WMIH + Cooper Info

https://www.boardpost.net/forum/...php?topic=9450.msg137322#msg137322

Zitat Nightdaytrader9:
Just out looking for any time of WMIH news.... Was out on their website looking it over... It made me think about the old Michael Douglas movie called, "Wallstreet."  I remember when he (Gordon Gekko) was speaking at Teldar Paper shareholder's meeting and said "greed is good" and talked about the company having 33 or so Vice Presidents.

For a company with no assets, WMIH sure does have a lot of Vice Presidents.

Officers and Management

William C. Gallagher, Chief Executive Officer and Director
Thomas L. Fairfield, President, Chief Operating Officer and Director
Charles Edward Smith, EVP, Chief Legal Officer and Secretary
Timothy F. Jaeger, SVP, Interim Chief Financial Officer, Interim Chief Accounting Officer and Assistant Secretary
Doreen Logan, EVP and Controller
Peter Struck, SVP and Assistant Secretary
Weijia “Vicky” Wu, SVP and Assistant Secretary
Yana Soriano, VP and Assistant Secretary

And all these VPs operating from an office space of 300 square feet rented from the WMILT.

300 sqft is 17.32ft by 17.32ft


The greater point is that WMIH is renting 300sqft from the WMILT. Why is WMIH, with two subs not a stand alone company? Why is WMIIC operated by a third party like A&M, but is a sub of WMIH?

Does WMIH need to inform the shareholder with a SEC filing regarding the current subs intrinsic value?
R-203

Why has the WMILT not liquidated the value in WMIIC and made distribution to Equity Escrow holders?
510(b)


"About Us

WMIH Corp. (“WMIH”) (NASDAQ: WMIH) is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware. WMIH is the direct parent of WM Mortgage Reinsurance Company, Inc., a Hawaii corporation (“WMMRC”), and WMI Investment Corp., a Delaware corporation. On March 19, 2012, WMIH emerged from bankruptcy proceedings as the successor to Washington Mutual, Inc. Upon emergence from bankruptcy, we had limited operations other than WMMRC’s legacy reinsurance business, which is being operated in runoff mode and has not written any new business since September 26, 2008. We continue to operate WMMRC’s business in runoff mode and we are actively seeking acquisition opportunities across a broad array of industries."

http://wmih-corp.com/about-us/
--------------------------------------------------
Zitatende
MfG.L:)

https://www.boardpost.net/forum/...php?topic=8820.msg137253#msg137253
Zitat azcowboy:

I did a lot of the early research and most of it' , is presented within the post, that was presented here, ... last December, 9th 2015

Here we are now, with WMIH-Corp, ... after Four Long years since the 2012' WaMu reorganization, ... WMIH-Corp, should be in a position to fully acknowledge its own SEC, revealed 10-Q, and 10-K subsidiary, WMIIC, ... properly and factually ... and obviously containing the COMPLETE Truth'

Regarding the Liquidating Trust ? ... The WMI-LT, ... as an exiting and legally registered "Grantors Trust" ... is not in need of, nor can it be legally "restructured" ... enough already, ... again, four years ?

Also, WMIH-Corp, As a NasDaq publically traded company, producing SEC mandated filings 10-Q's and 10-K's to past, present, and possible future shareholders, ... WMIH-Corp has obligations to be forthright regarding itself, along with its two subsidiaries ...

Again, ... if interested ?  I would suggest a review of my December 2O15 study of the process, and the beginning of the connections ...

After four long years and multiple filings presented, ... WMIH-Corp should be responsible for its own subs ... and our WMI-LT money should not continue to be squandered, paying for the A&M operations of a WMIH sub' ... a sub of a publically traded company's ... WMIH-Corp(s)'sub' - WMIIC

AZ
Quote from: azcowboy on December 09, 2015, 11:30:17 AM
As the world watched, On 09/25/2008, The OTS / FDIC seized WaMu, ... or, ... to be factually correct, seized WMB', the banking subsidiary of the massive Washington Mutual, Inc. Estate ... Immediately, and on the very next day, 09/26/2008, the WaMu Estate, filed for two distinct and separate Chapter 11 Reorganization Bankruptcy Filings with the Delaware Court System' ... (initially KCC listed as Filing # 0001 & Filing # 0002)

The first bankruptcy filing was submitted for WMI Investment, recording no debt and no creditors, ... and ... the second filing was for WMI, which recorded assets at $32 billion dollars, with its liabilities recorded at $8 billion dollars' ...

The first of the TWO bankruptcy filings, entered for WMI Investment, was designed to maintain operations, move toward a future reorganization for the company, while the second of the TWO bankruptcy filings, entered for WMI, was designed to address debt, and pay with interest, all outstanding creditors' ...

Since these TWO bankruptcy's were quickly Court Ruled and Approved' to be procedurally joined, and for administrative purposes only, ... both' ... of the company progressions within the legal confines of the Delaware Court System were able to be accomplished ...

As the documents reveal, ... the first filing for WMIIC's chapter 11 reorganization, was never designed to allow creditor claims against it' ... again, ... as it initially filed with zero creditors and zero debt' ... and, as a subsidiary of the Parent Corporation, WMI ... WMIIC was allowed and destined to maintain its re-organizational operations throughout the entire Chapter 11 process, ultimately planning to exit bankruptcy as a reorganized entity' ... again, allowed by the Court to be financially separated from the WMI bankruptcy ...

... However, ... for WMIIC to maintain its operations, throughout the reorganization process, it needed a Court Approved functioning staff ...  

William Kosturos, as the 10/02/2008 Court approved and named President and Chief Executive Officer of WMIIC ... along with A&M and it's national staffing and resources, were Court authorized to maintain and continue WMIIC's operations while it remained under Bankruptcy Protection, ... and merely joined procedurally only, (KCC Filing # 0025 - 10/03/2008) ... and for Administrative Purposes,  (The Disclosure Statement - 01/09/2012 - [DN 9365])  along with document expedition to accommodate the WMI Bankruptcy ...

William Kosturos and the extensive staffing and resources available of Alvarez and Marsal, were Court approved, at the very onset of the 2008 process' to be placed appropriately, and be able to continue the seamless operation of WMIIC throughout the entire Bankruptcy and Reorganization Process' ... and ... again, Federal Court approved, being allowed to back date' - "nunc pro tunc" - to October 2nd, 2008, as Filing # 0246 reveals'

... Not only do all of the billing statements support this, but so does the sequence of events placed within the filings acknowledge this ... The procedural joining of the TWO BK's caused a tremendous amount of controversy during the Court Hearings and revealed within the relevant documents Filed' ...

Mike W and Esopus Creek' ... understood that' Pandora's Box had been carefully tucked away within WMIIC back in the early days and requested discovery of the joining of the bankruptcy's ... their requests, were consolidated within their (equity's) request for a shareholders meeting, ... and ... a review and discovery, regarding the procedural and administrative only, joining of the Two Bankruptcy Filings'

The end of 2009 and into early 2010 were tumultuous times, as the Court Hearings moved forward', equity's requests for depositions, a shareholder meeting, discovery of the BK joining, ... etc, etc' ... the links to the process are numerous, so I will spare everyone for now, ... what is ultimately important though is Filing # 0013' ...... Filed on 08/23/2010' ... The filing number, like many others was rolled back to the original issue being discussed'

This final Court Ruling on, 08/23/2010 lead to the beginnings of the four standing motions being filed, with the last Standing Motion' ... Filing # 8179 ... being filed on the eve of the Plan 6's Court Hearing to begin' ... July, 2011 ...  Plan 6 obviously failed' ... and here we all are' ...

There are serious reasons, as revealed here, that the NASDAQ' saw value in WMIH-Corp and allowed it to be up listed' ... and ... also there was a reason that WMIIC was able to be listed as the Guarantor for the current and in place provided, Citi and KKR Rights Offering' ... Yep' ... the original WMI Debtors Estate Value that had been secured and separated from the WMI bankruptcy within the other WaMu Bankruptcy' ... WMI's own subsidiary, WMI Investment' = WMIIC



Filing # 0001            Filed 09/26/2008
The First of TWO' - WaMu Bankruptcy Filings, WMIIC(s) Filing for Bankruptcy Protection
http://www.kccllc.net/wamu/document/0812228080926000000000001

Filing # 0012            Filed 10/02/2008
The Request for Joint Bankruptcy Administration
http://www.kccllc.net/wamu/document/0812229081002000000000001

Filing # 0025            Filed 10/03/2008
The Courts Signed Approval for Joint Administration (notice the difference)
http://www.kccllc.net/wamu/document/0812229081003000000000002

Filing # 0013            Filed 10/02/2008
The Declaration of - Stewart Landefeld - ... "in support of" ... the administrative BK combining'
http://www.kccllc.net/wamu/document/0812229081002000000000002

Filing # 0065            Filed 10/13/2008
A&M and William Kosturos Request to be the Chief Restructuring Component (William Kosturos is currently the WMILT Trustee) - (don't miss the attachments)
http://www.kccllc.net/wamu/document/0812229081011000000000003

Filing # 0152            Filed 10/24/2008
Supplemental Declaration of William Kosturos - (don't miss the attachments)
http://www.kccllc.net/wamu/document/0812229081024000000000016

Filing # 0246            Filed 11/07/2008
The Request to backdate the naming of A&M and William Kosturos of designated CRO to be backdated to 10/02/2008
http://www.kccllc.net/wamu/document/0812229081107000000000004

Filing # 0013            Filed 08/23/2010
The Final Signed Order' (upon equity's request for discovery of the joining of the BK's) stipulating to "Procedural Purposes Only"
ORDERED: that consolidation of the above-captioned adversary proceedings is for procedural purposes only and shall not affect the parties substantive rights ... again' ... signed 08/23/2010 ...
http://www.kccllc.net/wamu/document/0812229100907000000000005

... I don't believe that anyone wanted a light placed on this WMILT's  03/29/2012 SEC 8-K  ... filed a mere 10 days beyond the 03/19/2012 Implementation Date  ... which actually named William Kosturos as the President and Chief Executive Officer of Investment  ... dating back to Oct 2008 thru to the Reorganization ? ...

WMI Liquidating Trust ... Form 8-K ... Filed March 29, 2012
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/containers/...0138/mm03-2712_8k.htm

read, ... ITEM 5.02(c) ... and the reference to ... INVESTMENT ... "this'' ... is in direct reference to WMIIC" ...

Effective 10/11/2008 William Kosturos was named the CRO (Chief Restructuring Officer) of WMI' ... and between 10/20/2008 and the effective date' he was the President and Chief Executive Officer of Investment (WMIIC) ...

(c)                      Pursuant to the Agreement, William C. Kosturos, age 50, was appointed as the liquidating trustee of the Trust on March 6, 2012. Between October 11, 2008 and the Effective Date, Mr. Kosturos was the Chief Restructuring Officer of WMI, and between October 20, 2008 and the Effective Date, Mr. Kosturos was the President and Chief Executive Officer of Investment.
--------------------------------------------------
Zitatende
MfG.L

https://www.boardpost.net/forum/...php?topic=8820.msg137255#msg137255
Zitat ron_66271
Thanks AZ

Question to WMIH BOD; What about the other sub called WMIIC that A&M is now operating since 10/02/2008?

Question to WMILT/A&M; What needs to be overseen and administrated in WMIIC since 10/02/2008

As an owner of both Escrow shares as an owner of the "Original Debtor's Estate" and reorganized WMIH shares, when do I get to see whats in WMIIC?
Zitat Uncle_Bo:
Good questions, if one was to consider the half million billings to AM, perhaps by now the balance due would have been below 50MM in the LT and the TAB would have changed putting equity firmly in control if this has something to do with anything. Right now the balance is just a bit over 51MM.

Uncle Bo
Zitat azcowboy:

Ron and Bo,

Thank You both, for following the presented text, and the inner meaning, document verified, and  implied information, ... here, as presented, on this internet message board ...

In my opinion, after four long years beyond WMIH-Corp(s) exit into Reorganization, ... there is no continued reason that the WMI-LT should still be paying for Alvarez and Marsal's operations, maintenance and servicing of one of TWO of the actual WMIH-Corps subsidiaries ... WMI Investment Corp' ...

Again, now that WMIH-Corp is a NasDaq publically traded company, ... obligated to the production of SEC mandated 10-Q's and 10-K's, ... with the mention of both'  of its subs, (WMIIC, and WMMRC) ... this BOD's should be legally charged with the complete management of 100% of WMIH-Corp, ... which would or should, obviously include its subsidiaries ...

The WMI Liquidating Trust (a registered "Grantors Trust" = a "Pass Through Trust") ... should not continue to spend Trust Funding to maintain one of WMIH's subsidiaries ... especially now after four years have passed since the reorganization of the same ...

Mathematically, ... you are also correct regarding the $51 million dollar holding pattern, that we have been forced to endure ...

Thanks Again Ron and Bo''
Zitat jjflash49:
AZ, I assume that pressing the LT (paying) and WMIH (ignoring details of WMIIC in sec filings and saying nothing is behind the curtain)  about AM is to really expose the ruse.
Zitat azcowboy:
That is 100% ... CORRECT ... Alvarez and Marsal,  was Court Assigned to service and manage the ... "debtors in possession" estate ... WMI Investment ...  back in 2008' as the Court Signed, documents I have sequenced and presented, ... reveal' ...

while the "debtors" estate ... WMI' ... was bankruptcy processed by the WGM Attorney Group, reporting only the cash' in their MOR's (monthly operating report) to the Court' ...

This is in direct reference to my question to the BOD's, revolving around the possibility of the WMIH-Corp (s) exit into reorganization done prematurely ...

These convoluted and continued actions, should not have been continued for four years beyond the reorganization of WMIH-Corp ...

WMIH-Corp, ... as a NasDaq publically traded company, needs to be responsible for its obligations, it's ownership and management of its reported subs, and to be forthright to the shareholders ...

WMI-LT ... as a Delaware registered "Grantors Trust", needs to be responsible for its designated mandate and responsibilities to the creditors' and the owners' of the Original Debtors Estate'
Zitat Scott Fox:
Is it possible that the court is mandating who manages the estate since it assigned A&M to it? Why on earth would the court approve such continued quarterly large payments this entire time to a third party if there is nothing to service. Perhaps to block a conflict of interest? WMIH has it's own accountants and I don't think they're slouches. I believe the court still has it's hands in a lot of this. Remember the redactions and under seal info. Just a thought...
Zitat  azcowboy:
.. Remember, there are many facets to these issues, ... however,

Initially, upon the newco's exit into reorganization, back in 2012' ... The Company', initially refuted any knowledge of the company's beginnings of trading on the Over The Counter Market' ... there were statements made to that' lack of knowledge

However, ... Those initial statements made and the required parameters changed drastically, with the Company's OWN, public notification of its move to the NasDaq exchange, last year' ...

