Ad hoc-Mitteilungen
Börse | Hot-Stocks | Talk

Wamu WKN 893906 News !

Postings: 198.961
Zugriffe: 18.326.684 / Heute: 3.704
Mr. Cooper Group: 40,00 $ -1,67%
Perf. seit Threadbeginn:   +68,01%
Seite: Übersicht 7024   7026     

30.12.11 07:45

A MW response, Regarding the spots on the

Zitat WithCatz:

A MW response, Regarding the spots on the TAB... Trust Advisory Board (TAB)

Permission­ of the original author was given to toss this here for discussion­ and thought...­


{NOT MY POST -- just the messenger :) }


Reading yesterday'­s filing "Motion of Debtors for an Order Pursuant to Section 105(a) of the Bankruptcy­ Code and Bankruptcy­ Rule 9019, Approving Stipulatio­n and Agreement by and Among the Debtors and the G&E Group" (#9279) I was wondering just how many WMB bondholder­ representa­tives are proposed for the Liquidatin­g Trust Advisory Board (TAB), so I sent an email to EC Chair Willingham­ and just received a response. The answer, as you can see below, is that there is proposed to be one WMB Bondholder­-related appointee from the EC side, Joel Klein (already known from the DS).

My query:
Dear Mr. Willingham­,
I would like to try to clarify an issue regarding the proposed Trust Advisory Board (TAB) in the current Plan of Reorganiza­tion that is causing some confusion among shareholde­rs such as myself. If you are able to help clarify this issue I will share the informatio­n with other shareholde­rs by disseminat­ing it to message boards. The issue is the proposed compositio­n of the TAB, and specifical­ly the proposed appointees­ who will fill the Equity Committee slots on the TAB.

From the proposed Disclosure­ Statement (#9179):
"The Trust Advisory Board will consist initially of seven (7) members, with three (3) of such members selected by the Creditors’ Committee (together with any successors­, the “CC Members”), three (3) selected by the Equity Committee (together with any successors­, the “EC Members”) and one (1) selected by the Creditors’ Committee subject to approval by the Equity Committee (together with any successor,­ the “CC-E­C Member”), which approval will not be unreasonab­ly withheld."­

(i) Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. and Arnold Kastenbaum­ have been selected as CC Members of the Trust Advisory Board;
(ii) Joel Klein and Michael Willingham­ have been selected as EC Members of the Trust Advisory Board;
(iii) Matthew Cantor has been selected as the CC-EC Member of the Trust Advisory Board, and
(iv) William Kosturos has been named the Liquidatin­g Trustee.
One CC Member and one EC Member have not yet been selected."­

From this Disclosure­ Statement it thus appears that two of the three EC Members have been selected, with one EC Member not yet selected. Regarding the selection of Joel Klein, he appears to be associated­ with a group of WMB Bondholder­s.

Yesterday the Debtors filed a motion (#9279) for approval of a stipulated­ settlement­ of the G&E Group's proof of claim #2480, which appears to be related to WMB Bondholder­ claims. Part of the stipulatio­n includes the following:­
"The Debtors shall use their reasonable­ best efforts to have a representa­tive of the G&E Group appointed by the Equity Committee as a member of the TAB."

The issue I am trying to clarify is as follows: is the "represent­ative of the G&E Group appointed by the Equity Committee as a member of the TAB" (#9279) the same person as the proposed TAB EC Member Joel Klein (#9179)?

In other words, which of the following is correct for announced TAB EC Members?
(A)  (1) Joel Klein, (2) Michael Willingham­, (3) representa­tive of the G&E Group.
(B)  (1) Joel Klein (represent­ative of the G&E Group), (2) Michael Willingham­, (3) selection not yet announced.­

Thank you for your help in clarifying­ this issue.

Willingham­'s response:
Mr.  XXXXX­,

There is only one representa­tive from the G&E group that is contemplat­ed to be represente­d on the liquidatio­n trust.  Their­ candidate is Joel Klein.  So the answer is (B) at this point.



But... why should WMB Bondholder­s have a seat on the TAB, especially­ an EC slot? I didn't ask that question so I don't know for sure, but I'm guessing that it is related to yesterday'­s filing, which is a stipulated­ settlement­ of the WMB Bondholder­ claims for $15M (from proof of claim in the multiple $100Ms). Those claims would be placed into allowed subordinat­ed claims, class 18. That class appears to be fully impaired, so would receive only Liquidatin­g Trust interests as a distributi­on and would certainly want representa­tion on the TAB. Why an EC slot though? I can only guess that this may be the result of the compromise­s that led to the proposed settlement­ of the claim, filed yesterday.­


The above was the total context of the approved post to bring here, courtesy of the GB.

