters. Those matters will directly affect (1) indemnification payments to JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association under the Purchase and Assumption Agreement; and (2) the final receivership distributions on claims that have been accepted as filed timely and proven to the satisfaction of the Receiver.
The expiration of the term of the Purchase and Assumption Agreement does not affect any pending litigation. And at this time, it may take years before the pending litigation is resolved. Consequently, the amount of funds available for distribution under the receivership claims process is contingent on the outcome of the pending litigation.
The next balance sheet summary as of September 30, 2014, should be available soon (most likely by the end of October 2014).
So it does look like the Purchase and Assumption Agreement was closed on September 25th. We should get a better picture of any new indemnification claims, if any by the end of the month. We will also know if JPM paid any additional funds into WAMU Receivership. We will know by the end of the month if escrow shares have a potential payoff by the end of the month when the release the balance sheet summary. --------------------------------------------------
Zitatende
MfG.L:)
|
Wertung | Antworten | Thema | Verfasser | letzter Verfasser | letzter Beitrag | |
46 | 13.508 | █ Der ESCROW - Thread █ | union | moneymoagi | 28.04.24 21:29 | |
60 | 67.451 | Coop SK Tippspiel (ehem. WMIH) | ranger100 | Snowcat | 28.04.24 08:49 | |
162 | 86.765 | COOP News (ehemals: Wamu /WMIH) | Pjöngjang | JusticeWillWin | 25.04.24 15:30 | |
8 | 1.310 | WMIH + Cooper Info | Orakel99 | lander | 24.04.24 16:54 | |
349 | 198.955 | Wamu WKN 893906 News ! | plusquamperfekt | union | 10.03.24 17:21 |