Among, numerous issues needing to be completed by 07/05/2015 as disclosed, ... When WMIH-Corp notified its shareholders last year in 2015' of its move to Delaware, along with its uplist to the NasDaq Exchange, ... there were obviously a few extremely serious and again, in my opinion, SEC' required steps left incomplete' ...
--------------------------------------------------
Zitatende

MfG.L

https://www.boardpost.net/forum/...php?topic=8820.msg137285#msg137285
Zitat kenwalker:
... there is no continued reason that the WMI-LT should still be paying for Alvarez and Marsal's operations

Agree ............................ but that ain't the only "cross-over".

So WMMRC owes the run-off notes ................

On the Effective Date, Reorganized WMI issued (i) $110.0 million aggregate principal amount of 13% Senior First Lien Notes due 2030 (the “First Lien Notes”) under an indenture, dated as of March 19, 2012, between Reorganized WMI and Wilmington Trust,

............... and Piers are ahead of equity ...................

WMMRC is restricted by the Second Lien Indenture from making distributions to WMIH until the Runoff Notes are paid in full and is restricted by insurance law from making distributions to us unless prior approval is obtained from the Insurance Commissioner of the State of Hawaii. Thus, our ability to service our debt, finance acquisitions and pay dividends to our stockholders in the future is dependent on (i) the ability of our operating subsidiary to generate sufficient net income and cash flows to make upstream cash distributions to us, and (ii) our ability to obtain access to the funds held in escrow from the Series B Preferred Stock Financing. Our subsidiaries are and will be separate legal entities,

............... why was 2 million of the fail M&A money ( now at 11.1 Million ) from WMMRC?

Substantial pay down of our Runoff Notes, including the pay-off of the entire $110 million principal balance of the 13% Senior First Lien Notes and satisfaction and discharge of the First Lien Indenture and partial redemption of the 13% Senior Second Lien Notes. The aggregate principal balance remaining under the 13% Senior Second Lien Notes is $20.5 million as at of March 31, 2016.

then we have:

Nevertheless, WMMRC’s operating environment remains uncertain as much of its results over the next several years will be directly affected by the inventory of pending defaulted mortgages at its ceding companies arising primarily from mortgages originated in calendar years 2005 through 2008.

I find it interesting that these ceding co’s have a large enough inventory that will be considered “directly affected” after all these years. These are PMI ( insuring LTV of greater than 80% ) and as the youngest is 8 years old you would assume that the crap was behind them by now.

........... not that 20 Million is not a lot of money but 13% and until paid we have a lien ..........

The reinsurance agreements with Triad, PMI and UGRIC were commuted (each, a one-time transaction) on August 31, 2009, October 2, 2012 and April 3, 2014, respectively. The PMI transaction resulted in a loss from contract termination of $6.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2012. In accordance with the commutation agreement between WMMRC and PMI, the trust assets were distributed in a manner such that PMI received $49.0 million in cash and WMMRC received all remaining trust assets equal to approximately $30.7 million. The UGRIC transaction resulted in a loss from contract termination of $6.6 million during the year ended December 31, 2014. In accordance with the terms of the commutation agreement between WMMRC and UGRIC, the trust assets were distributed in a manner such that UGRIC was paid $17.7 million in cash and WMMRC was paid all remaining cash and assets remaining in the trust account, which totaled $65.4 million from the commutation. The proceeds from the PMI and UGRIC commutations were used to pay principal and interest and fees related to the Runoff Notes to the extent such proceeds were Runoff Proceeds as defined under the Indentures.

...................... see how that goes as these contracts age? After 8 years it should have all worked out good or bad. Heck, the court only set this up for 10 years.
Zitat azcowboy:
Ken,

Well, ... I'll reemphasize my earlier post, and the TRUTH that is held within this, ... and, I will refer to your earlier reference to a  "Time Stamp"  application of the October, 2015 release ... and the Company's silence since'

Among many things, one of the company's problems is the already release of  ... 2' Q's and 1' K since the company's notification to the public, of a move to the NasDaq platform ... and, ... those Q' and K' shareholder responsibilities continue, to be required as time moves forward

... That issue' ... The WMIH-Corp 2015 notification of its move to the NasDaq, came with SEC responsibilities to its shareholders' ...
Zitat Scott Fox:
More house cleaning to be done before a M/A can be completed? I would think that they had to realize that before they moved on the one last year unless it was done for a reason.....
Zitat rp201288:
Az, are you suggesting there are grounds for a class action against the individual and collective BoD's?

At this point I am pretty resigned to this going no where so I am game.
Zitat azcowboy:
Nope, ... I'm not a believer in ... "class action litigation" ... However, I am a believer in our legal system, to the level of cash awards plus' legally assigned interest accumulation until an ordered payment has been finalized, ... and of course, the subtle yet serious, notification of someone possibly wanting to reconsider their current position' ... the truth will set you free' ...

Regarding WMIH-Corp ? ... Last years public disclosures beginning in January, ... "changed things" ...

I'm just interested in the possibility of tomorrow mornings conversations revolving around the need for the company to begin to follow the guidelines, since It' announced the move to the NasDaq, last year  ... (prematurely or not ... it is now, done')

If WMIH-Corp wanted the WMI-LT to keep on paying A&M to service and manage its sub, WMIIC ? ... they' should have cooled their jets last year, at least until the, chickens began to hatch' ... Now ? ... They obviously are stuck with a bit of ... the cart before the unicorn, ... since last October'
Zitat  Scott Fox:
I'd rather have silence than to be strung along with a lot of BS and empty statements concerning possible M/A's with no results. The one we had was obviously viable. I do hope they can come out shootin' with something in the near future, really don't want to get in to the end of year mess. It will be interesting if they disclose who we were dealing with at the meeting.
Zitat azcowboy:
As Alvarez and Marsal was initially Court assigned in Sept 2008' to operate, service, and manage WMI Investment, ...

To date now in April of 2016, and beyond the reorganization in March of 2012, ... neither, the WMI-LT or WMIH-Corp have made any effort at all, to rectify this on going issue, or request the Court update this' issue' ... again, now four years into the reorganization ...

Now, ... upon the March 2012' reorganization, ... WMIH's representation would not accept responsibility for the company beginning to openly trade on the Over The Counter Platform ... which, as they denied knowledge of the company beginning to trade, one could say provided WMIH, some semblance of innocence ...

However, ... Last year, ... When WMIH-Corp announced publically, that the company was moving to uplist to the NasDaq public trading platform ? ... the company's possible initial cloak of innocence, pleading lack of knowledge of trading ? ... went out the window ...

When WMIH-Corp, ... notified the public it was moving to the NasDaq ? ... WMIH-Corp should have addressed the Alvarez and Marsal, continuing to managing its sub WMIIC, simultaneously ... issue' ...

... Obviously, ... regarding WMIH-Corp's SEC public reveal responsibilities, regarding the release of timely, informative, and always truthful, 10-Q's and 10-K's to its shareholders ?, ... WMIH-Corp, ... has missed a very, very, important step'
--------------------------------------------------
Zitatende
MfG.L

https://www.boardpost.net/forum/...php?topic=8820.msg137320#msg137320

Zitat bgriffinokc:
AZ,

It has been apparent from the beginning that some of the Hedge Funds involved here are a ruthless and greedy bunch of vultures that would sell their own mother out if they could make a nickle off of them.

Many Hedge Funds have lied and cheated their way through life by swindling people out of their money and shorting shares and don't give a rats ass about anyone other than their self. They are the taker of life and have sucked the blood out of their many victims. Hedge Funds are private companies and they live in their own little world of accomplices and are very secretive by nature.  

What we have here in WMIH is a Corporation that is run by the henchmen of these various Hedge Funds and they are acting like this their own private company with no regards to all the owners.

It is my understanding that any shareholder may request to examine the books and records upon a written request to the BOD and those records shall be made available during normal business hour.   This is what needs to be done as the BOD has fiduciary duty's to the share holders and at this point they have crossed the line on several issues.  I personally believe they need to be called out.  

Bob
-----------------------
ZItat azcowboy:
Bob,

Absolutely ... and there is no doubt on any of your points' ...

... What I am saying is' ... When WMIH-Corp publically announced last year its now completed up list to the NasDaq trading platform' ... WMIH-Corps responsibilities to its shareholders changed' ... with the up list, came SEC responsibility to the shareholders ...

A third party entity, ... the WMI-LT, ... should not continue to be paying to service, manage, and operate a WMIH-Corp's subsidiary, ... WMIIC, ... or, ... the shareholders of WMIH-Corp should be informed as to WHY this continues' ... or, is necesary ...

WMIH-Corp has quite an extensive BOD's and A&M is not mentioned as being a participant in WMIH-Corp, ... and' ... the WMI-LT' surely doesn't need to be restructured or managed at this point in time' ...


... regarding A&M ? ... I have studied and can quickly produce the signed documents assigning them' to manage ... "nunc pro tunc" ... and, the follow up 8-K that no one was supposed to find' or pay ant attention to' ...

What has not been filed, ... are the finalization or acknowledgement documents' ... in my opinion ? ... WMIH-Corp has got caught speeding' ...

I'm totally thankfull and glad that KKR made one of last years requirements ... was for WMIH-Corp to need to complete and publically announce an up list to the NasDaq' ... otherwise ... this issue of allowing the WMI-LT to pay for the management of WMIIC, may have been able to go unnoticed and be continued'

(maybe KKR knew ?)

again, just sayin'
---------------------
Zitat Scott Fox:
"A third party entity, ... the WMI-LT, ... should not continue to be paying to service, manage, and operate a WMIH-Corp' subsidiary, ... WMIIC, ... or, ... the shareholders of WMIH-Corp should be informed as to WHY this continues''    Well said AZ. The one and only reason I can think of after looking at the millions in billings is that A&M was assigned by the judge to handle this and it will continue until she is petitioned to end it, unless of course, our people aren't large enough to handle the monitoring. That shouldn't be the case if there's nothing to monitor from what the releases are stating.
--------------------------------------------------
Zitatende
MfG.L:)

https://www.boardpost.net/forum/...php?topic=8820.msg137346#msg137346

Zitat azcowboy:
Moved;

... I believe that a forward action is needed first, and is internal' ... and, as the company defines and considers an "acquisition" ... is once completed, the company will consider the new people's stock award given at a "qualified acquisition" ... (the company defines acquisition and qualified acquisition  differently') ... so, thinking out load, some rough numbers ...

Davis = 1,777,778 / 437,497 = 4.06 multiple forward split is needed to equal things out

Glossman = 1,777,778 / 387,497 = 4.6 multiple forward split is needed to equal things out

Graham = 1,777,778 / 337,497 = 5.27 multiple forward split is needed to equal things out

Holliday = 1,777,778 / 337,497 = 5.27 multiple forward split is needed to equal things out

Renoff = 1,777,778 / 387,497 = 4.6 multiple forward split is needed to equal things out

Scheiwe = 1,777,778 / 337,497 = 5.27 multiple forward split is needed to equal things out

Willingham = 1,777,778 / 422,000 =  4.2 multiple forward split is needed to equal things out

... So, to level out the BOD's ownership of shares, ... a WMIH-Corp forward split,  at a minimum of a multiple of four, needs to occur prior to a "qualified acquisition" taking place' ... if just a stock award occurs to all BOD's ? ... it just prolongs what needs to happen to level out the BOD's ownership of the company' ... and a "qualified acquisition", only involves F&G' ... no one else'

So, currently there are 206 million shares out' ... X's a minimum of four would result in 824 million shares out' ... (each releasing marker holder would receive four times their original March 2012 issued transitional shares) ... (WMIH-Corp would enhance itself by issuing 618 million additional shares issued X's $2.25 per share or $1,390,500,000.00 worth of returning'  "asset value" now able to be coupled with the'  "equity value" of the original WMI estate' ... obviously, which is owned by the releasing marker holders)

WMIH-Corps current market cap = 206 million shares out X's $2.25 = $463,500,000.00

WMIH-Corps market cap - after - = 824 million shares out X's $2.25 = $1,854,000,000.00

the difference ... $1,854,000,000.00 - $463,500,000.00 = $1,390,500,000.00 is the same and the BOD's ownership equals out' ... $1,390,500,00.00

In my opinion ?, ... a company defined, "aquisition" (internal) needs to occur prior to a company defined "qualified acquisition" occurring, to level out the BOD's ownership of the company, ... first'

... A couple of issues always jumped off the page, ...

One was the company's share allocation increasing to 3.5 billion shares available,

Another was the large amount of the share award to the two new guys upon a qualified acquisition, ... and, that none of the othe BOD's were included

AZ an User scott fox gerichtet:
Well, ... according to the early filings, ... A&M was allowed to submit their billings to manage WMIIC directly to the Judge on a monthly basis' privately' ... these A&M billings were separate from the Monthly Operating Report (MOR's) that were publically produced by WGM' for the "debtors" handling of the WMI Bankruptcy Process, ... which again, only reported "cash" ...

Keeping A&M's monthly billings away from any public review was critical to the process' ... however' ... there is ONE billing, that slipped through the cracks' ...

again, just sayin'

--------------------------------------------------
Zitatende
MfG.L:)

https://www.boardpost.net/forum/...php?topic=8820.msg137405#msg137405

Zitat azcowboy:

hmmmm' ... as, I posted this earlier ... regarding anyone being diluted ? ... neither Tepper' or anyone else would not be diluted at all, with an initial WMIH-Corp forward split ...

consider this' ... so if Tepper' currently owns some 17,000,000 shares of WMIH, now with 206 million shares out' ... he; owns 12.11% of the company (ish) ... now, with a four to one forward split, he would then own 68,000,000 million shares, however the company's allocation of shares also increases to the exact same ratio of four times 206m or now to 824m shares out', irrelevant of anyone's individual ownership' ... here, ... so, the dilution effect stays the same for all existing participants'

currently, we have 206 million out, with Tepper' owning 17,000,000 shares, or divided equals an ownership of 12.11764 %

so, if we forward split times four' ... (or use'  five, or six' it truly doesn't matter)

we would have 824 million out, with Tepper' then owning 68,000,000 shares, or divided equals an ownership of 12.11764 %

it all stays the same' ... except it allows the BOD's to equal out their existing share count, with the two new guys' stock award of 1,777,778 million shares upon a "qualified" and also allows the company to gain access to and couple together' some of the ... "asset value" ... and the ... "equity value" of Original WMI'

don't forget' the company's issuing of the additional 618,000,000 shares ... (824m - 206m = 618m) ... gives WMIH-Corp ... 618m shares X's $2.25 PPS, of equity owned "asset value" buying power of $1,390,500,000.00 worth of buying power, just to get this party started' ... a "value for stock" and a multiple faceted event' as the PPS begins to rise' ...

