█ Der ESCROW - Thread █

Howard Hughes   Saturday, 03/20/21 01:07:51 PM
Re: AZCowboy post# 652226 0
Post #   of 652252
Nothing Of Substance


AZ - You predicted a payout by 12/31/20. It didn't happen. Now, the latest deadline has gone and there is a debate about whether or not the WMI-LT is over as of yesterday. BBANBOB repeatedly wrote how he had for the past several years always predicted that the payout would be on 3/19/21 and, if not, he was done. Yet, he still posts on the board today. This debacle is like "Groundhog Day."....................13 years and counting!

I don't care one bit about your exhaustive analysis and self-proclaimed "expertise" nor about your latest predictions. All of it adds up to much ado about nothing.

Here's what I know. I know that after 13 years and countless unfounded predictions, microanalysis, and exponential speculation, not a single penny has been distributed to the escrows.

COOP and the escrows are two different entities. Whether COOP shares hit $100.00 or drop to zero still doesn't result or correlate in the distribution for the escrows.

And, more speculation and giddiness doesn't put a dime in my pocket. I know what I own and, in the final analysis, despite your brilliance, it's not worth as much as a briefcase full of Monopoly money.

To be perfectly frank, I couldn't care less about COOP. I just want my escrows to be paid so I can take the money and run.  

die Escrows werden reichlich entschädigt...mach dir da um Himmels Willen keine Sorgen.

Lass dich nicht verunsichern bzw. verarschen von ein paar Leuten. Vorallem nicht von solchen Leuten, die selbst Escrows besitzen, denn diese sind richtig falsch!  

Was macht dich so Sicher?
Machen kann ich eh nix daher bin ich nich verunsichert aber wäre schön wenn ich mehr Infos hätte.

Um das NOLS zu übernehmen, MUSS WMIH zu den gleichen Bedingungen vor Chapter 11 zurückkehren, die Anzahl der Aktien von dann splittet 1/30.
Das bedeutet:  Wer ESCROWS hat, muss einen RESPLITT erhalten.
Sonst sind die NOLS NULL und NICHTS

 

Gegenfragen: Was macht dich so unsicher?  

Das aus meiner Sicht komplette unsehbarkeit, dateneinsicht und Beweise von irgendwelchen Save horbour, oder sonstige Gelder die zu uns fließen können.
Vieles basiert auf Indizien und Vorahnungen.

Reicht das?

Bei mir geht die Webseite des LTs nicht auf, habe es ein paar Mal probiert.

Ich weiß natürlich nicht, ob das ein technisches oder inhaltliches Problem ist..

http://www.wmitrust.com/  

hat sehr gute Arbeit gemacht :
1.  KKR
2. National Mortage
3. Mr. Cooper

Involvierte Hedge Fonds und wichtige Gesellschaften
und die Champignon Liga   der Hochfinanz ,halten
als Escrow Besitzer die Füße still,
weil nun die FDIC  und JP Morgan
liefern muss .

Ohne Haus nix raus.  

WMILT closed or not?

Gibt es denn irgendwelche bestätigten Dokumente aus denen hervor geht, dass der LT vorgestern wirklich aufgelöst wurde? Irgendwelche Court Filings?

Außer den Aussagen einiger ihub'ler finde ich bis dato nichts.

Danke

 

Soweit ich es auf IHUB nachvollziehen kann, gibt es bisher wohl noch keine offiziellen Dokumente für die Auflösung des LT. Es gibt aber wohl ein neues Datum (der 19.03.21 war es ja wohl doch nicht), an dem es endlich die Milliarden Dollar für uns gibt!!!

And the winner is        31.07.2021

Schönen Sonntag
Zion  

Hi,
habe gestern das Dokument unterzeichnet von Mary gelesen, leider kann ich es jetzt nicht öffnen (Link timmt aber)


ORDERED: That the term of the Trust is extended for three (3) years from March 19, 2018 to March 19, 2021

http://www.kccllc.net/wamu/document/0812229171220000000000002

MfG Gerusia

 

Es wird sicherlich in der naechsten Woche noch ein Schlussmitteilung geben wenn der Trust seine Arbeit beendet hat.