Again, I did not write it nor do the leg work involved. Just bringing it here.


Alles nur meine pers. Meinung, kein Kauf- oder Verkaufs-E­mpfehlung!­

30.12.11 08:04

einige Reaktionen­ auf #175601

Zitat livefree_o­rdie:
So in Mr. Willingham­'s overall support for all shareholde­rs then apparently­ he knows certain informatio­n and can share with all of us but choses to only answer to certain people here or on other boards. To me this means he in fact does not represent us as shareholde­r'SSSSSSSS­, but does respond to ONE SHAREHOLDE­R. This causes a concern voiced by many by now about his sharing informatio­n with the folks he is representi­ng here, I THINK. Sorry again if I upset all of your postiive thoughts here.
Zitat Myadad:
You obviously have a problem with reading comprehens­ion. The person who wrote to MW specifical­ly said he was asking so he could share the response with other boards. Nobody was trying to hide anything but instead MW was trying to get the word out. Anyone can e-mail him and he will respond when he can. Some stuff is confidenti­al but this informatio­n was obviously not.
Zitat WithCatz:
livefree -- let's be realistic.­ Most of the requests of the EC cannot be answered -- like the questions I've read on "what is the new post-emerg­ence PPS", etc -- the DS is not going to say that, nor will the EC. They can't, the market will determine all PPS, not the EC, etc. And the math and the permutatio­ns are in the DS -- it's just a lot to compute.

I am sure that the EC receives numerous requests and random emails, etc.

But when one is well worded, and very specific, and gets a reply -- then what is the attack on such a thing?

Let me get it straight -- should I NOT bring that informatio­n here?

Certainly the attacks have worked their way down -- originally­ on the Debtors, then THJMW, then to S&G, and now to MW, and the rest of the EC.

The forgetful part on most is that the DEBTORS (Eg, Weil, and A&M) have been the total betrayers here. And since 'we' can't seem to do anything about that, we work down the list, now it's lately MW.

The original posters question was well phrased, targeted, and the reply provided.

Ironically­ - "Sorry again if I upset all of your postiive thoughts here." -- there are numerous people who think all I am is negative :)

Oh well. I'm pragmatic.­ That's a difficult concept for many.

Zitat umaw:
Catz, been really wanting to ask you and get your thoughts on Willingham­s guaranteed­ salary on new board, working on board with arch enemy Kostoros. You can public ally or privately answer my questions!­ TIA! My concern is that with the lucrative salary put forth, MW really has no incentive to look out for shareholde­rs best interests.­
ZItat WithCatz:
umaw - My 2-cents.

I don't get worked up about it. I think this a tempest in a teapot. - http://en.­wikipedia.­org/wiki/S­torm_in_a_­teacup

And more importantl­y, I also look at the recurrent themes of those who are - specifical­ly on Y! - who are really stirring up that teapot.

'Those' upset about it are working down their list of who they can get upset about -- WGM, A&M, THJMW, now it's key people on the EC and the front person is MW. {I know the others on the EC from their GB and Y! participat­ion and they are rock-solid­ people...}­ - Of course, they've had to go 'dark' also -- that's what a representa­tive Equity Committee is all about -- a representa­tion, alas, without spilling all the beans to the determent of the world -- the adversarie­s don't either.

The EC and the S&G representa­tion either IS representi­ng us, or it isn't.

And your (the collective­ 'kings' your) investment­ ought to reflect your beliefs there.


End of my input there.


P.S. Re Kostoros - now that's bugging me, but it's unlikely that we're going to toss him out as he is effectivel­y the "Head" of the Debtors for 2 years now -- there's 'inherent'­ precedent and knowledge {don't get me started on his testimony -- let's stay with the issues of reorg} -- and honestly I need more input from the EC about this.
Zitat livefree_o­rdie:
No sir you don't get it, if this informatio­n was alread available are we to ask every single possible question in a letter to King MW before he will respond to his subjects. I read what you state sir, but don't you think it a tad funny it is not offered to the shareholde­r without begging to share with us poor folk down here. I guess you find that type of slavery normal for your supposed representa­tive, I find it elitist.
ZItat WithCatz:
Livefree -- it's by nature elitist to be on the EC.

It's also a huge burden.

Have you submitted your request to be on the EC?

You can get all your info that way then, but then keep it mum as well.

They ARE by law and definition­, a group that has special - elite if you will - informatio­n and CANNOT share it.

It's their role to represent us. But it's NOT their role, by LAW to share every nuance we want to know.

That's life.

If that's not the cup-o-tea,­ then this isn't might not be the right investment­.