I think this conversation is going on in two threads ?



do this a couple of times ? ~ and everyone gets a ... "comprehensive fair and reasonable recovery" ... the original owners of the estate = releasing equity ? ... and, the shareholders of WMIH-Corp, whether transitional legacy holders or new present day buyers alike' ... everyone does well'
--------------------------------------------------
Zitatende
MfG.L:)

MfG.L:)

https://www.boardpost.net/forum/...hp?topic=10585.msg186080#msg186080

Zitat Mr_Simpson:

Between June 19th-July 27th: Beneficiaries in CA Orange County, California, Superior Court, Probate Division. Case number 30-2016-00892014-PR-TR-CJC must be notified by DTC (Brokers etc... ----- those should notify the certificate holders/beneficiaries.)

June 26th-28th: Grant Thornton Hearing in Judge Walrath´s Court.
NOTICE OF FILING OF TRANSCRIPT AND OF DEADLINES RELATED TO RESTRICTION AND REDACTION
A transcript of the proceeding held on 6/26/2017 was filed on 6/28/2017. The following deadlines apply:
The parties have  seven days to file with the court a  Notice of Intent to Request Redaction  of this transcript. The deadline for filing a  request for redaction  is 7/19/2017.
      If a request for redaction is filed, the redacted transcript is due 7/31/2017.
      If no such notice is filed, the transcript may be made available for remote electronic access upon expiration of the restriction period, which is 9/26/2017 unless extended by court order.
      To review the transcript for redaction purposes, you may purchase a copy from the transcriber (see docket for Transcriber's information) or you may view the document at the clerk's office public terminal.
http://www.kccllc.net/wamu/document/0812229170628000000000003

June 30th: Form 10K "90%" probability of a conversion B Preferreds
"In addition, the model requires the input of an expected probability of occurrence, which we estimated at 90% for both December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, and the timing of a Qualified Acquisition which initiates the mandatory conversion, which we estimated at 6 months from December 31, 2016 and 12 months from December 31, 2015"

July 27th: CA Probate case hearing to wrap up. Judge expects to approve ASAP so it could minimize the timeframes

August 1: WMILT next potential Quarterly distribution

Around September 30th: All 4 WAMU Cases could be dismissed & JPM would receive $645 Million... then its unknown territory  but hoping for the best.
Zitatende

MfG.L:)

http://ritholtz.com/2013/03/jpm-wamu/
schlechte, aber in deutsch ,"Prompt" Übersetzung;)
Zitat:
JPM: Washington gegenseitige Geschichte
Am 13. März 2013 8:00 Uhr

Josh Rosner (@JoshRosner) ist Mitverfasser des Verkaufsschlagers der New York Times “Rücksichtsloser Endangerment” und Direktor an der unabhängigen Forschungsberatung Graham Fisher & Co. Er empfiehlt Gangregler, Entscheidungsträger und Institutionsanleger auf Bankverkehrs- und Finanzdienstleistungen (erscheint ein mehr ganzer Lebens-am Ende dieser Säule).