Des weiteren erwarte ich in der naechsten Woche dann die ersten Meldungen von Usern mit Konten bei US Brokern ueber ein Verschwinden der Escrow Marker. Bei den europaeischen Brokern dauert es erfahrungsgemaess immer laenger. Schlusslichter sind meistens die "Hobbybroker" Sparkassen und aehnliche.

Quatsch ohne Ruecksicht auf Fakten oder Logik konnten wir auch hier ja schon wieder bewundern. Insofern wundern mich auch neue US Phantasiedeadlines nicht.

Ich bin etwas auf den Text der Broker gespannt mit dem sie die Loeschung der Marker ihren Kunden bekanntgeben.  

Planet Paprika   Sunday, 03/21/21 09:34:16 AM
Re: Major_Bankz post# 652304 0
Post # of 652365
                    §
managing the winding-down of the Trust


"As stated in the press release, following the Final Distribution, no additional distributions of cash or equity will be made by the Trust to any parties,
other than a potential distribution to one or more charities of unused cash reserves retained for purposes of managing the winding-down of the Trust.

Following the Final Distribution, Charles Edward Smith and Doreen Logan, current members of the Trust’s management, will, in their capacities as liquidating trust administrators, initiate the winding-up and dissolution of the Trust, and the resignations of (a) William C. Kosturos, in his capacity as the Liquidating Trustee,
and (b) John Maciel, in his capacity as the Trust’s Chief Financial Officer,
will become effective upon completion of the Final Distribution.

As soon as practicable after making the Final Distribution, the Trust intends to file a Form 15 with the SEC reflecting the termination and/or suspension, as appropriate, of its disclosure obligations under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (as amended, the “Exchange Act”).

As discussed in the press release appended hereto, the Trust’s application to close the chapter 11 cases was granted by the Bankruptcy Court and the Trust is no longer required to file any quarterly or other informational reports with the Bankruptcy Court. As a result, going forward, the Trust will no longer file any “Quarterly Summary Reports” (or other information) with the Bankruptcy Court and the Trust will no longer file with, or furnish to, the SEC any such reports under Form 8-K.

While the Trust’s affairs are being wound-down, the Trust will continue to maintain its website which can be found at www.wmitrust.com.
not anymore.

Further, the Trust will continue to maintain the “Frequently Asked Questions” page on such website, including any updates thereto that may be deemed necessary or advisable by the Trust’s administrators.


https://sec.report/Document/0001193125-20-005481/
 

oh and just in case, for clarification ? ... NO, NO Ones DTC Issued ESC Cusips Are Going To Disappear, ... NOT Until The "Trustee(s) and the DTC, are Done using them ... Go COOP

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/...sg.aspx?message_id=162670615

 

A post from the past (Tuesday, 05/29/18 06:54:09 PM):

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/...sg.aspx?message_id=141152171



As I stated in a post several years ago, it is futile to predict dates, times or amounts of any recovery for shareholders. However, here is a probability that might come to fruition as time passes.

Firstly, I think AZCowboy is right about interest money returning from the safe harbor trusts. He is most likely wrong about where that money will go.

Secondly, the safe harbor trusts were not included in the bankruptcy. No doubt, the trusts are where the value of WMI was and that value was the subject discussed at length behind closed doors during negotiations prior to the approval of POR7 and redacted in many of the bankruptcy documents. Additionally, no shareholder of any ilk owned the capital invested in those trusts or received the interest from those trusts before the bankruptcy and they do not own or receive it now. Those shareholders only owned their stock and its value. If the court had included those trusts in the bankruptcy, the value of the trusts would have been assigned to the WMILT and liquidated, and all shareholders would have already shared proportionately. As it is, ownership of the exempt trusts follows the rule of bankruptcy law.