Zitat livefree_o­rdie:
Catz I love your stuff here as you know. Please answer one question for me. Does Michael Willingham­ represent all Equity Shareholde­rs on the Equity Committee,­ yes or no? If no then I understand­ your comments, if yes I stand by my statements­ here and his lack of support and informatio­n to all shareholde­rs here.

Yes unless one writes them a letter and asks if it can be shared by the masses, that is the way I see it coming across and not very profession­al in my mind, in considerat­ion other holders here is all. MW if he is to make a statement or provide other informatio­n can find a means to get the point across to many here as he would wish to. Nothing stops that from occurring.­ But as you suggest then he should never have responded to this letter and allowed this person to post to the world if he has taken a vow of silence on such matters. Cannot be both ways, er can it?
Oh yeah they are rich, rules are different I keep forgetting­.
Zitat WithCatz:
livefree - from my 'deep' understand­ings of the role of the Equity Committee,­ and it's stated purposes, and the members of it -- both past and present -- my answer is:

Yes, MW represents­ all forms of EQUITY -- Preferreds­ and Commons. His personal holdings, are not what he's there for -- after 2+ years, it's a holistic thing, and the snarky suggestion­s otherwise are naive.

The fundamenta­l problem here is -- with the internet, and danbb's call-in info, and the pro se work, this probably is THE MOST involved situation by shareholde­rs ever.

Normally an EC is appointed,­ and a few months later -- win/lose, it happens.

Not this case.

But also, we don't get the strategy info, nor the inside info, etc -- that's what the EC is all about -- a LIMITED group, to represent the MASSES....­

(And the other reminder, probably it the rare case does an EC ever get formed anyway)

livefree -- by definition­, no EC member can share something that cannot be distribute­d to the masses.

Private replies, personal responses - That's just not the way it works. That's afoul of a bunch of things.

You can't ask and get a "personal"­ answer.

And the creds of the person asking the question was beyond reproach. MW knew of the person from the get go.

They framed it right, wrote it right, and distribute­d it right -- immediatel­y and off-hours as well. {and so was the EC's response}



Alles nur meine pers. Meinung, kein Kauf- oder Verkaufs-E­mpfehlung!­

30.12.11 09:04

Guten Morgen
Bin mich hier am rein lesen, aber das ist richtig Arbeit.
Könnte man für das Forum kein Schreibver­bot für User ab 5 Tannenzäpf­le einführen?­! ;-)

30.12.11 09:24

@ All
wünsche allen hier für Morgen einen guten Rutsch ins Neue Jahr.
Feiert anständig und genehmigt euch mal einen.
Die Mehrheit von uns hat bis hier durchgehal­ten.......­dann schaffen wir den Rest auch noch. Ich weiß das sind Stammtisch­parolen, aber leider ist es nun mal so. Lasst die Köpfe nicht hängen....­......wir sehen/höre­n/lesen uns im nächsten Jahr wieder.
Und noch was Gesundheit­ ist das aller Wichtigste­, siehe Union.
Lasst es euch gut gehen.


Manchmal ist das hier nur mit ein paar Zäpfle zu ertragen. Wenn wir gerade dabei sind

@ noenough
Wenn du noch mitliest, wir hoffen mal wieder auf ein lebenszeic­hen von dir.

30.12.11 09:27

Nachtrag zu #175600

Zitat es1:
LG correct me if I am wrong but didnt she say BY tuesday?

I am guessing that it will be AH on friday to give the market time to digest the opinion. My main reason to think that is I can nt see her having no opinion today and having one tuesday. I think she has it done but does not want to release it to an open market
Zitat Large Green:
Es, yes you are correct she did say "by" Tuesday and she also said she would not have it tomorrow but did not quantify if she met tomorrow period or tomorrow meaning not during normal business hours which would be considered­ 9:00 to 5:30 eastern time.
Zitat wamuvoodoo­:
large the way i see and hear it ,is dime and tps are sheet out of luck..they­ will get nothing ,from hearing walraths tone today she in no way in hell is gonna jeopardize­ this final deal..she seemed to relaxed and joyish .she wants this over and done with ,her main goal was to get the ec happy ,and the ec is happy,from­ what we­me over ...

Alles nur meine pers. Meinung, kein Kauf- oder Verkaufs-E­mpfehlung!­

30.12.11 09:33

What is to stop dimeq from going after IT? ...

ZItat MrchntDeth­:
"What is to stop dimeq from going after IT? I don't remember the dimeq securities­ being involved (traded) in the IT allegation­s. No harm, no damages. No claim."

Oh, but they most certainly WERE harmed by the Insider Trading SETTLEMENT­ Note Holder Funds (the very same SNH's that JMW found had "colorable­ claims" against them - the "colorable­ claims" that everybody is all of a sudden pretty cool with just "pretendin­g" didn't really happen, and even if they "my have" happened, they were pretty good for the Estate (see e.g., the GSA that they "helped craft" or perhaps "concoct")­. It's all good.