Das ist Teil 2 5; gestern Abend haben wir die Einführung veröffentlicht. Wir werden einen verschiedenen Teil veröffentlichen, jeden Abend und Morgen in der Ausgabe des ganzen Berichts von Rosner am Freitagsmorgen kulminierend. An diesem Datum wird der Ständige Unterausschuss für Untersuchungen des Senats ihren Schlussbericht auf CIO Group von JPM (auch bekannt als der Londoner Walfisch) veröffentlichen.

~~~

Wir werden unter - geschätzte, aber materielle grundsätzliche Probleme in einem bevorstehenden Bericht richten. Im Einklang stehend mit dem Zweck dieses Berichts haben wir es wichtig gefühlt, um hervorragende innere Kontrolle, Überschrift und andere außergewöhnliche Sachen zu denken, die die Rentabilität von JPM materiell zusammenpressen und potenziell weitere Depressionen in Steuerungen hervorheben konnten.

Gegenseitiges Washington: eine Geschichte der Undurchsichtigkeit und Straffreiheit

Vielleicht illustriert kein anderes Beispiel die versengte Erde von JPMORGAN gesetzliche Annäherung besser als die Streite über den Landbesitz Washingtons Gegenseitig (WaMu), den das Unternehmen vom FDIC im September 2008 erworben hat. JPMorgan porträtiert seinen Kauf von WaMu während der Tiefen der Finanzkrise als eine patriotische von einer gut geführten Bank durchgeführte Handlung. Seine öffentlichen Erklärungen und Durchführungsfeilstaub erzählen ein verschiedenes Märchen.

Im August 2009 hat Deutsche Bank, als Treuhänder für ungefähr $ 92 Milliarden des begrifflichen WaMu securitizations, gegen den FDIC das Verlangen des Rückkaufs von Milliarden von Dollars von Hypotheken Klage erhoben, dass sie verletzte Darstellungen und Garantien in der ein Kartell bildenden Abmachung diskutiert haben. Der FDIC hat sich bewegt, um die Beschwerde abzuweisen, behauptend, dass JPMorgan die Verbindlichkeiten im Kauf von WaMu angenommen hatte. Folglich hat Deutsche Bank seine Beschwerde amendiert, um JPMorgan [ich] hinzuzufügen. JPMorgan wird durch eine breite Knebelordnung geschützt, die weg, von der öffentlichen Ansicht, irgendwelchen inneren Kommunikationen über Gegenseitiges Washington auf Robbenjagd gegangen ist. Wir haben uns auf öffentliche Informationen und infolge der Freiheit von Informationsbitten gegebene Auskunft verlassen müssen.

Nach mehreren Jahren, mit der Position des FDIC übereinzustimmen und zuzugeben, dass es die Hypothekenverbindlichkeiten Washingtons Gegenseitig [ii] erworben hat, scheint JPMorgan, sich es anders überlegt zu haben, als es die Entsetzlichkeit die Hypothek der Industrie putback Gefahren [iii] begriffen hat. JPMorgan fordert jetzt Schadenersatz vom FDIC-Versicherungsfonds.

JPMorgan, der nach der Finanzkrise, hat mehr als $ 391 Milliarden der Regierungsnotprogrammunterstützung [iv] akzeptiert, bemüht sich, Verluste auf mehr als $ 190 Milliarden Washingtons Gegenseitig-bezogene Hypothekenwertpapiere auf den FDIC auszuwechseln - behauptend, dass für bloße $ 1.9 Milliarden es fast den ganzen positiven Wert von WaMu gekauft hat und im Stande gewesen ist, die Öffentlichkeit mit im Wesentlichen allen andauernden Verlusten zu durchstechen. Wenn das Unternehmen in diesen Anstrengungen scheitert, konnte es mit Ansiedlungskosten auf Ansprüchen zwischen 3 $ und $ 5 Milliarden durchstochen werden. Leider hat sich ein fortlaufender Mangel an der Klarheit über die Reserven des Unternehmens mit neuen anklägerfreundlichen Gerichtsentscheiden gepaart, die zunehmen können, machen putback Ansiedlungskosten es schwierig zu bewerten, ob JPMorgan entsprechend vorbestellt wird.

Seitdem es begonnen hat, seine Verpflichtung zu bestreiten, hat JPMorgan wiederholt versucht zu veranlassen, dass der FDIC zugibt, dass es Billigung hat, dann den FDIC die Rechnung zu setzen und ihn zu senden. Die Arroganz, die Straffreiheit und das Ausmaß, in dem Längen-JPM'S-Rechtsanwälte in Versuche hineingehen, den FDIC mit seinen eigenen Verlusten zu satteln, sind erstaunlich. In einem stark formulierten Brief der Antwort auf die wiederholten Versuche von JPM, den FDIC ins Angeben oder die Andeutung zum Narren zu halten, hat davon Zustimmung akzeptiert, der FDIC stellt stark fest, dass es keinen Handlungen oder Untätigkeit durch JPM zugestimmt hat, und dass, “dermaßen dass diese Behauptungen Textbausteinsprache in der Ähnlichkeit von diesem Unternehmen bitte geworden sein können, denken Sie, dass dieser Brief die Stehwiderlegung des FDIC” [v] ist. Und doch, neue Pressemeldungen weisen darauf hin, dass JPMorgan und Deutsche Bank mit Ansiedlungsgesprächen beschäftigt sind, und dass die Strategie von JPM sein kann, mit der Deutschen Bank (Treuhänder) Anleger zu setzen, jene Anleger zu entschädigen und sie zu haben, legen einen Anspruch gegen den FDIC für den Schadenersatz ab.

Sogar außer Verlusten auf $ 92 Milliarden des ursprünglichen Hauptgleichgewichtes, für das Deutsche Bank Treuhänder ist, gibt es Verluste, die mit weiteren $ 100 Milliarden von Hypothekenwertpapieren von WaMu vereinigt sind, über die entweder JPMorgan oder der FDIC schließlich erforderlich sein werden sich niederzulassen.
Zitatende

MfG.L:)

http://ritholtz.com/2013/03/jpm-wamu/

schlechte, aber in deutsch "Prompt" Übersetzung ;)
Zitat:
JPM: Washington gegenseitige Geschichte
13. März 2013 8:00 Uhr

Der Erwerb

Anfang 2008 hat JPMorgan begonnen, erwarteten Fleiß auf Washington zu tun, das mit einem Auge zum Erwerben des beunruhigten gegenseitig ist, aber noch lösendes Unternehmen, aber wegen des Potenzials für große Verluste an WaMu, hat JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon beschlossen, mit einem Erwerb [vi] nicht voranzukommen. Drei Monate später war WaMu bankrott. Da der FDIC begonnen hat, für das Schließen und den Verkauf von WaMu zu planen, hat es Bietern fünf mögliche Transaktionsstrukturen [vii], jeden mit verschiedenen Niveaus von erworbenen Verbindlichkeiten angeboten.

Am 23. und 24. September 2008 hat der FDIC über das Angebot von JPMORGAN verhandelt, das für den Erwerb von allen Aktiva und Passiva von WaMu abgesehen von der Vorzugsaktie, untergeordneten älteren und Schuldschuld der Bank [viii] war. Die Geschäftstruktur, die JPMorgan auch erforderlich gewählt hat, dass das Gewinnenangebot an den kleinsten Kosten zum FDIC kommt.


Während der Gespräche hat JPMorgan eine E-Mail [ix] an den FDIC das Ausdrücken von Sorgen und Suchen der Klarheit über die “Verbindlichkeiten gesandt, die von der Annehmenbank” [x] angenommen sind, und hat Sorge über die Breite der Bestimmung [xi] ausgedrückt. In Q&A hat während der anfänglichen Einladung veröffentlichtes Dokument, Prozess, der FDIC zu bieten, verständlich gemacht, dass die Verpflichtungen, die mit der Hypothek securitizations vereinigt sind, dem Käufer [xii] gehen würden, hat sich ihre Position nicht geändert, und JPMorgan hat die gewünschten Änderungen zum Standardschadenersatz nicht erhalten, um sich gegen die Verbindlichkeiten zu schützen, die mit der Hypothek von Washington Mutual securitizations vereinigt sind. Es könnte nicht klarer gewesen sein, dass JPMorgan die Verbindlichkeiten verstanden hat, die es akzeptierte.

Der FDIC hat wirklich beschränkte Änderungen mit der werbenden Standardform vorgenommen, die Bank für bis zu $ 500 Millionen für Schäden entschädigend, die durch Washington Gegenseitige oder Dritte gebracht sind. [xiii] Die Agentur ist auch bereit gewesen, JPMorgan-Schadenersatz gegen den Hypothekenentleiher (aber nicht Anleger) Ansprüche [xiv], ein häufiger Grund zu Sorge im Herbst 2008 zur Verfügung zu stellen.

Am 25. September 2008 hat der FDIC bekannt gegeben, dass JPMORGAN die Bankverkehrsoperationen Washingtons Gegenseitig ohne Kosten zum Versicherungsfonds des FDIC [xv] erworben hat. In einem SEC, der an diesem Abend ablegt, hat JPMORGAN gesagt, dass er “alle Ablagerungen, Vermögen und bestimmte Verbindlichkeiten der Bankverkehrsoperationen von Washington Mutual von Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), wirksam sofort erworben hat. Ausgeschlossen von der Transaktion sind die ältere ungesicherte Schuld, untergeordnete Schuld und Vorzugsaktie der Banken von Washington Mutual. JPMorgan Chase wird kein Vermögen oder Verbindlichkeiten der Elternteilholdingsgesellschaft der Banken (WM) oder der Nichtbanktochtergesellschaften der Holdingsgesellschaft erwerben. Als ein Teil dieser Transaktion wird JPMorgan Chase eine Zahlung von etwa $ 1.9 Milliarden zum FDIC” [xvi] machen.

Klar, der FDIC und JPMorgan sowohl beabsichtigt als auch geglaubt, dass alle Verbindlichkeiten nicht spezifisch ausgeschlossen übertragen wurden. Der FDIC hatte sonst geglaubt, dass er seine potenziellen Aussetzungen von behaltenen Verbindlichkeiten in seiner Ansage gedacht hätte und, wenn es andere Bieter in seiner Entscheidung gab, JPMorgan Gegenseitiges Washington zuzuerkennen. Immerhin hat der FDIC eine gesetzliche Verpflichtung, die am wenigsten kostspielige Entschlossenheit zu genehmigen.

Anerkennung von Verbindlichkeiten von WaMu

Als JPMorgan seinen Ertrag für das vierte Viertel von 2008 bekannt gegeben hat, hat Dimon stolz behauptet, dass JPMorgan seinen Teil “tat”, um zu helfen, die Finanzmärkte zu stabilisieren und Wiederherstellung zu beschleunigen. Wir haben Gefahr angenommen und haben Mittel ausgegeben, Bear Stearns und Gegenseitiges Washington zu assimilieren.” [xvii] machen Die Anmerkungen für einen großen patriotischen Tonbissen, aber verdienen weitere genaue Untersuchung im Licht des nachfolgenden Anspruchs der Bank, dass es nie die Hypothekenverbindlichkeiten von WaMu erworben hat. Immerhin, da die Bank das Vermögen von WaMu am Buchwert gekauft hat und das Kreditbuch um $ 31 Milliarden niedergeschrieben hat, ist es hart zu verstehen, was es riskiert, hat genommen, wenn es die Verbindlichkeiten in Zusammenhang mit den securitization Tätigkeiten von Washington Mutual nicht erworben hat.

In am 9. Januar 2009, SEC Feilstaub, hat Freddie Mac bekannt gegeben, dass “JPMorgan Chase die Zufluchtenverpflichtungen von Washington Mutual annehmen wird, einige solcher Hypotheken zurückzukaufen, die an Freddie Mac mit der Zuflucht verkauft wurden. In Bezug auf Hypotheken, dass Washington Gegenseitig verkauft an Freddie Mac ohne Zuflucht, JPMorgan Chase bereit gewesen ist, eine ehemalige Zahlung an Freddie Mac in Bezug auf Verpflichtungen Washingtons Gegenseitig zu machen, um einige solcher Hypotheken zurückzukaufen, die mit bestimmten Darstellungen und Garantien inkonsequent sind, die zur Zeit des Verkaufs [xviii] gemacht sind.” Dieser Feilstaub, wie mehrerer von JPMORGAN gemachter Feilstaub, demonstriert, dass das Unternehmen seine Verpflichtungen anerkannt hatte, WaMu-bezogene Hypotheken zurückzukaufen, die an den GSEs [xix] verkauft sind. Wenn, weil JPMORGAN jetzt kämpft, diese Rückkaufverpflichtungen die rechtmäßigen Verbindlichkeiten des FDIC waren, dann muss man fragen, wie das Unternehmen sie im Auftrag des FDIC gesetzlich gesetzt haben könnte. Tatsächlich schützt der Abschnitt 12.2 (f) der Kaufabmachung spezifisch den FDIC davor, für Verbindlichkeiten zu zahlen, die es durch das Verlangen nicht angenommen hat, dass es jeder Ansiedlung zustimmt, die auf eine Schadenersatzverpflichtung hinauslaufen würde.

Weiter ist das Unterstützen des Arguments, dass JPMorgan die Verbindlichkeiten von WaMu erworben hat, SEC-Feilstaub und Präsentationen Aktionären durch JPMorgan. Im Zusammenhang mit dem Ertrag von 2010 hat die Bank gewarnt, dass “wir und sicher in unseren Tochtergesellschaften, sowie Entitäten, die von uns als ein Teil des Bären erworben sind, Stearns, Washington Gegenseitige und andere Transaktionen, solche Darstellungen und Garantien im Zusammenhang mit dem Verkauf und securitization von Darlehen gemacht hat (entweder mit oder ohne Zuflucht … Unsere Verpflichtungen in Bezug auf diese Darstellungen und Garantien durch das Leben des Darlehens allgemein hervorragend sind, und sich auf, unter anderem, Einhaltung von Gesetzen und Regulierungen beziehen; das Unterschreiben von Standards; die Genauigkeit von Informationen in den Kreditdokumenten und der Kreditdatei; und die Eigenschaften und enforceability des Darlehens …. wenn ein Darlehen, das solche Darstellungen und Garantien nicht erfüllt, verkauft wird, können wir verpflichtet werden, das Darlehen zurückzukaufen und jeden verbundenen Verlust direkt zu tragen, oder wir können verpflichtet werden, den Käufer gegen jeden solchen Verlust zu entschädigen. Entsprechend konnten solcher Rückkauf und/oder Schadenersatzverpflichtungen … erworben von uns als ein Teil des Bären Stearns, Washington Gegenseitige und andere Transaktionen … unsere Ergebnisse von Operationen und Finanzbedingung materiell und nachteilig zusammenpressen.” Die Essenz wurde in anderem Feilstaub ebenso [xx] wiederholt.

Im November 2011 hat Richter Denise Cote [xxi] des Südlichen Bezirks New Yorks gefunden, dass “JPMorgan um die ausführlichen Behauptungen der Amendierten Beschwerde nicht direkt kämpft, dass es Bankverbindlichkeiten von WaMu in Bezug auf das securitizations strittige hier angenommen hat. Tatsächlich, wie der Ankläger darauf hinweist, hat JPMorgan selbst in seiner Verbindlichkeit für den 'Rückkauf und/oder die Schadenersatzverpflichtungen öffentlich Verweise angebracht, die im Zusammenhang mit dem Verkauf und securitization von Darlehen durch, unter anderen, WaMu entstehen. Der FDIC hat ebenfalls gemeint, dass 'die Verbindlichkeiten und das Entstehen von Verpflichtungen aus dem Verkauf von WaMu von hypothekenunterstützten Wertpapieren 'in ihrer Gesamtheit durch JPMC [(JPMorgan Chase)] unter P&A Abmachung angenommen wurden, dadurch jede potenzielle Verbindlichkeit durch den FDIC-Empfänger auslöschend.' So, zu den Zwecken dieser Bewegung, gibt es keinen Streit, dass JPMORGAN ein richtiger Angeklagter in Bezug auf verwandte Ansprüche des WaMu-von FHFA ist.” Veranlasste diese Entdeckung JPMORGAN, seine Streitigkeitsreserven zu vergrößern? Wir wissen nicht, weil ihre Enthüllungen unzulänglich sind.
Zitatende
MfG.L:)

http://ritholtz.com/2013/03/jpm-wamu/

schlechte, aber in deutsch "Prompt" Übersetzung ;)
Zitat:
JPM: Washington gegenseitige Geschichte
13. März 2013 8:00 Uhr

Fehlen Sie von der Klarheit beim Aufbewahren der Politik

Auf dem ersten Viertel des 2010-Einkommensanrufs hat Michael Cavanagh von JPMORGAN bemerkt, dass die Bank Darstellung und Garantienreserven für Aussetzungen von WaMu aufgestellt hatte, die mit beiden GSEs verbunden sind, aber zugegeben hat, dass die Reserven schwierig waren zu entziffern, in mehreren Taschen waren und er dann Anleger informiert hat, dass JPM nicht mehr bedeutungsvolle Leitung oder Detail [xxii] geben würde. In einer Präsentation im November 2010 an einer Bancanalysts Vereinigung der Bostoner Konferenz hat ein JPMorgan-Leitender Angestellter Details der “Handelsmarkenrückkaufrisikoaussetzung der Gesellschaft zur Verfügung gestellt, die” durch die Verfolgung, den Bären und WaMu und durch den Produkttyp ausgebrochen ist. Nirgends in dieser Präsentation hat das Unternehmen getan verleugnen die Verbindlichkeiten oder weisen darauf hin, dass sie die Verbindlichkeiten des FDIC [xxiii] waren.

Im Januar 2010 anerkennend, dass die Enthüllungen von JPMORGAN für die Fähigkeit von Anlegern unzulänglich waren, seine Gefahren zu analysieren, hat der SEC einen Brief Michael Cavanagh gesandt, der die Bank leitet, um größeres Detail [xxiv] von ihren Rückkaufverpflichtungen zur Verfügung zu stellen. Wieder anstatt Anleger mit der klassenführenden Durchsichtigkeit zu versorgen, fordert JPMorgan häufig, die Bank hat auf den Brief, in der redigierten Form [xxv] geantwortet, um vertrauliche Behandlung von bestimmten Teilen ihrer Antwort bittend.

Während in der Vergangenheit die Bank wiederholt seinen Erwerb von Rückkaufverbindlichkeiten von WaMu anerkannt hat und am Anfang diejenigen in Diskussionen von Rückkaufreserven eingeschlossen hat, scheint es, dass jene Policen mit der Zeit nicht entsprochen haben. Wo früher WaMu-bezogene Rückkaufverbindlichkeiten scheinen, auf vergrößerte Rückkaufreserven hinausgelaufen zu sein, scheint es, dass sobald sich JPMorgan dafür entschieden hat zu behaupten, dass die Rückkaufverbindlichkeiten von WaMu als die Verpflichtung des FDIC, die Vergleichbarkeit ihrer bereits schwachen Enthüllungen sogar weniger zerlegbar geworden ist.

