I'm not touching the PQs anymore. I had grabbed a few in the low $20s a few weeks ago and ditched them in the $40s. I wouldnt be surprised to see all the Preferreds get converted into commons anyway. TPG has commons, and TPG is one of the most important players in this mess. TPG gets paid, we get paid ... and I'm fairly confident TPG will get paid. From a percentage basis, the WAMUQs are the best to hold right now. WAMPQs are the safest as they'll get paid for sure, but I'm all about percentages and I believe the best investment to make here is the WAMUQs. GLTA
I'm not touching the PQs anymore. I had grabbed a few in the low $20s a few weeks ago and ditched them in the $40s. I wouldnt be surprised to see all the Preferreds get converted into commons anyway. TPG has commons, and TPG is one of the most important players in this mess. TPG gets paid, we get paid ... and I'm fairly confident TPG will get paid. From a percentage basis, the WAMUQs are the best to hold right now. WAMPQs are the safest as they'll get paid for sure, but I'm all about percentages and I believe the best investment to make here is the WAMUQs. GLTA
OK, I'm finally caught up and have listened to the audio clips from today's Omnibus. Below is a summary of the key happenings. Unfortunately, we didn't get the $4B ruled on, but no worries, just gives everyone more time to make up their mind and grab more shares if need be.
Court Summary:
- FDIC and JPM attempts to invoke FIRREA jurisdictional bar: denied
- FDIC and JPM motions to stay two adversary proceedings or remove to DC: denied
- JPM motion for reconsideration of Rule 2004 motion approval: denied
- JPM motion to dismiss WMI's 18 counterclaims: denied
- JPM attempts to categorize the two adversary proceedings as non-core: denied
- JPM attempt to divest bankruptcy court of authority pending appeals: denied as frivolous <== (lol, love this one)
- WMI Rule 2004 motion to examine JPM: approved
- WMI subpoena of JPM for Rule 2004 (Discovery) documents: served
Lol, another Win for WaMu.
Court Summary:
- FDIC and JPM attempts to invoke FIRREA jurisdictional bar: denied
- FDIC and JPM motions to stay two adversary proceedings or remove to DC: denied
- JPM motion for reconsideration of Rule 2004 motion approval: denied
- JPM motion to dismiss WMI's 18 counterclaims: denied
- JPM attempts to categorize the two adversary proceedings as non-core: denied
- JPM attempt to divest bankruptcy court of authority pending appeals: denied as frivolous <== (lol, love this one)
- WMI Rule 2004 motion to examine JPM: approved
- WMI subpoena of JPM for Rule 2004 (Discovery) documents: served
Lol, another Win for WaMu.
Haha did ya'll see this document? Someone linked it on ihub. Note the faxed date at top top requesting a ban on WAMU naked shorts to go into effect on the 21st. Stamped received on 22nd.
http://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-20-08/s72008-553.pdf
Everyone was predicting all the shorts to cover and the new report says only 2%. What gives? If people shorted it all the way down... why didn't they cover in the pennies? I just don't see why anyone in their right minds would short something so worthless at the risk of it exploding in their face. It feels like we are risking a dollar to make 50 and they are risking 50 dollars to make 20 cents. Is there any truth to the people suggesting the shares "don't exist"?
Hypothetically, if wamuq goes to 0 and the stock delists, they can't cover at that point because the stock doesn't trade, right? Or would they not have to and they pocket everything? It's hard to wrap my head around.
http://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-20-08/s72008-553.pdf
Everyone was predicting all the shorts to cover and the new report says only 2%. What gives? If people shorted it all the way down... why didn't they cover in the pennies? I just don't see why anyone in their right minds would short something so worthless at the risk of it exploding in their face. It feels like we are risking a dollar to make 50 and they are risking 50 dollars to make 20 cents. Is there any truth to the people suggesting the shares "don't exist"?