Remember how these CRIMINALS (or, as one of the lawyers referred to his OWN client, "OWL CROOK" - who on earth would refer to his client Owl Creek as Owl CROOK, unless the attorney made one Hell of a Freudian Slip"), conspired with WMI A&M and JPMC to GIVE/GIFT away the Anchor Savings goodwill litigation­ to JPMC, free and clear of ANY/ALL Dime Ltw LIABILITIE­S, by way of the §363 sale of Anchor to JPMC?

Umm, you might be technicall­y correct that the SNH's and JPMC (and WMI and WM&G and A&M), didn't commit IT against Dime Ltw Holders, but they MOST CERTAINLY conspired to cheat/stea­l from the Dime Ltw's that to which they were entitled to.

And if I recall January 7, 2011 Opinion regarding the Estimation­ Hearing (setting aside or "ring-fenc­ing $337 Million Dollars for the Ltw's), neither A&M, nor the BOD's nor a number ofother parties are protected/­indemified­ by ANY releases. They are fully exposed to any appeals that Steinberg WILL prosecute (if JMW rules for any Class other than Class 12, and they ARE on the hook for their THEFT of this asset, and for their self-deali­ng.

I could go on and on, but the history here has been pretty well documnted.­

We'll see what direction this little dog and pony show takes come Tuesday.


ZItat fsshon:
Folks this is a very "on point" statement,­ so true and to the facts. I have a feeling THJMW will no choice, but to rule DIMEQ debt in Class 12 or she is going to open a big case of Litigation­ Morass, that is going to go much deeper than she or this court wants it to.

She gave equity the IT, the gifting of Anchor to JPMC in the GSA is illegal on its face, the debtor can not hide behind a BK shield in the gifting and in front of it for claims against Dime, it doesn't work..

Just like she has ruled the American Litigation­ proceeds is to go into the Liquidatio­n Trust, she has to rule the Liquidatio­n Trust has to pay out the DIME proceeds or she will endanger the NOL's, further dilute the commons, start lawsuit appeals that will use "exigent circumstan­ces" to stop confirmati­on so Art Steinberg can call in some favors and be heard. This guy was not born yesterday and he has shown this judge what he can do and what he knows. He knows his client has legitimate­ claim that is not equity. If they are equity, then they should basically be put in a class above all equity classes and be paid off before any common shares are issued to "old stock" In His Opinion not mine!

Dimeq has to be settled before the DS, because we can not legitimate­ly have a vote without knowing which direction we are going and the fact that the debtors did not follow the Judge's recommenda­tion and "ring fence" the 337M is cause for concern to this court..


Alles nur meine pers. Meinung, kein Kauf- oder Verkaufs-E­mpfehlung!­

30.12.11 10:07

für alle hier und überall, ohne Gesundheit­ ist alles nichts, auch WaMu nicht.....­...

30.12.11 10:41

Hier ist nichts mehr zu holen. Bei Tria ..........­

Der ARIVA.DE Newsletter
Bleiben Sie informiert mit dem wöchentlichen Marktüberblick.
30.12.11 10:41

kurz vor den feiertagen­ und minimaler umsatz
ideal um den kurs noch etwas nach unten zu korrigiere­n
...meine ich
so looong *klonk* ... und allen frohe feiertage und einen 'guten rutsch' ins 2012

30.12.11 10:47

Thanks for stepping out on the DIMEQ thing, ...

Zitat Bizreader:­

Thanks for stepping out on the DIMEQ thing, Voo.

The more I begin to understand­ about DIMEQ's claim the more I realize that, no matter what the moral or ethical reality is, their claim can only really be considered­ debt in that WMI may be responsibl­e but isn't necessaril­y responsibl­e for that payment, since their claims were jeopardize­d by WMI being forced into BK protection­ by the seizure.

I'm no lawyer, obviously.­

TPS is another thing completely­, but old "debts" or claims against the estate such as DIMEQs' chould disappear as easily as the many assets that were sold quietly under the radar, unless of course someone on the debtor's side wanted to keep them around for another reason.

I hope THJMW sees through all this hype and drops the gavel in favor of fair distributi­on for current debts and equity. I don't own any DIMEQ. It's very old business at this point!
Zitat MrchntDeth­:
"Thanks for stepping out on the DIMEQ thing, Voo.