Neue Hypothekenklagen

In den letzten wenigen Monaten wurde eine neue Runde von hypothekenbezogenen Klagen gegen das Unternehmen abgelegt. Anleger, Gangregler, Ankläger und Versicherer haben eine neue Runde von Ansprüchen gegen die Bank abgelegt, die mit Milliarden des Werts von Dollars von durch Wohnhypotheken unterstützten Wertpapieren verbunden ist.

Am 5. Februar 2013, hinsichtlich der Versicherten Garantie v. Flagstar [xxvi], der US-amerikanische Südliche Bezirksrichter Jed Rakoff scheint, Präzedenzfall geschaffen zu haben, indem er eine Entscheidung weitergibt, staistical Analyse zu erlauben, die vom unabhängigen Rechnungsprüfer von Assured, aber nicht Darlehen-für-Darlehen-Analyse zur Verfügung gestellt ist, eine Basis für Ergebnisse von Brüchen zu PSAs und Wüstling und Garantien in vereinten Hypothekendarlehen zu sein. Der Rechnungsprüfer hat gefunden, dass, wie man fand, 606 der Probe von 800 Darlehen über das Vertrauen materielle Brüche hatten. Während die Entscheidung wahrscheinlich appelliert wird, ist die Wirklichkeit, dass sie bedeutsam die Gefahren zu JPM und anderen Angeklagten in putback Streitigkeiten erhöht. Es kann auch JPM dazu bringen zu beschließen, dass sie Reserven vergrößern müssen.

Im November 2012 hat CIFG Versicherung JPM über mehr als $ 100 Millionen von Verlusten verklagt, die es in CDOs gestützt hat. US-amerikanische Bank, als Treuhänder, hat auch [xxvii] Klage erhoben, Brüche von bestimmten allgemeinen Bedingungen des Vereinigens und der Wartung von Abmachungen fordernd (die Verpflichtungen der Parteien gegen einander definierend), eines RMBS mit $ 698 Millionen von ursprünglichen Hauptgleichgewichten, hat Verluste von $ 358 Millionen ertragen. In einer Probe der Darlehen, die im Verzug gewesen sind, behaupten die Ankläger, dass 74 % einen oder mehr Brüche hatten. Hypothekenversicherer Syncora Guarantee hat auch [xxviii] Klage erhoben, der behauptet, dass, infolge falscher Bilder auf fast 85 % der am Geschäft beteiligten Darlehen, Syncora mehr als $ 94 Millionen in Ansprüchen auf Anleger auf Verlusten von mehr als $ 111 Millionen hat bezahlen müssen. Der Nationale Kreditvereinigungsverwaltungsausschuss hat gegen JPM auf WaMu-bezogenen Verlusten auf fast 50 RMBS-Geschäften Klage erhoben. Im Feilstaub demonstriert der NCUA den massiven Unterschied zwischen den erwarteten Schadensumfängen und den wirklichen Verlusten in diesen Geschäften [xxix]. Das folgt einer NCUA-Klage, die gegen JPM in Zusammenhang mit $ 3.6 Milliarden von “fehlerhaften” Wertpapieren abgelegt ist, die mit dem Bären von JPM Erwerb von Stearns verbunden sind.

Im Oktober 2012 hat der New Yorker Generalstaatsanwalt, Eric Schneiderman, gegen JPM Klage erhoben, der mit angeblichen falschen Bildern in RMBS-Wertpapiere-Angeboten verbunden ist, die, wie man fordert, auf die Verluste von $ 22.5 Milliarden von $ 87 Milliarden im ursprünglichen Hauptwert [xxx] hinausgelaufen sind.

Am 4. Februar 2013, verbunden mit einer Klage, die gegen JPMorgan durch Dexia abgelegt ist, hat Dexia Hundert von E-Mails und Mitarbeiterinterviewabschriften veröffentlicht, die darauf hinweisen, dass JPM unabhängige Versichererberichte erhalten hat zeigend, der zwischen 8 % und 20 % der Darlehen, die für die Einschließung in Schwimmbäder probiert sind, Unterschreibenrichtlinien nicht entsprochen hat. Anstatt diese Defekte Anlegern bekannt zu geben, hat JPM die unabhängigen Entschlüsse überritten, eine “endgültige, sterilisierte Version” zu schaffen. [xxxi]

[i] http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/.../pdf/USCOURTS-dcd-1_09-cv-01656-0.pdf “Vermerkmeinung.” Letzter modifizierter 2012. Zugegriffen am 26. Februar 2013. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/...pdf/USCOURTS-dcd-1_09-cv-01656-0.pdf.

http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ONE/...102689/19617/filing.pdf J P MORGAN CHASE & [ii]-CO, “FORMEN SICH 10-Q (Vierteljährlicher Bericht). ” Letzter modifizierter 2010. http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ONE/...02689/19617/filing.pdf. “Von 2005 bis 2008 unterwirft Washington Gegenseitige verkaufte etwa $ 150 Milliarden von Darlehen an den GSEs bestimmten Darstellungen und Garantien. Nachfolgend auf den Erwerb des Unternehmens von bestimmten Aktiva und Passiva Washingtons, das vom FDIC im September 2008 gegenseitig ist, hat das Unternehmen aufgelöst und/oder hat bestimmte aktuelle und zukünftige Rückkaufanforderungen nach Darlehen beschränkt, die an den GSEs durch Gegenseitiges Washington verkauft sind, obwohl es die Position des Unternehmens bleibt, dass solche Verpflichtungen mit der FDIC-Konkursverwaltung bleiben. Dennoch sind bestimmte Zahlungen in Bezug auf bestimmte von den dann aktuellen und zukünftigen Rückkaufanforderungen gemacht worden, und das Unternehmen wird fortsetzen, bestimmte zukünftige mit individuellen Darlehen verbundene Rückkaufanforderungen zu bewerten und zu bezahlen. Zusätzlich zu den bereits gemachten Zahlungen hat das Unternehmen eine restliche Rückkaufverbindlichkeit von etwa $ 250 Millionen bezüglich am 30. September 2010, in Zusammenhang mit ungelösten und zukünftigen Anforderungen auf Washington Gegenseitige Mappe. Nach der Rücksicht dieser Rückkaufverbindlichkeit glaubt das Unternehmen, dass die restliche GSE-Rückkaufaussetzung, die nach Washington Gegenseitige Mappe verbunden ist, minimale zukünftige Gefahr zu den Finanzergebnissen des Unternehmens präsentiert.”

[iii] http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/10/...s-dwarf-lehman-weekend.html “Josh Rosner: “Konnten Verletzungen des zwerg Lehmanwochenendes von PSA?”.” Nackter Kapitalismus, am 12. Oktober 2010. http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/10/...-dwarf-lehman-weekend.html.

[iv]-http://www.gao.gov/assets/330/321506.pdf p.131 USA-Regierungsverantwortlichkeitsbüro, “Bestehen BUNDESRESERVESYSTEM-Gelegenheiten, um Policen und Prozesse für die Betriebsnothilfe Zu stärken.” Letzter modifizierter 2011. http://www.gao.gov/assets/330/321506.pdf. p. 131.

[v] Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, “Identifizierungsanspruchbrief.” Letzter modifizierter 2012. http://www.scribd.com/doc/127203581/Fdic-Letter-to-Jpm-05-011-2012.

[vi] http://wmish.com/joshua_hochbergs_joke/epic_fail/...PM_EX00004075.PDF Morgan Chase und Gesellschaft, “Brief: (Fw: Sitzung mit Emilio Botin).” Letzter modifizierter 2008. http://wmish.com/joshua_hochbergs_joke/epic_fail/...M_EX00004075.PDF. (Siehe: “Hat gefragt, warum JP Morgan nicht getan hat, kaufen Wamu, und stattdessen hat TPG die Hauptstadt Jamie eingespritzt hat geantwortet, dass er denkt, dass die potenziellen Verluste höher sind als TPG, wird das Schätzen plus ihre Verluste auf ihre anfängliche Billigkeitsinvestition unterschiedlich für JPMorgan oder jede andere Bank von USA beschränkt, die kennzeichnen muss, um zusätzliches Kapital entsprechend” auf den Markt zu bringen und zuzuteilen/einzuspritzen)

[vii] http://wmish.com/joshua_hochbergs_joke/epic_fail/...001.pdfWashington gegenseitige Bank, “verschiedene Dokumente.” http://wmish.com/joshua_hochbergs_joke/epic_fail/...001550.00001.pdf.

Alle Verbindlichkeiten werden außer der Vorzugsaktie angenommen.

Alle Verbindlichkeiten werden angenommen, außer der Vorzugsaktie und der untergeordneten Schuld.

Alle Verbindlichkeiten werden außer der Vorzugsaktie, der untergeordneten Schuld und der älteren  Schuld angenommen.

Der Erwerber nimmt alle Ablagerungen und gesicherte Verbindlichkeiten an.

Alle Versicherungsnehmerablagerungen und gesicherte Verbindlichkeiten werden angenommen.
Zitatende
MfG.L:)

http://ritholtz.com/2013/03/jpm-wamu/

schlechte, aber in deutsch "Prompt" Übersetzung ;)
Zitat:
JPM: Washington gegenseitige Geschichte
13. März 2013 8:00 Uhr

[viii] Einsatzverbindung zu p. 31 der Antwort von Deutschen Bank auf FDIC und JPM-Bewegungen (Siehe: “Unter dieser Transaktion, dem Kauf und der Annahme (Ganze Bank), nimmt der Potenzielle Erwerber, dessen Angebot von der Vereinigung akzeptiert wird, die Angenommenen Ablagerungen der Bank und aller anderen Verbindlichkeiten an, aber spezifisch der Vorzugsaktie ausschließend, hat Nichtaktivposten Verteidigungsstreitigkeit, untergeordnete ältere und Schuldschuld verbunden, und kauft das ganze Vermögen der Bank, jenes Vermögens ausschließend, das als ausgeschlossenes Vermögen in den Gesetzlichen Dokumenten und dem Thema den Bestimmungen davon identifiziert ist.”)

[ix] p. 31 der Antwort von Deutschen Bank.

[x] http://www.fdic.gov/about/freedom/Washington_Mutual_P_and_A.pdf

(Siehe p.8) Ganze Bank, “KAUF UND ANNAHMENABMACHUNG.” Letzter modifizierter 2008. http://www.fdic.gov/about/freedom/Washington_Mutual_P_and_A.pdf. (Siehe:p. 8)

[xi] Sehen p. 32 Antwort von Deutscher Bank (Siehe”: Wollen wir sagen, dass es einen Vertrag zwischen der Sparsamkeit und dem Elternteil gibt und das in die Bücher und Aufzeichnungen eingeschlossen wird (nicht etwas wie “angehäufter für auf den Büchern der Erfolglosen Bank”, die wahrscheinlich das Problem befestigen würde) der Sparsamkeit zur Zeit des Schließens. Jede Verbindlichkeit laut dieses Vertrags ist dann wohl eine Verbindlichkeit, die in den Büchern und Aufzeichnungen widerspiegelt ist. Deshalb würde man am wahrscheinlichsten beschließen, dass Verbindlichkeiten laut dieses Vertrags unter 2.1 angenommen werden.... In einem normalen P&A zwischen kommerziellen Parteien ist das nicht etwas, was ein Käufer jemals annehmen würde und es wirklich keinen Sinn hat (noch es offen gesagt Messe ist) hier.”)

[xii] Antwort von Deutsche p. 33 (Siehe: “9. Sind die aus dem Gleichgewicht Plattenkreditkartenmappe und Hypothek securitizations eingeschlossen in die Transaktion? Nehmen Sie an, dass der Erwerber die Wartungsverpflichtungen annimmt? Wenn dort mit den Verträgen vereinigte Probleme bewerten (z.B. die Preiskalkulation ist für die Annehmeneinrichtung nachteilig), können wir die Nichtanerkennungsmächte des FDIC ausnutzen, eine Wiederpreiskalkulation zu bewirken?

Antwort: Die Interessen und Verpflichtungen der Bank haben mit der aus dem Gleichgewicht Plattenkreditkartenmappe und Hypothek securitizations Pass dem Erwerber vereinigt. Nur Verträge und Verpflichtungen, die in der Konkursverwaltung bleiben, sind Nichtanerkennungsmächten unterworfen.”)

[xiii] Bank von http://www.fdic.gov/about/freedom/Washington_Mutual_P_and_A.pdfWhole, “KAUF UND ANNAHMENABMACHUNG.” Letzter modifizierter 2008. http://www.fdic.gov/about/freedom/Washington_Mutual_P_and_A.pdf. (Siehe: Abschnitt 12.1 (a) (9))

[xiv] Ibd. (Siehe: “Jede Verbindlichkeit hat mit Entleiheransprüchen auf die Zahlung oder Verbindlichkeit jedem Entleiher für die Gelderleichterung verkehrt, oder die für jede andere Form der Erleichterung jedem Entleiher sorgen... verbunden in jedem Fall mit jedem Darlehen oder Engagement, gemacht von der Erfolglosen Bank vor dem Misserfolg, oder zu jedem Darlehen zu leihen, das von einem Dritten im Zusammenhang mit einem Darlehen vermittelt ist, das ist oder von der Erfolglosen Bank gehalten wurde, oder sonst im Zusammenhang mit der Erfolglosen Bank leihend oder Kreditkauftätigkeiten” entstehend)

[xv] http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/press/2008/pr08085.html Grau, Andrew. Föderale Insurance Ablagerungscorporation, “Erwirbt JPMorgan Chase Bankverkehrsoperationen Gegenseitigen Washingtons.” Letzter modifizierter 2008. http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/press/2008/pr08085.html.

[xvi] http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/19617/...312508201636/dfwp.htm JP Morgan Chase und Gesellschaft, “verschiedene Dokumente.” http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/19617/...12508201636/dfwp.htm.

JP Morgan [xvii]-Chase von http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ONE/...Press-Release-Final.pdf und Gesellschaft, “MELDET JPMORGAN CHASE VOLL-JÄHRIGES NETZEINKOMMEN von 20:08 Uhr VON $ 5.6 Milliarden ODER 1.37 $ pro Anteil AUF EINNAHMEN VON $ 67.3 Milliarden; VIERTELVIERTELNETZEINKOMMEN von 20:08 Uhr VON $ 702 Millionen ODER 0.07 $ pro Anteil.” http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ONE/...ress-Release-Final.pdf.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1026214/...0005/f71045e8vk.htm US [xviii]-Securities und Austauschkommission, “BILDEN 8-k, AKTUELLER BERICHT Entsprechend dem Abschnitt 13 oder 15 (d) des Wertpapierbörsengesetzes von 1934.” Letzter modifizierter 2009. http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1026214/...005/f71045e8vk.htm.

[xix]-http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/19617/...16029/e82150e10vk.htm (Siehe p5 US Securities und Austauschkommission, “Form 10-K, Jahresbericht entsprechend dem Abschnitt 13 oder 15 (d) des Wertpapierbörsengesetzes von 1934 (JPMorgan Chase & Co.). ” Letzter modifizierter 2009. http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/19617/...6029/e82150e10vk.htm. (Siehe p.5, “Wenn ein Darlehen solche Darstellungen nicht erfüllt oder Garantien verkauft wird oder securitized, können wir verpflichtet werden, das Darlehen zurückzukaufen und jeden verbundenen Verlust direkt zu tragen, oder wir können verpflichtet werden, den Käufer gegen irgendwelche solche Verluste zu entschädigen. 2009, die Kosten, Hypothekendarlehen zurückzukaufen, die an Regierungsbehörden wie Freddie Mac und Fannie Mae vergrößert wesentlich verkauft worden waren und fortsetzen konnten, wesentlich weiter zuzunehmen. Entsprechend konnten Rückkauf und/oder Schadenersatzverpflichtungen gegen regierungsgesponserte Unternehmen oder gegen private Drittkäufer unsere Ergebnisse von Operationen und Ertrag in der Zukunft materiell und nachteilig betreffen.”) und p14 und P18 http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ONE/...tion_FINAL_11.17.10.pdf und p.14, p.18 und JP Morgan Chase und Gesellschaft, “Konferenz von BAC-ML Banking and Financial Services.” Letzter modifizierter 2010. http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ONE/...3cb-5fb51c17216b/BAC-ML Presentation_FINAL_11.17.10.pdf.

(Beispiel: “Das Unternehmen hat aufgelöst und/oder hat Rückkaufgefahren beschränkt, die mit bestimmten WaMu GSE Kreditverkäufen ― minimale zukünftige Gefahr” vereinigt sind)
Zitatende
MfG.L:)

http://ritholtz.com/2013/03/jpm-wamu/

schlechte, aber in deutsch "Prompt" Übersetzung ;)
Zitat:
JPM: Washington gegenseitige Geschichte
13. März 2013 8:00 Uhr

[xx] http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/19617/...2509249391/d424b7.htm (See:P. JP Morgan Chase und Gesellschaft, “EINLEITENDE BROSCHÜRENERGÄNZUNG (am 16. Oktober 2007).” Letzter modifizierter 2007. http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/19617/...509249391/d424b7.htm. (Siehe: P.S.-7 “Wir und sicher in unseren Tochtergesellschaften, sowie Entitäten, die von uns als ein Teil des Bären erworben sind, hat Stearns, Washington Gegenseitige und andere Transaktionen, solche Darstellungen und Garantien im Zusammenhang mit dem Verkauf und securitization von Darlehen (entweder mit oder ohne Zuflucht) gemacht, und wir werden fortsetzen, so als ein Teil unseres normalen Verbrauchers zu tun, der Geschäft Leiht. Unsere Verpflichtungen in Bezug auf diese Darstellungen und Garantien sind durch das Leben des Darlehens allgemein hervorragend, und beziehen sich auf, unter anderem, Einhaltung von Gesetzen und Regulierungen; das Unterschreiben von Standards; die Genauigkeit von Informationen in den Kreditdokumenten und der Kreditdatei; und die Eigenschaften und enforceability des Darlehens.