Hypothetically, if wamuq goes to 0 and the stock delists, they can't cover at that point because the stock doesn't trade, right? Or would they not have to and they pocket everything? It's hard to wrap my head around.
if u short 2000 dollars worth of ABC stock at 10 bucks a share or 1 cent a share....u make the same amount 2000 dollars if ABC stock goes to 0
the risk just much higher obviously shorting at 1 cent a share as u could lose a ton if it ramps and they forced or decide to cover
the max you can make on any short regardless of share price is how much you risked to start out...or 100%....but you can lose multiple times if it ramps to the upside and you have to cover
in the case of WaMu lets say you shorted 2000 dollars worth of WaMu at 10 dollars a share and you are still short....if it goes back to 1 and you cover there you make 1800 dollars....if you hang onto it and it goes to zero...you make 2000....if you cover now around 25 cents....1950.....
It's Official ... 11/25
JPM has until 11/25 to settle with WaMu on the $4B or have it settled in Court by the judge:
"Per the Notice of Briefing rules THJMW can rule at any time with in the next 60 Days, but no later than.
Again, Judges don't like to rule. They would rather people in dispute settle there differences. But, we all know JPM is not the settling kind.
The time line has been set and JPM will wait until the last minute IMO. But every day that they wait, the costs of JPM settling are going up."
The above quote is from DrRugby who's a long-time holder of WaMu since seizure last year. He is also a bankruptcy lawyer and has been translating all the documents over at I-Hub. He also wrote this:
"Due to THJMW's ruling on Friday, the Turnover Action has not been certified. Therefore, Judge Sleet can not hear the appeal because the order is not appealable. Even the colateral doctrine was ruled in Favor of WMI.
As it sits, JPM/FDIC can only appeal the final BK order.
Go WAMU."
Lets see if JPM has the balls to drag this out another 59 days ... this oughta be interesting from here on out. I dont recommend anyone get caught without shares as you could miss this opportunity since a settlement at any time between now and 11/25 is possible to occur. GLTA to all longs.
JPM has until 11/25 to settle with WaMu on the $4B or have it settled in Court by the judge:
"Per the Notice of Briefing rules THJMW can rule at any time with in the next 60 Days, but no later than.
Again, Judges don't like to rule. They would rather people in dispute settle there differences. But, we all know JPM is not the settling kind.
The time line has been set and JPM will wait until the last minute IMO. But every day that they wait, the costs of JPM settling are going up."
The above quote is from DrRugby who's a long-time holder of WaMu since seizure last year. He is also a bankruptcy lawyer and has been translating all the documents over at I-Hub. He also wrote this:
"Due to THJMW's ruling on Friday, the Turnover Action has not been certified. Therefore, Judge Sleet can not hear the appeal because the order is not appealable. Even the colateral doctrine was ruled in Favor of WMI.
As it sits, JPM/FDIC can only appeal the final BK order.
Go WAMU."
Lets see if JPM has the balls to drag this out another 59 days ... this oughta be interesting from here on out. I dont recommend anyone get caught without shares as you could miss this opportunity since a settlement at any time between now and 11/25 is possible to occur. GLTA to all longs.
Kuwlness, this 60 days for ruling/settlement only concerns the 4 billion and not the whole bankruptcy case correct? So if there is a settlement it would only be to the tune of 4 billion, which is not enough to pay off creditors, much less the preferred shareholders. It would definitely be positive news for wamuq and should have a corresponding rise in pps but this doesn't sound like the jackpot we are hoping for.
Are you saying that if JPM settles over the 4 then they are most likely to settle everything? Perhaps I am misunderstanding. Not to beat a dead horse, but I'd like to hear a little elaboration on this point.
Also, do we know how Judge Walrath leans politically? Steel is a liberal recommended for nomination by (now VP) Biden under Clinton. I would think Steel would be more likely to intervene with a conservative judge and less so on a liberal one but I'm just playing the guessing game. JPM spent a crapton more on lobbying (2x more for dems than repubs) than in elections past.
Here is the official document vs. FDIC dated 03/20/09.
http://www.wamuqd.com/WMIFDIC.pdf
You're probably looking for upcoming dates though, which I do not have.