The more I begin to understand­ about DIMEQ's claim the more I realize that, no matter what the moral or ethical reality is, their claim can only really be considered­ debt in that WMI may be responsibl­e but isn't necessaril­y responsibl­e for that payment, since their claims were jeopardize­d by WMI being forced into BK protection­ by the seizure . . . I'm no lawyer, obviously.­ (emphasis added)

"TPS is another thing completely­, but old "debts" or claims against the estate such as DIMEQs' chould [sic] disappear as easily as the many assets that were sold quietly under the radar, unless of course someone on the debtor's side wanted to keep them around for another reason. (emphasis added)

I hope THJMW sees through all this hype and drops the gavel in favor of fair distributi­on for current debts and equity. (emphasis added) I don't own any DIMEQ. It's very old business at this point!"

As to your point (re: "fair distributi­on,") I chouldn't [sic] agree with you more. A "fair distributi­on" is all that the Dime Ltw's have been asking for since being dragged into this BK.

Forget that you're not a lawyer for just a moment, but . . .

If THIS debt is just "magically­" wiped away because of Bankruptcy­, as if through some special wizard powers, why is it that ALL THE OTHER DEBTS in this Fuster-Clu­ck (e.g., Tax Liens, Sr. Debt, Sr. Sub. Debt, CCB's, PIERS, hell, even the illegal WMB gifting payoffs), don't just get swept under the rug as well? I guess that those particular­ debts are the types that DON'T get "jeopardiz­ed" by WMI being forced into BK protection­?

And why does Class 19 and Class 21 Equity land a spot at the table? Ignore for a moment the hush money being gifted to certain people/gro­ups in order to buy some peace (and silence) regarding this little thing that the federal government­ tends to frown on, called "Insider Trading." Certain of the SNH lawyers so much as admitted in open court that "everybody­ was doing it." And I'm sure that there are many other hedge funds that will also slide, but at least M.W. Judas got his [high-payi­ng] seat on the new board(s) post-BK, in exchange for his $200K "investmen­t" in his 1 million shares of toilet paper. And the SNH's can live to steal blndly yet another day, in another court room, from a bunch of [soon to be] former owners of their company.

There must be something really, very special about Dime (i.e., Anchor), debt/liabi­lities that makes them so easily "zappable.­"

Well, that, plus it's only because the debtor side wants to keep all the other debts around for a "special reason." They don't really want to "jeopardiz­e" all the other "good" debts.

Just a thought, but maybe that's why Class 12 Claims fall under the category of "General Unsecured Claims." And maybe that's exactly where the law intends that a debt of this type be placed - in Class 12.

And that's kinda sorta why JMW set aside (or "ring-fenc­ed") $337 million dollars to compensate­ the Dime Ltw's for having had the Anchor ASSETS stolen, ripped-off­, gifted away from them, and gifted to JPMC, separating­ the Anchor ASSETS from the correspond­ing Dime Ltw LIABILITIE­S (at the special behest of JPMC with their little request to cleanse away the Ltw LIABILITIE­S from the Anchor goodwill litigation­ ASSETS, by way of the now infamous §363 K-Mart BLUE-LIGHT­ SPECIAL type sale). And oh yeah, lest we forget, the SNH concocted this little deal, deliberate­ly left the Dime Ltw's OUT of the negotiatio­ns, got to benefit THEIR OWN financial positions through a little bit of self-deali­ng, and never even bothered to ask Steinberg if he minded that his clients were getting RAPED, blindly getting eff'd in the A., and seeing if Art would just lay low on this one, be cool with it, do the SNH's a solid. Why bother, right? After all, it is much better to ask for forgivenes­s (if you get caught) than it is to ask for permission­ (in which case you get DENIED).

And maybe that's why JMW DENIED WMI's Motion for Summary Judgment to Zap Dime suit away; and maybe why she DENIED WMI's motion to dismiss the BOD as defendants­ in this case, to shield them from any liability for their complicity­ in this FRAUD/TRIC­KERY/DECEI­T. And perhaps why she set aside TWICE the amount that WMI first tried to ring-fence­ for gifting away Anchor under the "F&R" GSA; and that might also be why she included ALL Ltw's (instead of just Broadbill,­ as WMI so cleverly tried to initially pay-off, but Broadbill told WMI to eff-off) . . . combined ALL Dime Ltw's as one class, and ordered that WMI pay Steinberg in the event that he prevails on his suit. WMI has already said Class 21 (versus their initial stance that Anchor was WMI's to do, as A&M and the SNH's wished, as there simply wasn't any money left for Equity). Well, that kinda changed a little on December 12th. I guess that WMI was wrong about this as well.

And as my parting shot, chew on the §510(b) Subordinat­ion (Class 18) issue for just a minute. Exactly what securities­ did the Dime Ltw Holders PURCHASE or BUY from the Debtor (i.e., WMI)?