Ein Darlehen, das solche Darstellungen und Garantien nicht erfüllt, kann länger nehmen, um zu verkaufen, oder kann unverkäuflich oder nur bei einem bedeutenden Preisnachlass verkäuflich sein. Noch wichtiger wenn ein Darlehen, das solche Darstellungen und Garantien nicht erfüllt, verkauft wird, können wir verpflichtet werden, das Darlehen zurückzukaufen und jeden verbundenen Verlust direkt zu tragen, oder wir können verpflichtet werden, den Käufer gegen jeden solchen Verlust zu entschädigen. Entsprechend solcher Rückkauf und/oder Schadenersatzverpflichtungen, die im Zusammenhang mit dem Verkauf und securitization von Darlehen (entweder mit oder ohne Zuflucht) durch uns und sicher in unseren Tochtergesellschaften, sowie Entitäten entstehen, die von uns als ein Teil des Bären erworben sind, konnte Stearns, Washington Gegenseitige und andere Transaktionen, unsere Kosten materiell vergrößern und unsere Rentabilität senken, und konnte unsere Ergebnisse von Operationen und Finanzbedingung materiell und nachteilig zusammenpressen.”) und http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ONE/...1-03-10_FINAL_PRINT.pdf (JP Morgan Chase und Gesellschaft, “BANCAN LYSTS VEREINIGUNG der Bostoner KONFERENZ.” Letzter modifizierter 2010. http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ONE/...-03-10_FINAL_PRINT.pdf. (Siehe: P24-26 “Handelsmarkenrückkaufrisikoaussetzung.”)
[xx] http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/19617/...2509249391/d424b7.htm (See:P. JP Morgan Chase und Gesellschaft, “EINLEITENDE BROSCHÜRENERGÄNZUNG (am 16. Oktober 2007).” Letzter modifizierter 2007. http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/19617/...509249391/d424b7.htm. (Siehe: P.S.-7 “Wir und sicher in unseren Tochtergesellschaften, sowie Entitäten, die von uns als ein Teil des Bären erworben sind, hat Stearns, Washington Gegenseitige und andere Transaktionen, solche Darstellungen und Garantien im Zusammenhang mit dem Verkauf und securitization von Darlehen (entweder mit oder ohne Zuflucht) gemacht, und wir werden fortsetzen, so als ein Teil unseres normalen Verbrauchers zu tun, der Geschäft Leiht. Unsere Verpflichtungen in Bezug auf diese Darstellungen und Garantien sind durch das Leben des Darlehens allgemein hervorragend, und beziehen sich auf, unter anderem, Einhaltung von Gesetzen und Regulierungen; das Unterschreiben von Standards; die Genauigkeit von Informationen in den Kreditdokumenten und der Kreditdatei; und die Eigenschaften und enforceability des Darlehens.

Ein Darlehen, das solche Darstellungen und Garantien nicht erfüllt, kann länger nehmen, um zu verkaufen, oder kann unverkäuflich oder nur bei einem bedeutenden Preisnachlass verkäuflich sein. Noch wichtiger wenn ein Darlehen, das solche Darstellungen und Garantien nicht erfüllt, verkauft wird, können wir verpflichtet werden, das Darlehen zurückzukaufen und jeden verbundenen Verlust direkt zu tragen, oder wir können verpflichtet werden, den Käufer gegen jeden solchen Verlust zu entschädigen. Entsprechend solcher Rückkauf und/oder Schadenersatzverpflichtungen, die im Zusammenhang mit dem Verkauf und securitization von Darlehen (entweder mit oder ohne Zuflucht) durch uns und sicher in unseren Tochtergesellschaften, sowie Entitäten entstehen, die von uns als ein Teil des Bären erworben sind, konnte Stearns, Washington Gegenseitige und andere Transaktionen, unsere Kosten materiell vergrößern und unsere Rentabilität senken, und konnte unsere Ergebnisse von Operationen und Finanzbedingung materiell und nachteilig zusammenpressen.”) und http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ONE/...1-03-10_FINAL_PRINT.pdf (JP Morgan Chase und Gesellschaft, “BANCAN LYSTS VEREINIGUNG der Bostoner KONFERENZ.” Letzter modifizierter 2010. http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ONE/...-03-10_FINAL_PRINT.pdf. (Siehe: P24-26 “Handelsmarkenrückkaufrisikoaussetzung.”)

[xxi] http://wallstreetonparade.com/wp-content/uploads/...t-of-New-York.pdf LANDGERICHT DER VEREINIGTEN STAATEN, SÜDLICHER BEZIRK NEW YORKS, “11 Civ. 6188 (DLC), MEINUNG & ORDNUNG.” http://wallstreetonparade.com/wp-content/uploads/...-of-New-York.pdf.
[xxii] http://seekingalpha.com/article/...nings-call-transcript?part=single, Alpha, “JP Morgan Chase & Co Suchend. Q1 2010 Einkommensanrufabschrift.” Letzter modifizierter 2010. http://seekingalpha.com/article/...0-earnings-call-transcript?page=1. (Siehe: “Lassen Sie mich das einfach machen. In der Investitionsbank, werden Sie im Einzelhandel verkauft und korporativ wir haben Ruf und Garantienreserven und Streitigkeitsreserven für GSEs und alle anderen Hypotheken einschließlich privater Wertpapiere aufgestellt. Wir haben versucht, es fleißig zu tun. Einige jener Zahlen haben die Investitionsbank dieses Viertel durchbohrt. Wir haben die Zahlen im Einzelhandel ausgebrochen, und wir haben die Zahlen im korporativen gestellt. Viele der Zahlen im korporativen beziehen sich auf WaMu. Wir sind nicht dabei, irgendwelche anderen Informationen zu geben. Wir denken, dass wir richtig für den Wüstling und die Garantien zugekommen sind, ob sie auf dem Ruf und der Garantienlinie oder der Streitigkeitslinie durchkommen. Es gibt legitime Ansprüche, dass einige dieser Hypotheken [richtig] getan wurden. Es ist dabei, getane Hypothek hypothekarisch zu sein. Anders als das denken wir, dass wir einen ziemlich guten Job getan haben, der das Problem früh anerkennt.”)

[xxiii]-http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ONE/...1-03-10_FINAL_PRINT.pdf (Siehe: P24-26 “Handelsmarke ― Rückkaufrisikoaussetzung”) Scharf, Charlie. JPMorgan Chase & Co, “BANCANALYSTS-VEREINIGUNG der Bostoner KONFERENZ.” Letzter modifizierter 2010. http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ONE/...-03-10_FINAL_PRINT.pdf. (Siehe: P.24-26 “Handelsmarke ― Rückkaufrisikoaussetzung.”)
Zitatende

MfG.L:)

http://ritholtz.com/2013/03/jpm-wamu/

schlechte, aber in deutsch "Prompt" Übersetzung ;)
Zitat:
JPM: Washington gegenseitige Geschichte
13. März 2013 8:00 Uhr

[xxiv] Sicherheit von http://www.scribd.com/doc/33507476/...closure-on-Buybacks-Jun-17-2010 und Austauschkommission, “SEC-Brief an JPM, Re Mehr Enthüllung auf Rückkäufen.” Letzter modifizierter 2010. http://www.scribd.com/doc/33507476/...losure-on-Buybacks-Jun-17-2010. (Siehe: Die spezifische Methodik, die verwendet ist, um die Erlaubnis zu schätzen, hat sich auf verschiedene Darstellungen und Garantien einschließlich irgendwelcher Unterschiede bezogen, die abhängig vom Typ der Gegenpartei zum Vertrag resultieren können; Besprechen Sie das Niveau von Spesen gegründet verbunden mit diesen Rückkaufbitten, und wie und wo sie in den Bilanzen klassifiziert werden; Besprechen Sie das Niveau, und der Typ des Rückkaufs bittet, dass Sie, und irgendwelche Tendenzen erhalten, die, einschließlich Ihrer Erfolgraten im Vermeiden des Festsetzens der Anspruch identifiziert worden sind; Besprechen Sie Ihre Methoden, die Ansprüche laut der Abmachungen zu setzen. Erzählen Sie uns spezifisch, ob Sie die Darlehen völlig von der Gegenpartei zurückkaufen oder gerade eine Ansiedlungszahlung an sie machen. Wenn der erstere, irgendwelche Effekten oder Tendenzen auf Ihrer nichtleistenden Kreditstatistik besprechen Sie. Wenn die Letzteren, irgendwelche Tendenzen in Bezug auf den durchschnittlichen Ansiedlungsbetrag durch den Kredittyp besprechen Sie; und Besprechen Sie die typische Zeitdauer Ihrer Rückkaufverpflichtung und irgendwelcher Tendenzen, die Sie durch die Kreditweinlese” sehen)

[xxv] http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/19617/...0020146/filename1.htm Rauchenberger, Louis. JPMorgan Chase & Co., “Herr Amit Pande, Buchhaltungszweighauptabteilung von Corporation Finance United States Securities und Austauschkommissionsbrief.” Letzter modifizierter 2010. http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/19617/...020146/filename1.htm. Das Unternehmen hat den SEC dass informiert:

Ihr potenzieller Ruf und Garantienverletzungen erscheinen allgemein und werden innerhalb etwa 24 - 36 Monate des Beginndatums des Darlehens aufgelöst.

Nach dem Erwerb des Unternehmens von bestimmten Wohnkreditaktiva und Passiva Washingtons Gegenseitige Bank vom FDIC im September 2008 hat das Unternehmen Vereinbarungen mit den Agenturen getroffen, um die Rückkaufanforderungen der Agenturen in Bezug auf das bestimmte Washington Gegenseitige Bankdarlehenrückkaufverbindlichkeiten zu beschränken.

Bezüglich am 31. Dezember 2009 war die Erlaubnis des Unternehmens, die mit Brüchen des Wüstlings und der Garantien (die “Erlaubnis”) verbunden ist, $ 1.7 Milliarden. [Redigiert]

[xxvi] http://www.scribd.com/doc/124118554/...-v-Flagstar-Bank-2-5-13-Ruling Versicherte Garantie v. Flagstar Bank, http://www.scribd.com/doc/124118554/...v-Flagstar-Bank-2-5-13-Ruling.

[xxvii] http://www.structuredfinancelitigation.com/files/...-Bank-Summons.pdf “SACO ich Vertrauens-2006-3, Aussteller des SACO VERTRAUE ich 2006-3 HYPOTHEKENUNTERSTÜTZTEN ZERTIFIKATEN, REIHE 2006-3, v. EMC Hypotheken.” Letzt modifiziert am 11/8/12. http://www.structuredfinancelitigation.com/files/...Bank-Summons.pdf.

[xxviii] http://www.structuredfinancelitigation.com/files/2012/10/Syncora.pdf “Syncora v. EMC Hypothek.” Letzter modifizierter 2012. http://www.structuredfinancelitigation.com/files/2012/10/Syncora.pdf.

[xxix] http://www.ncua.gov/News/Press/NW20130104MorganComplaint.pdf p.36-50 NATIONALER KREDITVEREINIGUNGSVERWALTUNGSAUSSCHUSS v. J.P. Morgan Chase. Letzter modifizierter 2013. http://www.ncua.gov/News/Press/NW20130104MorganComplaint.pdf. p. 36-50

[xxx] McLaughlin, David und Chris Dolmetsch. Bloomberg BusinessWeek, “Sagt NY-Generalstaatsanwalt Mehr Klagen, Wird JPMorgan Folgen.” Letzter modifizierter 2012. http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-10-01/...r-mortgage-securities.

[xxxi] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-07/...e-loans-before-sales.html Schneider, Joe. Bloomberg, “Berichte von JPMorgan Hid von Fehlerhaften Darlehen Vor Verkäufen.” Letzter modifizierter 2013. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-07/...-loans-before-sales.html.
Zitatende

MfG.L:)

http://www.wmitrust.com/wmitrust/document/8817600170728000000000001

We went from 78 to 93 million available.

Also:

NO DISTRIBUTIONS WILL BE MADE TO HOLDERS OF LTIs ON AUGUST 1, 2017. UPDATED LIQUIDATING TRUST INTEREST STATEMENTS FOR MEMBERS OF EACH OF CLASSES 2 (“SENIOR FLOATING RATE NOTES”), 12 (“GENERAL UNSECURED CLAIMS”), AND 16 (“PIERS CLAIMS”) WILL BE MAILED BEGINNING AUGUST 7, 2017.

MfG.L:)

https://www.boardpost.net/forum/...hp?topic=11498.msg189579#msg189579

Zitat Lunchdrunk:
Note  9:   Investment  in  Subsidiaries   Since the Effective Date,  the Trust  had  five (5)  dormant  subsidiaries  without  any  active  business  operations.   The subsidiaries  adopted a  plan  of  liquidation  in  October  2012.   The  assets  held by  these  subsidiaries  were  comprised solely  of  cash  and cash  equivalents.   On  June  23,  2017,  four  of  the  subsidiaries  were merged  with and  into  the  last remaining subsidiary,  WaMu  1031  Exchange.   Prior  to  such  mergers,  such  subsidiaries  distributed  their  remaining cash  to the  Trust.   The  Trust  received $444,333  on  June  27,  2017.    The  last  subsidiary,  which no  longer  has  any assets,  is  expected  to  be dissolved  by  December  31,  2017.
-----------------------------
Zitat mdavis9439:
I recall reading something which stated WAMU 1031 Exhange couldn' t be dissolved until six months after the close of the BK.  Does anyone else remember that or am I mistaken.
-----------------------------
Zitat Uncle_Bo:
You think, that the 1031 is somehow connected to WMIIC - same timeline, same words "expected"...capital loss ?!
------------------------------
Zitat  hgh2live:
Jaysense posted a link that showed that WMI could use the old domain up until six months after the close of the BK.
-----------------------------
Zitat  Lunchdrunk:
"The primary 1031 exchange rules and requirements include: 1) same taxpayer: the taxpayer who sells is the taxpayer who buys, 2) property identification within 45 calendar days post closing of the first property, 3) purchase of the replacement property within 180 calendar days, 4) trading up: the price of the replacement property is equal to or greater than the old or relinquished property, 5) hold time supports the intent to hold for investment, and 6) related party transaction regulations."

I don't know but appears to be a loaded disclosure with interesting dates. 5 years to liquidate then merge for 440k? Approximately 180 days to year end...
-----------------------------
ZItat jaysenese:
This is weird, isn't it?  I had never heard of "WAMU 1031 Exchange" until now, then it turns up in our threads, in two different contexts, on two consecutive days.

=========================================

MDavis wrote:

Quote
I recall reading something which stated WAMU 1031 Exhange couldn' t be dissolved until six months after the close of the BK.  Does anyone else remember that or am I mistaken.

No, it was nothing like that.   The settlement document said that old WAMU could use the URL / email addresses for "wamuinc.net", which was being used by "WAMU 1031 Exchange", through the bankruptcy and for six months afterwards.  It really didn't say anything about dissolving the subsidiary.

=========================================

From looking at earlier quarterly reports, on December 31, 2016, the trust had $97MM in cash.  Then they distributed $18MM to shareholders on February 1, 2017.

This time, though, they held $91MM on June 30, 2017, but they made -0- distribution on August 1.   It seems like they should have distributed some money.  

=========================================

It looks like they are reducing the amount of possible pending tax refunds by $7MM to reflect some judicial judgments that went against us.

=========================================

The new reports has an update on the employee claims:

Quote
Pursuant to a motion, dated June 7, 2017, the Trust moved for certification of a partial final judgment under Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) and for a temporary stay of the litigation pending before the Delaware District
Court. Specifically, the Trust asked the Delaware District Court to (1) enter a judgment consistent with its rulings in
the prior orders finding that ‘no private right of action” exists and that parties must act in accordance with the
Administrative Procedures Act (something the Trust did in accordance with its applications before the FDIC and the
subsequent APA Action) and (2) stay consideration of the claims and causes of action with respect to the automatic
termination regulations. On June 21, 2017, the Individual Defendants opposed such relief and the Trust’s motion
and filed a motion seeking judgment on the pleadings and entry of order granting the Individual Defendants
judgment on the “Covered Company” and “automatic termination” issues. The Trust has opposed such relief and
the matter has been fully briefed and remains pending before the Delaware District Court.

===============================

That whole paragraph involving "Wamu 1031 Exchange" is brand new to this quarterly report for the first time.  IMO, it certainly looks like they are getting ready to wind this thing down.
------------------------------
Zitat umaw:
I think that this is an original list of WMI subs, of which this latest filing states what was left has been merged into the last remaining sub.

 You think, that the 1031 is somehow connected to WMIIC - same timeline, same words "expected"...capital loss ?!

Quote from: Lunchdrunk on Yesterday at 06:49:39 PM
Note  9:   Investment  in  Subsidiaries   Since the Effective Date,  the Trust  had  five (5)  dormant  subsidiaries  without  any  active  business  operations.   The subsidiaries  adopted a  plan  of  liquidation  in  October  2012.   The  assets  held by  these  subsidiaries  were  comprised solely  of  cash  and cash  equivalents.   On  June  23,  2017,  four  of  the  subsidiaries  were merged  with and  into  the  last remaining subsidiary,  WaMu  1031  Exchange.   Prior  to  such  mergers,  such  subsidiaries  distributed  their  remaining cash  to the  Trust.   The  Trust  received $444,333  on  June  27,  2017.    The  last  subsidiary,  which no  longer  has  any assets,  is  expected  to  be dissolved  by  December  31,  2017.

Lists of WMI Subs:
Screen:
----------
Zitat Lunchdrunk:
Dormant - no activity for a long period of time other than posting interest. So 5 subs receiving interest for 5 years from cash equivalents.