The post in the link above is how I describe the process of exempt assets. Basically, it works like this:

Whoever owns assets that are allowed by the court to be exempt in a bankruptcy still owns those assets when the bankruptcy is closed. In this case the parent company - WMIH. I expect any capital invested by the parent company – WMI - in the safe harbor trusts and any accumulated interest from those safe harbor trusts to be returned to the parent company - WMIH - and not to the owners of the RELEASED SHARES or to holders of escrow markers. Apparently, some accumulated interest has already been returned to the parent company - WMIH. A recent example of who is in charge of the value of the trusts is when WMIH used some of the returned interest to fund an action with one of the company’s subsidiaries – without asking permission from the owners of the RELEASED SHARES or permission from holders of escrow markers. The parent company – WMIH - will decide how to use any returned value or how to pay any value to those who own RELEASED SHARES, not to holders of escrow markers. If there is a requirement to restore ownership levels to pre POR7 levels, it might mean if the value of the trusts is returned to the parent company – WMIH -, it will increase the value of the parent company and by default increase the value of the RELEASED SHARES, requiring a forward split to bring the PPS down to a tradable level. Because all pre POR7 shares were converted to common, Ps and Ks will probably not be restored. For example, if $xxB is returned, increasing the value of WMIH, a calculation based on that value would be passed on to those who own RELEASED SHARES by doing an appropriate forward split of the original RELEASED SHARES. Ps and Ks had their shares converted to many times more commons than QUs and would be lumped in with common RELEASED SHARES for a forward split.

Notice I emphasize RELEASED SHARES. It is irrelevant who owns them, and it is irrelevant what your escrow marker number is. The only thing relevant is what affects the RELEASED SHARES and by default, the owning shareholder. Basically, John Doe shareholder has only those rights which affect a RELEASED SHARE he owns. If someone later buys that RELEASED SHARE John Doe shareholder has no further rights in the RELEASED SHARE he sold. The danger here is if John Doe shareholder has 2K RELEASED SHARES and sells them, he may have lost his right to participate in anything forthcoming to RELEASED SHARES. The right to participate will belong to whomever bought the RELEASED SHARE. It may be the reason behind the buyback. The RELEASED SHARES are more valuable than new shares because of their potential to receive good things when the safe harbor assets and interest income are returned to the parent company, such as a forward split. It is unlikely the escrow markers will be used for future calculations on returned monies. I think it is the RELEASED SHARE itself that holds the value. What if this is true and the parent company holds the majority of RELEASED SHARES when any income values from the trusts are released? Who owns the most RELEASED SHARES now? Who is collecting more RELEASED SHARES every day? Think about it.

This is only another hypothesis or theory. I offer no links of proof, but the clues and rules of bankruptcy are there if you look for them.

I hope I am wrong and all who subscribe to the theory of direct payment based on the escrow markers are correct. My escrow number is 500k and my cost is around $0.07 per share. I bought in because an equity committee was formed, because Willingham bought 1M shares, and because the value of the parent company was touted as an amount around $370B. That money has to be somewhere. Lastly, I counted on a good ROI from my RELEASED SHARES or from my escrow markers. Holding only original RELEASED SHARES, I am ahead right now by a little over $18K. I think the PPS will get a lot better.

Good fortune to all.  

Ich sehe keinen Unterschied zwischen dem, der die Coop-Aktien bekommen hat und dem, der die Escrows bekommen hat.

Der eine oder andere erhält in jedem Fall die Belohnung des FORWARD-Splitts 1/30-angerechnet

Andernfalls kann WMIH die NOLS, sie nicht monetarisieren,(Fiscus).

Es macht keinen Unterschied, ob Sie über die erhaltene Anzahl von Coop-Aktien damals nach Por 7 oder über die Anzahl von ESCROWS abrechnen.
1/30für die  zugeteilten Aktien oder Abrechnung nach REALE- Escrowszahlen ,
Ich sehe keinen Unterschied zwischen dem, der die Coop-Aktien bekommen hat und dem, der die Escrows bekommen hat.
der eine oder andere erhält in jedem Fall die Belohnung des FORWARD-Splitts 1/30-angerechnet
Andernfalls kann das NOLS, WMIH sie nicht monetarisieren,(Fiscus).
Es macht keinen Unterschied, ob Sie über die erhaltene Anzahl von Coop-Aktien oder über die Anzahl von ESCROWS abrechnen.
Ob so oder so, es gibt keinen Unterschied.
Die Basis der Konten ist immer die gleiche, ESCROWS = Anzahl der Aktien.
ESCROWSZAHLEN = AKTIEN.30/1
SHARES= Anzahl der ESCROWS 1/30  

Ist egal ob... Escrows oder Coop !
Es wird alles Gut ... alle bekommen ihr Belohnung.  