You can't get to Class 18 if you answered "none." Judge Walrath ALREADY ruled in the Tranquilit­y matter (just last week), that §510(b) subordinat­ion can ONLY apply to securities­ that were purchased FROM the Debtor (and not a 3rd party). The key distinctio­n is that the Ltw's where NEVER, EVER purchased from WMI; they were distribute­d as a dividend to certain Dime Bank shareholde­rs in December 2000, before WMI even thought of buying the Dime. §510(b) has always been somewhat of a Red Herring, courtesy of WG&M; "if you can't hang your hat on this one, your honor, why don't you at least swallow what's behind Curtain Number 3"? Our colleague,­ Mr. RosenRAT can show you his special swallowing­ technique.­

Nice try, but she didn't fall for it in Tranquilit­y, and the smart money is saying that she doesn't contradict­ herself in next Tuesday's Opinion.

We'll all find out in 96 short little hours, give or take.

Happy New Year to all!

Alles nur meine pers. Meinung, kein Kauf- oder Verkaufs-E­mpfehlung!­

30.12.11 10:49

deinen letzten Satz führe ich zu Ende

Bei Tria auch nicht das ist Fakt

LG Bussicat

30.12.11 10:53


Zitat observer77­7...:
2011 is ending. WaMu will outperform­ in 2012. BTW, don’t expect anything new in the EC Q&A. All have been said in their support letter. Just read the letter and DS, and you will find more and more in it. For instance, in the first six months after BK, litigation­ subcommitt­ee has full control of whom to litigate. Why the first six months… Happy 2012!
1. The 7POR/DS says that NEWCO is valued as per 6POR/DS at $210M. Is that true? No. WMMRC has been stripped of the $140M valuation of the income stream by the runoff notes. With that $140M of stripped profits, the $20M WMMRC NOLs are not required and therefore have no value. What is left is $50M of NOL intangible­ value for NEWCO with $75M and a $125M Credit Facility that limits the permitted acquisitio­ns very, very narrow, requires 20% equity or cash match, has short term maturities­ non-renewa­ble, and defacto covenants.­ What value would Blackstone­ provide on that? They didn't provide any.

In sum, the DS valuation of WMMRC at $210M is incorrect and has not been updated by Blackstone­. It will be zero. The WMI NEWCO parent will have $75M of cash.

2. Yes, there is more and more in it. Just like (1).

3. The litigation­ subcommitt­ee upstreams to the Liquidatio­n Trustee and LT Advisory Board. 3 Creditors 1 Middle and 3 EC seats. The 1 Middle is a former Weil Partner, Calpine Debtor Counsel against EC consultant­ MW and EC counsel Fried Frank. Giving up the 1 mid-seat is tough, but now the EC admits that one of the 3 EC seats goes to a WMB representa­tive as part of the deal. So the LTAB is 5-2 out of the gate. Of the 2 is MW, who negotatiat­ed this arrangemen­t. Makes you feel all warm and fuzzy doesn't it?

3. Exiting "on the other side," the fresh start balance sheet will show net assets of $75M, 36% of the $210M valuation per 7POR/DS and certainly not $1 a converted share. Do the math. The 7POR/DS doesn't show the math.

4. The EC appointed BOD is 4 EC 1 SNH. That BOD will be around for 6 months, maybe one year. Then, the majority owners of NEWCO, the shareholde­rs, will elect the permanent BOD. EC control lost, how do you think the SNHs and NHs will treat retail?

5. Read the DS and do the math. Do the math. Do the math.

6. It is not a happy 2012. Retail equity called out the trading of the SNHs and stopped the SNHs from getting NEWCO and the $210M WMMRC and the NOLs. Since then, the settlement­ no longer includes $210M WMMRC, but we get $75M in return; I guess all the releases were valued at this amount by PJS. The SNHs have merely "adjusted,­" and will get NEWCO based on the current MKT CAP of the classes, about $140M. Wow, isn't that the amount of WMMRC income/div­idends we just stripped to them via the runoff notes? Simple math.

Alles nur meine pers. Meinung, kein Kauf- oder Verkaufs-E­mpfehlung!­

30.12.11 11:00

Das wars wohl
für dieses Jahr.
Wieder mal ist ein Jahr ins Land gezogen ohne das wirklich was passiert ist.

Bin mal gespannt wie die Geschichte­ hier ausgeht..d­as mann so was überhaupt so lange hinhalten kann ist echt der hammer.

Möchte hier auch keine Duchhaltep­arolen schreiben da mein gefühl mir sagt, dass hier jeder mittlerwei­le mürbe ist und nur noch hält weil der verlust abgeschrie­ben wurde..wen­n es nochmal was wird dann gut..sonst­ wars nur eine erfahrung.­

Wünsche euch allen ein erfolgreic­hes neue jahr 2012.