Cash equivalents - Treasury Bills, Commercial Paper, Marketable Securities, Money Market Funds or Short-Term Government Bonds.

"Remaining cash" went to Trust on Friday and settled/received by Trust on Tuesday.

WAMU 1031 no longer has any assets. Where did the cash equivalents go or were they fully liquidated for 440k? Was the "remaining" cash left over after a 1031 exchange through WAMU 1031Exchange? Have assets "non-remaining cash" and cash equivalents been used to purchase new like assets that will be taken possession of by year end? OR was WAMU 1031kept going for the liquidating trust to use to swap out short term investments and the merger/cash is somehow related to the 16M increase on page 1? I agree though that this signifies things are beginning to wrap up.
Zitatende
--------------------------------------------------
MfG:L:)

https://www.boardpost.net/forum/...hp?topic=11498.msg189624#msg189624
Zitat govinsider:
Pg 27-28 early 1031 discussions:
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229081223000000000028.pdf
1031 Exchange
A 1031 exchange allows an investor to dispose of investment property and acquire "like kind" replacement property. Provided that all of the rules are followed, the investor can defer paying capital gains tax that would otherwise have been due on the sale. First American Exchange Company is the nation's top qualified intermediary whose exclusive business is handling 1031 exchanges. First American Exchange offers solid financial strength, experience and nationwide service, and handles exchanges in all 50 states.
Deferred / Simultaneous
A simultaneous or deferred 1031 exchange allows an investor to dispose of investment property and acquire "like kind" replacement property either simultaneously or within 180 days of the closing of the sale.
Reverse Exchange
A reverse exchange allows an investor to close on the replacement property acquisition before the property to be disposed of closes. This is accomplished primarily by having the intermediary or an entity related to the intermediary temporarily take title to the replacement property.
Build to Suit or Improvement
A build to suit or improvement exchange allows an investor to add improvements to the replacement property prior to taking title to it in an exchange. This is accomplished by having the intermediary or an entity related to the intermediary temporarily take title to the replacement property.
Real Estate
An investor can exchange real estate for real estate in a 1031 exchange, provided that the property disposed of and property acquired are held for investment purposes or for use in the investor's business.
Personal Property
An investor can exchange personal property, such as equipment, automobiles, airplanes, art work and copyrights, for other like kind personal property in a 1031 exchange, provided that the property disposed of and property acquired are held for investment purposes or for use in the investor's business.
http://www.firstam.com/title/homebuilder/socal/.../1031-exchange.html
-----------------------------
Zitat Nightdaytrader9:
7.  Assets of WMI’s Non-Debtor Subsidiaries, Other than WMMRC

Pursuant to applicable law, and as stated by the Bankruptcy Court at the March 21, 2011 hearing, the Bankruptcy Court’s jurisdiction is limited to assets of the Debtors and not to those of any non-Debtor subsidiary.  However, because the value of the Debtors’ interests in such non-Debtor subsidiaries and non-Debtor assets, including WMMRC, ultimately accretes to the benefit of the Debtors’ chapter 11 estate, the Debtors have reflected such value in their liquidation and recovery analyses.  To provide parties in interest with additional information, set forth below is information related to WMI’s direct and indirect subsidiaries as of the Petition Date, including WMMRC, as well as historical information regarding any transfers of assets by WMI’s non-Debtor subsidiaries from and after the Petition Date.  Pursuant to Section 1.140 of the Seventh Amended Plan, WMI’s Equity Interest in all of its subsidiaries, except for WMI Investment, WMMRC and WMB, will be transferred to the Liquidating Trust.  For the avoidance of doubt, and as set forth in more detail below, with the exception of a few de minimis residential real estate properties held by Ahmanson Obligation (defined below) as a result of mortgage foreclosures, neither the Debtors nor their non-Debtor subsidiaries hold any real estate.

The general background and status of the Non-Debtor Non-Banking Subsidiaries set forth below is delineated as follows:  (a) subsidiaries currently owned by WMI, (b) subsidiaries merged on or prior to December 30, 2008, (c) subsidiaries merged in April 2009, and (d) subsidiaries merged or liquidated on June 30, 2010.

a.  
Currently Owned WMI Non-Banking Subsidiaries, Other than WMMRC

WaMu 1031 Exchange. Prior to the Petition Date, WaMu 1031 Exchange (“WaMu 1031”) facilitated Section 1031 exchanges for residential and commercial property owners.  Specifically, WaMu 1031 provided qualified intermediary services to assist real estate investors in deferring capital gains taxes with respect to real estate transactions involving investment properties.  WaMu 1031 Exchange was formed as a combination of three predecessor 1031 exchange companies and processed 15,000 exchanges annually, with each exchange averaging $300,000 to $400,000 in size.  WaMu 1031 ceased facilitating exchanges, however, in July 2009.  The company has been undergoing a wind-down process and currently has no employees, offices or assets other than cash.  Since the Petition Date, WaMu 1031 has paid $4 million to WMI, either as distributions or in satisfaction of obligations to WMI.  WaMu 1031’s balance sheet as of October 31, 2011 is shown below in Section IV.IV.8.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/933136/...jg02-2712_8ke22.htm
-----------------------------
8.  
WMI Non-Debtor Subsidiary Balance Sheets

Balance sheets as of October 31, 2011 for all the WMI subsidiaries, save WMI Investment and WMMRC, are below.  For financial information regarding WMMRC, refer to Article VII of this Disclosure Statement.  For WMI Investment’s balance sheet, refer to the Debtors’ MORs.

WaMu 1031 Exchange Balance Sheet
(Unaudited)

...............
........

Total Assets $1,421,987.48
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/933136/...jg02-2712_8ke22.htm
------------------------------
Per the Global Settlement Agreement, the Debtors currently estimate that their share of the total estimated Tax Refunds will be approximately $2.17 billion, after the distribution that may be payable to holders of WMB Senior Notes.

(iii)  
Transfer of Assets to JPMC

Pursuant to the Global Settlement Agreement, WMI, WMI Investment, Ahmanson Obligation Company, H.S. Loan Corporation, WAMU 1031 Exchange, WMMRC, WM Citation Holdings, LLC, WMI Rainier LLC and Washington Mutual Capital Trust 2001 (collectively, the “WMI Entities”), the FDIC Receiver and the Receivership, will sell, transfer, and assign (or cause to be sold, transferred or assigned) to the JPMC Entities, and the JPMC Entities will acquire, pursuant to the Seventh Amended Plan and sections 363 and 365 of the Bankruptcy Code, free and clear of all liens, Claims and encumbrances, or otherwise waive and relinquish any and all right, title and interest any of the WMI Entities, the FDIC Receiver and the Receivership may have in the following assets, each of which is described in detail herein:  (i) the Trust Preferred Securities, (ii) the Washington Mutual, Inc. Flexible Benefits Plan (the “Medical Plan”) and any checks made out to or received by WMI or otherwise for the benefit of the Medical Plan including pharmacy rebates in connection with contracts associated with the Medical Plan which includes uncashed checks in an amount equal to the pharmacy rebates received by the WMI Entities from and after the Petition Date currently estimated to be approximately $776,000, (iii) those certain JPMC Rabbi Trusts, set forth in the Global Settlement Agreement and the Seventh Amended Plan, and certain JPMC Policies (i.e., BOLI/COLI policies and the proceeds thereof), as identified in the Global Settlement Agreement and as defined in the Seventh Amended Plan, (iv) the two defined benefit plans sponsored by WMI, the WaMu Pension Plan (the “WaMu Pension Plan”) and the Retirement Income Plan for the Salaried Employees of Lakeview Savings Bank (the “Lakeview Pension Plan” and, together, the “Pension Plans”) and all of WMI’s interest in the assets contained in any Pension Plan-related trusts or assets that are otherwise associated with such plans (subject to the correction and satisfaction of certain potential defects and remediation obligations, as set forth in the Global Settlement Agreement), (v) the proceeds of litigation commenced by Anchor Savings Bank FSB, described herein, (vi) the Visa Shares and the VISA Strategic Agreement (as defined in the Global Settlement Agreement), (vii) certain intellectual property identified in the Global Settlement Agreement and as described below, (viii) WMI Investment’s indirect membership interest in a portfolio holding company, JPMC Wind Investment Portfolio LLC, which owns an Equity Interest in certain wind investment projects, discussed below, (ix) certain bonds issued by certain insurance or bonding companies on behalf of WMB and FSB, pursuant to that certain general agreement of indemnity, dated as of June 14, 1999, executed and delivered by WMI, and (x) certain Tax Refunds (as discussed herein and as set forth in Section 2.4 of the Global Settlement Agreement), in each case, free and clear of all liens, Claims, interests and encumbrances, except for any Claim that is an Allowed JPMC Assumed Liability.
------------------------------
""""Total Assets $1,421,987.48""""""

DAT BE A HO LOT MO DAN 100 mill $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ aint it???????????????????????
-----------------------------
WAMU 1031 EXCHANGE - Trademark Details

Status: 710 - Cancelled - Section 8
Image for trademark with serial number 78953666
Serial Number78953666
Registration Number3566059
Word MarkWAMU 1031 EXCHANGE
Status710 - Cancelled - Section 8
Status Date2015-08-21
Filing Date2006-08-16
Registration Number3566059
Registration Date2009-01-20
Mark Drawing4000 - Standard character mark Typeset
Published for Opposition Date2007-03-20
Attorney NameJessica L. Rothstein
Law Office Assigned Location CodeM80
Employee NameMEYERS, MORGAN LAURA
Statements
Disclaimer with Predetermined Text"1031"
Goods and ServicesEducational services, namely, providing classes, seminars, conferences and workshops in the field of tax planning, financial planning and financial investment; educational services, namely, providing classes, seminars, conferences and workshops in the field of real property investment and asset investment; educational services, namely, providing classes, seminars, conferences and workshops in the field of IRS § 1031 tax deferred property exchange transactions
Classification Information
International Class041 - Education; providing of training; entertainment; sporting and cultural activities. - Education; providing of training; entertainment; sporting and cultural activities.
US Class Codes100, 101, 107
Class Status Code2 - Sec. 8 - Entire Registration
Class Status Date2015-08-21
Primary Code041
First Use Anywhere Date2007-02-16
First Use In Commerce Date2007-02-16
Correspondences
NameJessica L. Rothstein
AddressPlease log in with your Justia account to see this address.
Prior Registrations
Relationship Type   Reel Number
Prior Registration   2315782
Prior Registration   2483253
Prior Registration   2498860
Trademark Events
Event Date   Event Description
2006-08-23   NEW APPLICATION ENTERED IN TRAM
2006-08-24   NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED
2007-01-04   ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER
2007-01-04   NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN
2007-01-04   NON-FINAL ACTION E-MAILED
2007-01-04   APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER
2007-02-07   ASSIGNED TO LIE
2007-02-07   LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED
2007-02-28   NOTICE OF PUBLICATION
2007-03-20   PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION
2007-06-12   NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT
2007-12-10   TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED
2007-12-26   TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED
2007-12-26   APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED
2007-12-10   EXTENSION 1 FILED
2008-01-04   EXTENSION 1 GRANTED
2008-06-11   TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED
2008-06-11   EXTENSION 2 FILED
2008-06-11   EXTENSION 2 GRANTED
2008-09-26   TEAS STATEMENT OF USE RECEIVED
2008-09-26   TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED
2008-09-26   TEAS VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT RECEIVED
2008-09-29   CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL
2008-09-26   AMENDMENT AFTER NOA NOT ENTERED
2008-09-26   EXTENSION 3 FILED
2008-09-29   EXTENSION 3 GRANTED
2008-09-26   USE AMENDMENT FILED
2008-09-29   STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE
2008-10-17   ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER
2008-11-24   ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER
2008-11-26   SU - NON-FINAL ACTION - WRITTEN
2008-11-26   NON-FINAL ACTION E-MAILED
2008-11-26   NOTIFICATION OF NON-FINAL ACTION E-MAILED
2008-12-11   SU-EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT WRITTEN
2008-12-11   EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED
2008-12-11   NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED
2008-12-12   EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED
2008-12-16   SU-EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT WRITTEN
2008-12-16   EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED
2008-12-16   NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED
2008-12-16   EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED
2008-12-17   ALLOWED PRINCIPAL REGISTER - SOU ACCEPTED
2008-12-17   ASSIGNED TO LIE
2008-12-17   LAW OFFICE REGISTRATION REVIEW COMPLETED
2009-01-20   REGISTERED-PRINCIPAL REGISTER
2010-03-15   TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED
2010-03-15   APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED
2012-04-18   AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP
2012-05-09   AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP
2012-07-03   TEAS REVOKE/APPOINT ATTORNEY RECEIVED
2012-07-03   ATTORNEY REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED
2015-08-21   CANCELLED SEC. 8 (6-YR)
https://trademarks.justia.com/789/53/wamu-1031-78953666.html
------------------------------
Re Trademarks, it appears the WMILT sold those "for consideration" back in 2014.  So at least they get that $$ out of the deal.

det
https://www.boardpost.net/forum/...hp?topic=11498.msg189641#msg189641
------------------------------
Zitat det_sherlock:
Quote from: Scott Fox on July 29, 2017, 11:33:07 AM
"Personal Property
An investor can exchange personal property, such as equipment, automobiles, airplanes, art work and copyrights, for other like kind personal property in a 1031 exchange, provided that the property disposed of and property acquired are held for investment purposes or for use in the investor's business."   As they use to say on Laugh in, "very interesting" Gov and it's not stupid. Could be the wrong link you gave though.

newflow logic posted some trademark transfers.  This one, in 2014, was WMILT selling the trademarks for Timcor [1031 exchange-related?] for "just and fair compensation."  "Assignment of the entire interest and the goodwill."

I thought Jay Senese's posts re websites showed that Timcor was related to our 1031 exchange [another name for?], and was somehow family owned and had retaken control, or reupped to continue business.

det
http://assignments.uspto.gov/assignments/assignment-tm-5350-0642.pdf