Ah here we go. The WMI v. FDIC play-by-play
http://ghostofwamu.com/CaseHeader/09-00533Header.htm
Most recent was filed September 25th, 2009
REPLY to opposition to motion re 45 MOTION to Dismiss THE AMENDED COUNTERCLAIMS OF DEFENDANT AND COUNTERCLAIM PLAINTIFF FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, PURSUANT TO 11 U.S.C. § 362(a) AND FEDERAL RULE 12(B)(6), AND TO STAY THE PROCEEDING IN ITS ENTIRETY MOTION to Dismiss THE AMENDED COUNTERCLAIMS OF DEFENDANT AND COUNTERCLAIM PLAINTIFF FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, PURSUANT TO 11 U.S.C. § 362(a) AND FEDERAL RULE 12(B)(6), AND TO STAY THE PROCEEDING IN ITS ENTIRETY filed by WASHINGTON MUTUAL, INC.. (Brown, Deborah) (Entered: 09/25/2009)
That's a mouthful!
http://ghostofwamu.com/CaseHeader/09-00533Header.htm
Most recent was filed September 25th, 2009
REPLY to opposition to motion re 45 MOTION to Dismiss THE AMENDED COUNTERCLAIMS OF DEFENDANT AND COUNTERCLAIM PLAINTIFF FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, PURSUANT TO 11 U.S.C. § 362(a) AND FEDERAL RULE 12(B)(6), AND TO STAY THE PROCEEDING IN ITS ENTIRETY MOTION to Dismiss THE AMENDED COUNTERCLAIMS OF DEFENDANT AND COUNTERCLAIM PLAINTIFF FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, PURSUANT TO 11 U.S.C. § 362(a) AND FEDERAL RULE 12(B)(6), AND TO STAY THE PROCEEDING IN ITS ENTIRETY filed by WASHINGTON MUTUAL, INC.. (Brown, Deborah) (Entered: 09/25/2009)
That's a mouthful!
info i found
By Jodi Xu
When the deal was struck in September, J.P. Morgan Chase’s purchase of most of the collapsed Washington Mutual Bank looked like a master stroke, a $1.88 billion purchase price for operations expected to boost annual earnings more than $2 billion. In the first quarter alone, revenue jumped 48%, in part reflecting the impact of the WaMu purchase.
Bloomberg News
Buildings are reflected in the window of a Washington Mutual ATM in New York in September.
But at least part of the deal is getting a second look, as Delaware Judge Mary Walrath on Friday granted a motion from the thrift’s parent, Washington Mutual Inc., to examine J.P. Morgan’s books.
At issue is $4 billion of depository accounts at the holding company that both J.P. Morgan and WaMu Inc. claim ownership of. In court documents, J.P. Morgan said it assumed that when it bought WaMu from the FDIC, it took on all the thrift’s assets and liabilities. (It acquired more than $180 billion of deposits in the deal.) J.P. Morgan “expressly assumes…and agrees to pay, perform, and discharge, all of the liabilities of [Washington Mutual Bank]…including the Assumed Deposits…,” court documents stated.
WaMu attorneys said “the Deposits were property of the Debtors estates” and “would be used to fund distributions to creditors.”
The brouhaha is somewhat reminiscent of the recent Lehman Brothers attempt to revisit its September sale of assets to Barclays, which Deal Journal wrote about here. There a judge agreed to allow Lehman to probe Barclays books, saying the extraordinary speed of the deal, days after Lehman failed, warranted review. “It’s conceivable mistakes were made. The notion that there may have been a misunderstanding or even an innocent misrepresentation, as opposed to a willful one, is entirely possible” that the speed of the September sale of the Lehman operations out of bankruptcy-court proceedings, the judge ruled. (The FDIC sold WaMu within a day after seizing the assets.)
In the granting the WaMu motion, Judge Walrath said that giving WaMu Inc. access to J.P. Morgan documents was appropriate because the examinations would be “discovering assets, examining transactions and determining whether wrongdoing has occurred.” The judge also said “JP Morgan had misapplied the pending proceeding rule since WaMu’s motion did not seek evidence related to the bank’s adversary proceeding.” (WaMu previously sued the FDIC for selling the WaMu assets its seized in September too cheaply to J.P. Morgan.)
