Washington Mutual demanda a la FDIC por 17 billones US$ + daños

Solo sé que no se nada (Sócrates)... pronto lo sabremos.

http://blogs.forbes.com/danielfisher/2010/09/13/an-old-case-haunts-the-fdics-bank-closers/?boxes=businesschannelsections

http://www.eleconomista.es/mercados-cotizaciones/noticias/2441616/09/10/El-tribunal-de-bancarrotas-de-EEUU-se-convierte-en-el-patio-de-recreo-de-grandes-inversores-y-hedge-funds.html

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_W/threadview?m=tm&bn=86316&tid=549756&mid=549756&tof=4&frt=2

"When we've discussed JPM's and the FDIC's respective liability I've made it clear that for purposes of fraudulent conveyance restitution WMI is entitled to recover the full amount of the seized subsidiaries from either JPM or the FDIC, but, on account of that cause of action, only the amount of the seized assets. Accordingly, if the value were $80 billion, this amount could be paid in full by JPM, the FDIC, or both, in combination.

I wanted to make clear that just because WMI receives restitution does not preclude it from obtaining money from either JPM or the FDIC under other legal theories. For example, extinguishing the fraudulent conveyance claim would not affect the other tort claims WMI has against JPM for what WMI alleges is its willful efforts to lower WMI's stock price and coerce the FDIC into seizing the company. These claims will either have to be settled or litigated. If settled, WMI will demand consideration (i.e., $) separate and apart from the value of the seized assets. If settled, the question is what is it worth to JPM and/or the FDIC to avoid a trial on these claims. I don't know, but it may be a very hefty figure if WMI is in a position to prove its allegations.

There is no need to conjecture about WMI's theories: they are set forth in the Examiner's preliminary report. The job of making an initial $ demand is for PJS/Susman/the EC, however, it will encompass, at a minimum (1) the unliquidated value of WMI's equity in the seized subsidiaries (as mentioned in WMI's FDIC claim), plus (2) payment to WMI for it agreement to settle other claims. Before anyone asks, I have no idea what the amount representing (2) will be, but it would be proportionate to the harm caused WMI. "

"I think people are falling into the psychological trap of believing that something must be valid because it's on calendar.

The judge has to participate in this comedy because that's her job. Every lawyer in that room knew that DS was in jeopardy from 3/12 because of the existence of the EC. Moreover, when the court appointed Hochberg it became obvious the Debtors' scheme as evidenced in the DS/Plan was D.O.A., and the court was using the examiner route as a fig leaf to depose Weil Gotshal without appearing to do so.

She is NOT going to approve the extant plan, AND there is a substantial likelihood that a trustee will be appointed shortly after the examiner publishes his report, so nothing Weil Gotshal is doing now matters, and there will be nothing for Weil to do on WMI's behalf in the near future. The firm's time will be occupied dodging the legal and ethical consequences of their actions to jettison equity. "

Simpson vamos a esperar acontecimientos, ya sabemos que Bopfan aun opina que las comunes se pagarán a 56 USD.

56 ls comunes? ¿Que se ha tomado ese forero? Vaya chiste,je,je,je.

Nadie está diciendo eso en este momento y más bien hay un debate bastante interesante que a los que tienen problema de corazón les puede venir bien leer. Después que cada uno saque sus propias conclusiones, yo al margen de las risas por lo de los $$$$ os digo que hice caso cuando ella me recomendo comprar a $3 las preferentes y le debo mucho, no siempre estará en la razón pero al ser experta en BK sabe más de esto que muchos de los que aquí leemos y opinamos sin saber ni papa.

Lo demás a verse en próximas fechas...

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_W/threadview?o=lp&bn=86316&tid=549756&mid=-1&tof=2&m=me&so=L&rt=2&num=20&off=41&dir=f