Zitatende
--------------------------------------------------

MfG.L:)

https://fintel.io/i/bank-of-new-york-mellon

Bank of New York Mellon increases their WMIH share holdings

Zitat Nightdaytrader9
In a recent SEC filing, the Bank of New York Mellon increased their WMIH share holdings from 686K to 763K.  It may not be a huge amount but at this point, I'll take any positive news.
Zitatende
**************************************************

Bank of New York Mellon Corp
Current Holdings (from 13F, 13D)

2017‑03‑31   13F-HR   WMIH / WMIH Corp.   *   1.45   686,284    763,197   11.21   1,064   1,106   3.95

--------------------------------------------------
MfG.L:)

https://www.boardpost.net/forum/...hp?topic=11224.msg181371#msg181371

Zitat Nightdaytrader9:
File Date   Form   Investor      Put/Call   Prev Shares   Current Shares  
(Percent)
2017-02-14   13F-HR   Numina Capital Management, LLC   *      8,093,885   7,761,038   -4.11   18,940   12,030   -36.48
2017-02-14   13F-HR   VANGUARD GROUP INC   *      7,153,311   7,743,395   8.25   16,738   12,002   -28.29
2017-02-14   13F-HR   APPALOOSA LP   *      7,800,000   7,600,000   -2.56   18,252   11,780   -35.46
2017-02-10   13F-HR   BlackRock Fund Advisors   *      5,598,766   6,756,904   20.69   13,101   10,473   -20.06
2017-02-14   SC 13G/A   Greywolf Capital Management LP   *      3,161,664   5,622,385   77.83        
2017-02-09   13F-HR   STATE STREET CORP   *      2,964,243   3,163,757   6.73   6,934   4,903   -29.29
2017-02-14   13F-HR   LAKEWOOD CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LP   *      2,769,100   2,769,100   0.00   6,480   4,292   -33.77
2017-02-14   13F-HR   Centerbridge Partners, L.P.   *      2,603,867   2,603,867   0.00   6,093   4,036   -33.76
2017-02-13   13F-HR   NORTHERN TRUST CORP   *      2,150,476   2,258,307   5.01   5,032   3,501   -30.43
2017-02-10   13F-HR   BlackRock Institutional Trust Company, N.A.   *      1,952,138   2,011,220   3.03   4,568   3,117   -31.76
2017-02-14   13F-HR   SCOGGIN LLC   *      1,941,365   1,941,365   0.00   4,543   3,009   -33.77
2017-02-14   13F-HR   GEODE CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LLC   *      1,434,589   1,655,256   15.38   3,356   2,565   -23.57
2017-02-14   13F-HR   Trishield Capital Management LLC   *      1,500,000   1,500,000   0.00   3,510   2,325   -33.76
2017-02-13   13F-HR   AKRE CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC   *      1,500,000   1,460,000   -2.67   3,510   2,263   -35.53
2017-02-14   13F-HR   CREDIT SUISSE AG/   *      1,162,908   1,173,621   0.92   2,721   1,820   -33.11
2017-02-14   13F-HR   Pacific Grove Capital LP   *         1,109,619         1,720  
2017-02-14   13F-HR   AKANTHOS CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC   *      1,282,105   1,000,000   -22.00   3,000   1,400   -53.33
2017-02-13   13F-HR   SCHWAB CHARLES INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT INC   *      640,550   843,380   31.66   1,499   1,308   -12.74
2017-02-10   13F-HR   BlackRock Investment Management, LLC   *      793,533   796,475   0.37   1,857   1,235   -33.49
2017-05-03   13F-HR   Bank of New York Mellon Corp   *      686,284   763,197   11.21   1,064   1,106   3.95
2017-02-22   13F-HR/A   MORGAN STANLEY   *      54,214   595,202   997.88   126   922   631.75
2017-02-14   13F-HR   LEVIN CAPITAL STRATEGIES, L.P.   *      388,826   594,063   52.78   910   921   1.21

https://fintel.io/so/us/wmih
----------------------------------
Zitat Mr_Simpson:
As of 12/31/2016 this was the Top 25 Shareholders list (10.95 kB - downloaded 46 times.)

https://www.boardpost.net/forum/...dlattach;topic=11224.0;attach=3221
------------------------------
Zitat  Nightdaytrader9:
Bank of New York Mellon buys a little more WMIH....  now over 800,000 shares.....

2017-08-03   13F-HR   Bank of New York Mellon Corp   *      763,197   801,345   5.00   1,106   1,001   -9.49
https://fintel.io/so/us/wmih

--------------------------------------------------

MfG.L:)

https://www.boardpost.net/forum/index.php?topic=6715.msg87572#msg87572
on: December 29, 2014, 08:36:08 AM
So, Are The NOL's Still The Goal & Reward

ZItat azcowboy:
Regarding our New Company moving forward, and after watching and waiting for all of this time since transition as we all have, I am having a difficult time believing that the NOL's are still the future target value that everyone is striving for ... and their potential utilization via a merger or acquisition ...

I may have bought into some of that theory within a reasonable short time period after transition when the company had minimal cash to work with and an AAOC provided' minimal lending facility ...

However, now ... I believe things are quite different

One week from today we will have two very large publically traded companies write some large checks equalling $600,000,000.00 ... ( 600 million dollars ) to invest into our little shell of a company ... Some believe this is all happening due to our NOL possibilities ? ... That seems like a bit of a stretch to me and if that is all we are worth going forward, that is probably an initially very high risk gamble on their part ...

On what planet is it frugal, for a large corporation like KKR or Citi, to invest 600 million dollars into a BK exiting shell of a company which only has a possibility of the utilization of a 35% tax benefit ratio of 8.37 billion dollars, forward for 17 years future from their BK exit ~ 2012 - 2032 ? ... That's a whole lot of money to throw down, with an awful lot of very long term risk for not a lot of future return ... 600 million now ? for a 2 billion dollar benefit maybe 17 years future ? ...

Somewhat of a large bet' from these guys, on the future of this little newco' ...  when we don't even have a product or a service direction yet' ...  nor do we know that if we acquire one ... will it be an income producer which can use this Net Operating Loss Tax Benefit ... and as some keep saying, the Tax Benefit future tense is all that makes us interesting ...

I mean, if there is a company out there that can produce those types of positive future revenues, what the heck do they need us for ... a tax benefit ? ... paleez' ... with 600 million dollars to invest' ... KKR & Citi could buy something and simply move it to Ireland' ... Nope' WMIH is special somehow' ...

Well, my two cents is, that if this entire group of extremely smart people, which are working for the benefit of this new company going forward, can only see the utilization of a 2 billion dollar maximized tax benefit over a 17 year future and are willing to invest 600 million dollars on Monday to get that, ... I'm starting to think that maybe I ain't the only "dumb ass" hangin' around here on this security ...

All of the people here, know of my existing belief in the companies own disclosed capital loss benefits and I also believe that WMI the debtor has not released all of its claims ... and then there is good old 510(b) coming up on deck quite soon ... as we will begin to fiddle with the FDIC-R ...

Nope, this ol' ... "dumb ass biker" ... figures KKR, Citi, AAOC ... and all of the very smart people involved have something very special planned for this little shell of a nothing company going forward ...

I say we (the involved shareholders) are in for the ride of our lives with this new company and its currently tradable stock' ~ everyone put on your leathers and strap down your helmet' ... we are gonna' boogie' ...

AZ 8) 8)

--------------------------------------------------
MfG.L:)

https://www.boardpost.net/forum/...hp?topic=11412.msg186723#msg186723

ZItat azcowboy:
Pay Attention People', This Is From Globic ~
« on: July 06, 2017, 06:19:48 PM »

This Is Important, ... 07/05/2017'
http://www.globic.com/wamurmbssettlement/pdfs/...Holders_7.5.2017.pdf
This IS WMI II' ... ALL' of the Trusts are Listed' ... The Total Listing of Trusts is in excess of some 1800' Trusts' ...  

... This is the Settlement for the whole enchilada' ... WMI II'
-----------------------------
"Holders are reminded that settlement proceeds will be derived from distributions to be made with respect to the Trustee’s claims by the FDIC, as receiver of Washington Mutual Bank. The precise amounts and timing of such distributions have not been announced by the FDIC, as receiver. The Trustee will issue further informational notices to holders of WaMu Securities concerning the amounts and timing of settlement distributions."

... This IS NOT Referring to' nor does it have anything to do with the FDIC-C's allowed DB' general unsecured claim against the FDIC-R' ... "as listed on the FDIC site as, yet to be determined"

The WaMu Securities: ... are,

The WMB Bonds = Class 17'

The WMI Preferreds = Class 19'

The Owners of WMI' re: WMI Investment Corp = Class 22'

AZ
--------------------------------------------------
MfG.L:)

http://volumebot.com/?s=wmih

Date            Short Volume   Total Volume   Short Percent

08-07-2017   43,187             172,052             25.1%
08-04-2017   21,305             80,306             26.53%
08-03-2017   25,184             129,818             19.4%
08-02-2017   44,372             134,234             33.06%
08-01-2017   51,583             129,842             39.73%
07-31-2017   6,015                 53,630             11.22%
07-28-2017   42,003             161,252             26.05%
07-27-2017   35,276             79,796             44.21%
07-26-2017   105,451             162,032             65.08%
07-25-2017   58,091             122,709             47.34%
07-24-2017   32,433             69,952             46.36%
07-21-2017   92,597             257,900             35.9%
07-20-2017   36,038             84,951             42.42%
07-19-2017   47,663             115,140             41.4%
07-18-2017   37,297             176,371             21.15%
07-17-2017   68,051             134,878             50.45%
07-14-2017   60,745             191,548             31.71%
07-13-2017   86,548             247,291             35%
07-12-2017   38,112             136,903             27.84%
07-11-2017   44,621             150,651             29.62%

MfG.L:)

http://www.kkr.com/global-perspectives/...17-kkr-co-lps-earnings-call

ZItat  jaysenese:
KKR's conference call was yesterday.   In answer to a question, KKR mentioned WMIH:
__________________________________________________
Quote
Question: Chris Kotowski - Oppenheimer

Just a follow-up on the balance sheet. Two things. One is that last quarter there were two investments listed there, an oilfield service investment and a natural gas midstream investment, both around $160 million. They're not there now. Is that just because they dropped out of the top 5? Or is it that you divested them? And then secondly, you made the investment in WMIH quite some time ago, now two years. It's my understanding that's just kind of a shell company. Is there a time limit on when and how you can deploy that money, that shell?

Answer:  William J. Janetschek - KKR & Co. L.P. - Member and CFO

Chris, this is Bill. With regard to the first question, those investments are still held by us and actually were up a little this quarter. But you are right, we are disclosing top 5, so because of PortAventura and USI which was brought up earlier, they dropped off the list. As it related to WMIH, that is its own public company and we don't really delve into the particulars around a particular portfolio company. So that's really not for us to answer.
__________________________________________________
... he dodged the question ...
Zitatende
-------------------------------
Zitat Bobwatch:
Since they have insiders on the BOD and maintain a substantial ownership and influence, it would be unwise for them to make any open comment that may influence the share price.  One can only imagine what the price would drop to if they said openly that they were pulling out or how it would jump if they said they were assisting with closing a merger deal.  They might have received unwanted attention from the SEC had they opened their mouths.  

For now to me it is good that the price is where it is when considering approaching another business for a deal. I am glad they didn't mention anything to the negative.. and that can be considered a positive thing.  IMO...
------------------------------
ZItat Nightdaytrader9
KKR has no problem buying companies, when the want to.... just look at last month or so..

**********************

(Reuters) - Envision Healthcare Corp (EVHC.N) said on Tuesday it would sell its ambulance business to buyout firm KKR & Co (KKR.N) in an ...
Envision Selling Ambulance Business to KKR for $2.4 Billion
TheStreet.com-12 hours ago

KKR to buy Covenant Surgical Partners
PE Hub (subscription) (blog)-13 hours ago
KKR is buying Covenant Surgical Partners Inc. Financial terms weren't announced. Sellers include DFW Capital Partners, Iroquois Capital ...
KKR buying local surgery center venture
Nashville Post (subscription)-7 hours ago
View all
Story image for kkr from New York Times

KKR to Buy WebMD and Take Majority Stake in Nature's Bounty
New York Times-Jul 24, 2017
Kohlberg Kravis Roberts said that Internet Brands, a K.K.R. portfolio company, had agreed to buy WebMD Health Corporation for about $2.8 ...

KKR strikes $6bn in US health-orientated deals
Financial Times-Jul 24, 2017
View all
Story image for kkr from CNBC

KKR to take PharMerica private in $1.4 billion deal
CNBC-Aug 2, 2017
Pharmerica agreed to be acquired by a newly formed company controlled by KKR for $1.4 billion, including debt. The U.S. pharmacy manager's ...
KKR to take PharMerica private in $1.4 bln deal
Reuters-Aug 2, 2017
View all
Story image for kkr from Forbes

KKR Strikes Deal To Buy Health Information Giant WebMD For $2.8 ...
Forbes-Jul 24, 2017
Private equity giant KKR is betting big on healthy living. In separate announcements on Monday morning, KKR said it will buy both internet ...
WebMD Goes Under the Knife of KKR's Turnaround Docs
Opinion-Bloomberg-Jul 24, 2017
--------------------------------------------------
Zitatende
MfG.L:)

https://www.boardpost.net/forum/...hp?topic=11500.msg190099#msg190099

Zitat kenwalker:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1545078/.../d282916dex991.htm

Note 9: Investment in Subsidiaries

Since the Effective Date, the Trust had five (5) dormant subsidiaries without any active business operations. The subsidiaries adopted a plan of liquidation in October 2012. The assets held by these subsidiaries were comprised solely of cash and cash equivalents. On June 23, 2017, four of the subsidiaries were merged with and into the last remaining subsidiary, WaMu 1031 Exchange. Prior to such mergers, such subsidiaries distributed their remaining cash to the Trust. The Trust received $444,333 on June 27, 2017.The last subsidiary, which no longer has any assets, is expected to be dissolved by December 31, 2017.

From the WMI Liquidating Trust

You have 45 calendar days to identify what you are going sell as your relinquished property, and you have an additional 135 calendar days — for a total of 180 calendar days — to complete the sale of your identify relinquished property and close out your Reverse 1031 Exchange

http://www.exeter1031.com/reverse_1031_exchange_overview.aspx

.............. I'll save you the math, 187 days June 27th till EOY. June 27th pus 45 days is 8/11/2017 but then again it looks like they had an extra week plugged in.

What will we know in 45 days?

http://www.exeter1031.com/...ules_like_kind_replacement_property.aspx

"The identification must be in writing, signed by you and delivered to a person involved in the exchange like the seller of the replacement property or the qualified intermediary. However, notice to your attorney, real estate agent, accountant or similar persons acting as your agent is not sufficient."

OK, so it's under a half million but it is cap gain or loss and it does have a countdown clock and it does involve the IRS ............... you don't lie to the IRS.

--------------------------------------------------
Zitatende

MfG.L:)