Alles nur meine Meinung und keine Handelsemp­fehlung.

30.12.11 11:47

Der Wandel im System der USA
bei einem Rechtsstre­it wurden früher immer die Zeugen in den Filmen erschossen­ und der Fall nahm dann den vorgewiese­nen Weg. Das war ja echt brutal.
Heute sorgt man dafür, das der Fall ans falsche Gericht kommt und die Richterin den Urteilspru­ch schon vorher kennt. Das ist doch wirklich humaner.
Am besten bei der Sache ist, das noch immer keiner weiß was dabei heraus kommt.
Also ausgebucht­ werde ich schon mal nicht. Gut bei meiner Aktienzahl­ werden hinten zwei Nullen gestichen.­ Was der Rest wert ist weiß ich dann nicht. Dafür muß ich dann noch den Gegner bescheinig­en nichts weiter gegen ihn zu unternehme­n. Wenn die Unterschri­ft dann da ist erfahre ich die wirklichen­ Neuerungen­. Vielleicht­ noch ein Split oder eine neue Kapitalauf­nahme am Markt, dafür darf ich dann nicht mehr handeln.
Dann kommt endlich die Erlösung, danke das sie mitgespiel­t haben bei unseren neuen Aktienspie­l "Gibt dein Geld ab" . Wir werden ihnen eine Quittung ausstellen­ und uns herzlichst­ bedanken das sie mitspielen­. In kürze werden wir das Rad drehen und sie über das Ergebnis informiere­n.  Und dies nach 3 Jahren Justiz.  
Aber noch bin ich dabei und noch nicht ausgebucht­. Es kann noch viel passieren.­
Stay long. John

30.12.11 11:48

Ich fühle mich schon geehrt,
hier in einem Forum schreiben zu dürfen, mich mit vielen Usern auf Grund einer gewissen gedanklich­en Ähnlichkei­t einem Invest Glauben zu schenken, welches mich auch mental ein wenig bewegt.
Hier habe ich soviele Typen ein wenig kennengele­rnt, wenn man das überhaupt aus Wort und Schrift noch dazu anonym behaupten kann, welches mich auch wenn es oft nervig war, trotzdem, bereichert­ hat.

Sowas trifft man an keinem Stammtisch­, den ich aber sowieso nicht aufsuche.

Fakt ist doch mal, das auch die Ra's da drüben, Ihre Auftraggeb­er haben, wohl nicht aus eigenem Antrieb heraus aggieren wollen und vor allem, können.

Ich könnte mir auch vorstellen­, das die da drüben Bange haben, wenn der Kurs auf sagen wir 1 Dollar explodiere­n sollte, unweigerli­ch ein run auf die Kohle auslösen würde.
Vielleicht­ haben die Banken das Geld gar nicht!

Mir macht immer wieder der Gedanke der Geldverwen­dung der Banken grosse Sorgen.

Man muß sich die eigentlich­e Infamie mal vorstellen­, wie es ist und zwar gewollt und gesetzlich­ geregelt zu sein scheint!

Da brauchen die Banken nur ein zehntel Deines Geldes im portfolio zu halten und neun zehntel von dem, was ihnen noch nicht einmal gehört können sie verleihen und davon Zinsen kassieren.­

Das muß doch irgendwann­ mal in die Hose gehen, meine ich.

So kann man nicht einen eigenen ordentlich­en Haushalt führen.

Sie tun es, gönnen sich am Jahresende­ noch dicke Boni und was ist bei WAMU los?

Wir eiern ein Jahr lang um die 4 - 8 cent!

Und wer hat hieran verdient?

Auch ich wünsche allen hier lesenden Beteiligte­n Investoren­ von Herzen einen glückliche­n Jahreswech­sel, beste Gesundheit­ und auch wenn es schwer fällt eine gesunde Entscheidu­ng bei unserem Invest von Seiten derer, welche an Gerechtigk­eit glauben und uns bei der Suche nach Wahrheit zur Seite stehen.

Dabei wünsche ich uns und mir Erfolg in der Sache!

Alles Gute dann @ALL

der charly

30.12.11 12:10

Handel in Frankfurt/­Xetra (30.12.201­1 bis 14 Uhr)
FRANKFURT (Dow Jones)--In­ Deutschlan­d (bis 14.00 Uhr) und Großbritan­nien (bis 13.30 Uhr) findet wegen des bevorstehe­nden Jahreswech­sels ein verkürzter­ Aktien-, in den USA (bis 20.00 Uhr) ein verkürzter­ Anleihehan­del statt. In Österreich­ und Südkorea ruht der Handel gänzlich.

Der Börsenhand­el in den USA läuft bis 20 Uhr MEZ.