Tax refunds, intellectual property and contractual rights, assets associated with the old Washington Mutual, push the total value at stake to more than $10 billion, according to an attorney for WaMu. “WaMu will be left with nothing to pay off the creditors if the dispute is not properly settled,” said Rafael X. Zahralddin-Aravena, attorney from Elliott Greenleaf, which is representing WaMu. “The grant allows us to investigate further.”
J.P. Morgan’s attorneys couldn’t be reached for comment.
J.P. Morgan over the weekend filed a motion for reconsideration, according to people familiar with the matter. WaMu plans to respond to the motion in the coming weeks. J.P. Morgan also said in last Wednesday’s hearing that it planned to file an Interlocutory Appeal to ask the court to allow the issue to be heard by a higher court.
By Jodi Xu
When the deal was struck in September, J.P. Morgan Chase’s purchase of most of the collapsed Washington Mutual Bank looked like a master stroke, a $1.88 billion purchase price for operations expected to boost annual earnings more than $2 billion. In the first quarter alone, revenue jumped 48%, in part reflecting the impact of the WaMu purchase.
Bloomberg News
Buildings are reflected in the window of a Washington Mutual ATM in New York in September.
But at least part of the deal is getting a second look, as Delaware Judge Mary Walrath on Friday granted a motion from the thrift’s parent, Washington Mutual Inc., to examine J.P. Morgan’s books.
At issue is $4 billion of depository accounts at the holding company that both J.P. Morgan and WaMu Inc. claim ownership of. In court documents, J.P. Morgan said it assumed that when it bought WaMu from the FDIC, it took on all the thrift’s assets and liabilities. (It acquired more than $180 billion of deposits in the deal.) J.P. Morgan “expressly assumes…and agrees to pay, perform, and discharge, all of the liabilities of [Washington Mutual Bank]…including the Assumed Deposits…,” court documents stated.
WaMu attorneys said “the Deposits were property of the Debtors estates” and “would be used to fund distributions to creditors.”
The brouhaha is somewhat reminiscent of the recent Lehman Brothers attempt to revisit its September sale of assets to Barclays, which Deal Journal wrote about here. There a judge agreed to allow Lehman to probe Barclays books, saying the extraordinary speed of the deal, days after Lehman failed, warranted review. “It’s conceivable mistakes were made. The notion that there may have been a misunderstanding or even an innocent misrepresentation, as opposed to a willful one, is entirely possible” that the speed of the September sale of the Lehman operations out of bankruptcy-court proceedings, the judge ruled. (The FDIC sold WaMu within a day after seizing the assets.)
In the granting the WaMu motion, Judge Walrath said that giving WaMu Inc. access to J.P. Morgan documents was appropriate because the examinations would be “discovering assets, examining transactions and determining whether wrongdoing has occurred.” The judge also said “JP Morgan had misapplied the pending proceeding rule since WaMu’s motion did not seek evidence related to the bank’s adversary proceeding.” (WaMu previously sued the FDIC for selling the WaMu assets its seized in September too cheaply to J.P. Morgan.)
Tax refunds, intellectual property and contractual rights, assets associated with the old Washington Mutual, push the total value at stake to more than $10 billion, according to an attorney for WaMu. “WaMu will be left with nothing to pay off the creditors if the dispute is not properly settled,” said Rafael X. Zahralddin-Aravena, attorney from Elliott Greenleaf, which is representing WaMu. “The grant allows us to investigate further.”
J.P. Morgan’s attorneys couldn’t be reached for comment.
J.P. Morgan over the weekend filed a motion for reconsideration, according to people familiar with the matter. WaMu plans to respond to the motion in the coming weeks. J.P. Morgan also said in last Wednesday’s hearing that it planned to file an Interlocutory Appeal to ask the court to allow the issue to be heard by a higher court.
old article.
The interesting thing which i still dont know is how much debt there is in total.
if they receive 10m in settlement is that enough to leak anything down to the commons or not. what is the number needed in a settlement to reach commons...
I have heard a lot of different stories so this would be interesting to find out for sure.