Hast du eine offizielle Quelle für einen 1/30 FS?  

Aber um die NOLS zu gebrauchen, steht im US FISCUS geschrieben, (habe ich gelesen) MÜSSEN die Zustände der Reorganisierten Unternehmer so wieder ergestellt sein wie VOR chapter 11
Reorganisationsverfahren für US-Unternehmen.
 

...die NOL's gar nicht genutzt werden?

Dann bekommt keiner was.  

Natürlich, wenn WMIH der Meinung ist, dass die Zahlungen, um von den Nols zu profitieren, exorbitant sind, denke ich, dass sie die Idee der Nols aufgeben würden.( Ich glaube, sie wollen die Nols bekommen)
WMIH steht es frei, den Weg zu den Nols anzunehmen oder aufzugeben. (Die Zeit ist glaube ich bis 2041 gültig, danach verfallen Anyway)
Dies ist eine Einschätzung, die sie BESTIMMT bereits in Bezug auf ihre Projekte vorgenommen haben.

Nur meine Meinung!  

Wenn man bedenkt, dass sich die meisten Aktien vor Kap. 11 in den Händen von Institutionen befanden, wäre der 1/30 RESPLITT nicht so teuer.
Das bedeutet, dass auch sie viele Anteile erhalten würden und nicht nur die Kleinanleger.  

Soweit ich weiss, sind die NOLs ca 5Bln USD Wert.
Warum sollten sich die derzeitigen Eigentümer (soweit ich weiss, 90% Instis) die Butter vom Brot nehmen lassen und sich über die alte Kap-Struktur die alten Eigentümer reinholen. Das macht ja gar keinen Sinn. Da lass ich doch lieber die NOLs verfallen als mir die Ehemaligen reinzuholen.
Auf die 5Bln USD können die Instis verzichten. DAs ist für die Peanuts...denen geht es um Macht und Einfluss.
imo  

Du schreibst immer über den Splitt 1/30.  Wie verhält es sich dann noch mit den Split 1/12. sollte der auch einbezogen werden?  

Planet Paprika   Monday, 03/22/21 09:41:49 AM
Re: AZCowboy post# 652507 0
Post # of 652557
          
AZCowboy
§
thank you for your opinion.
Another question I have, please, .......you wrote :

"That these "misunderstood" ratios that were presented
were limited to receiving an LTI ..."

REORG as the disbursing agent for LTIs, not the Litigation Trust.
Do I understand correctly that the Reorg company was and is the disbursing agent for LTIs.
Not the WMILT, as it is only for certain other claims.

Page 72-73/905

www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229120224000000000001.pdf

So if the reorganized company is the disbursing agent for LTIs or $$, and moreover the share structure to be adjusted to earlier includes the releaser, wouldn't that be THE argument for a S4V in terms of a forward split ?

equity is a holder of liquidation shares under the court order.
"STOCKHOLDERS WERE REQUIRED TO IDENTIFY THEMSELVES TO THE TRUSTEE BY FILING TAX FORMS AND AMOUNTS OF EQUITY SECURITIES"

PAGE 75/905
www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229120224000000000001.pdf

COOP aka WMI receives the assets and distributes the LTI`s/cash for the former equity holders in the role of disbursing agent as long as they can, but they can't keep using it like this forever ?

And THEN COOP WILL BE the tell ?
And all COOP-investees, new and old, benefit ?
.Yes, ONLY to the part that WMI = COOP gets, 3-5% ? That will be enough, for a company that will then be more debt free and provided with NOLs, fill their portfolio with our values and then continue to rise in price for all new stockholders.
No, ONLY the designated holders and shareholders of escrow cusips will see recoveries.

Correct ?