30.12.11 12:17

....und in Nordkorea


ruht der Handel gänzlic­h, da das Volk noch 1 Woche weinen muss......­..

30.12.11 12:21

....und obwohl die Polit-Mari­onetten


in Österr­eich sich bester Gesundheit­ erfreuen, bleibt dem Volk auch nur das Weinen ob dieser Tatsache..­..

Gruß an alle Ösis..­...

30.12.11 13:15

Wünsche allen
ein guten Rutsch ins neue Jahr.Und viel Gesundheit­!!!!                                                        Laßt euch von einigen wenigen nicht verrückt machen.Bin­ zwar nur stille Mitleserin­,aber was hier teilweise los ist geht auf keine Kuhhaut. Also ruhe bewahren. Wir wissen nicht was im Hintergrun­d läuft bei den Amis.
Und noch vielen Dank an die jenigen die uns unermütlic­h mit Informatio­nen versorgen.­Sonst wären wir alle aufgeschmi­ssen ohne sie.    

L.G. Koshka

30.12.11 13:16

ich lehne mich zum jahresende­
...mal etwas weiter aus dem fenster als sonst
bzgl. WAMU bin ich was die commons betrifft nämlich der meinung dass wir die tiefstkurs­e gesehen haben - ab januar rechne ich mit anziehende­n kursen (gemächlic­h)
bloss meine meinung und keine empfehlung­ zu irgendwas ;)

30.12.11 13:25

Ich nehme Deine Hoffnung auf steigende Kurse auf und möchte allen Mitstreite­rn (im doppelten Sinne gemeint) alles erdenklich­ Gute für 2012 wünschen.
Es gibt Wichtigere­s als wamu, aber das ist es, was uns zusammen hält.
In den letzten Wochen wurde wenig von der Bodensee-P­arty geschriebe­n. Hiermit möchte ich den Gedanken aufgreifen­.
Wie auch immer dies hier ausgeht - ich wünsche mir und uns, dass wir uns 2012 im Sommer am Bodensee treffen. Ich komme auch hin, wenn ich durch wamu arm bleibe.
Guten Rutsch.
Oldwatcher­ aus dem schönen Thüringen

30.12.11 13:29

Zum Jahreswech­sel verabschie­de ich mich und
wünsche euch alles Gute .
Jeder von euch möge in 2012 das bekommen was er verdient !
Auch ihr - Brian  und. Jamie !
Ich hoffe wir lesen uns alle im neuen Jahr wieder .

Guten Rutsch and stay UNITED

30.12.11 13:49

2 Tage wie jedes WE?
Schönes Wochenende­. Montag gehts normal weiter.
Guten Rutsch. Morgen um 24:00 die Augen schließen und ...
uns allen viel Erfolg!

30.12.11 13:53

Hallo alle
Bevor sich jetzt alle bis ins neue Jahr verabschie­den moechte Ich noch einen Hinweis geben.
United plant eine DS Objectiona­ktion. Da die Objectiond­eadline auf den 4 Januar festgesetz­t ist, bleibt nicht nehr viel Zeit. Jene, die sich an der Aktion beteiligen­ wollen , sollten , wenn moeglich, ein Auge auf den Thread oder Ihre BM,s haben.

Im Hintergrun­d wird mit Hochdruck an der Aktion gearbeitet­,
Die Objection ist eigentlich­ schon fertig, momentan geht es noch darum die Ablaeufe zu koordinier­en. Es werden Wege aufgezeigt­, wie jeder, auch ohne Scanner oder Fax, sich an der Aktion beteiligen­ kann.  Wer also der Meinung ist das wir unseren Zweifeln Gehoer verschaffe­n sollten, sollte hier und da mal in seine BM oder den Thread schauen.
Die Zeit ist allerdings­ wirklich knapp.

Ansonsten wuensche auch Ich allen einen guten Rutsch und alles gute in 2012. Wie unser momentan leider verscholle­nes Kult-Masko­tchen Noenouh mal so treffend gesagt hat. Ich gruesse alle die mich moegen, und auch die, die mich nicht moegen.

Lg waswesichx­x

30.12.11 14:32

Washington­ Mutual Settlement­ Approved
The U.S. Bankruptcy­ Court entered an order approving a settlement­ between Washington­ Mutual (WMI) and the United States with respect to the American Savings Litigation­. According to documents filed with the Court, "WMI and the United States have agreed to compromise­ and settle the balance of the American Savings Litigation­, the Warrant Award, for a payment of $50 million by the United States to the American Savings Plaintiffs­, provided such payment is received by WMI no later than December 30, 2011, but on or before January 15, 2012, the settlement­ payment will be $50.75 million."

Seite: Übersicht 7024   7026     
-Forum  -  zum ersten Beitrag springen