The interesting thing which i still dont know is how much debt there is in total.
if they receive 10m in settlement is that enough to leak anything down to the commons or not. what is the number needed in a settlement to reach commons...
I have heard a lot of different stories so this would be interesting to find out for sure.
Sound the music
More PACER Docs (http://www.ghostofwamu.com/latestupdates.htm)
Three new filings today, but these are quotes from the most recent one:
(Response Debtors' Opposition to Statement in Support of Appeal Under the Collateral Order Doctrine or, in the Alternative, Motion for Leave to Appeal of JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.)
"Confirming this plain truth, as discussed below, on September 25, 2009, the Bankruptcy Court found that JPMC's putative appeals of the Orders were nothing less than "frivolous.""
--Putative and Frivolous! Quinn & Company are laying the smack-down.
"In the Opposition, Debtors further established that an immediate appeal would only frustrate, not promote, the efficient resolution of the Adversary Proceedings, as well as Debtors' bankruptcy cases..."
"JPMC's latest dilatory tactics"
WHOOOHOOOO ... I love it! Bring on the pain, I want my settlement $$
More PACER Docs (http://www.ghostofwamu.com/latestupdates.htm)
Three new filings today, but these are quotes from the most recent one:
(Response Debtors' Opposition to Statement in Support of Appeal Under the Collateral Order Doctrine or, in the Alternative, Motion for Leave to Appeal of JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.)
"Confirming this plain truth, as discussed below, on September 25, 2009, the Bankruptcy Court found that JPMC's putative appeals of the Orders were nothing less than "frivolous.""
--Putative and Frivolous! Quinn & Company are laying the smack-down.
"In the Opposition, Debtors further established that an immediate appeal would only frustrate, not promote, the efficient resolution of the Adversary Proceedings, as well as Debtors' bankruptcy cases..."
"JPMC's latest dilatory tactics"
WHOOOHOOOO ... I love it! Bring on the pain, I want my settlement $$
House of Cards is Collapsing, Gotta Love it!!
Jes Staley in line to succeed JPMorgan CEO Dimon
REUTERS — 17 MINUTES AGO
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Jes Staley is taking over as head of investment banking at JPMorgan Chase & Co (Symbol : JPM) in line to succeed Jamie Dimon as chief executive of the No. 2 U.S. bank.
"With the credit crisis largely behind us and the economy recovering, the timing was right to begin the succession process," Dimon said in a statement Tuesday.
Staley, 53, who joined the bank in 1979, returns to the investment banking unit after stints at JPMorgan's private bank and asset management operation.
JPMorgan said Bill Winters, 48, co-CEO of investment banking, is leaving the company.
The other co-CEO, Steve Black, 57, becomes executive chairman of the investment bank to oversee the transition to Staley as the new CEO.
Staley will report to Black, who will work through a transition period until the end of 2010, the bank said.
Mary Callahan Erdoes, 42, chief executive of JPMorgan's private bank, succeeds Staley as head of asset management.
Winters and Black were deeply involved in the acquisition and integration of Bear Stearns Cos.
Jes Staley in line to succeed JPMorgan CEO Dimon
REUTERS — 17 MINUTES AGO
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Jes Staley is taking over as head of investment banking at JPMorgan Chase & Co (Symbol : JPM) in line to succeed Jamie Dimon as chief executive of the No. 2 U.S. bank.
"With the credit crisis largely behind us and the economy recovering, the timing was right to begin the succession process," Dimon said in a statement Tuesday.
Staley, 53, who joined the bank in 1979, returns to the investment banking unit after stints at JPMorgan's private bank and asset management operation.
JPMorgan said Bill Winters, 48, co-CEO of investment banking, is leaving the company.
The other co-CEO, Steve Black, 57, becomes executive chairman of the investment bank to oversee the transition to Staley as the new CEO.
Staley will report to Black, who will work through a transition period until the end of 2010, the bank said.
Mary Callahan Erdoes, 42, chief executive of JPMorgan's private bank, succeeds Staley as head of asset management.
Winters and Black were deeply involved in the acquisition and integration of Bear Stearns Cos.
