Aurelius tiene algo que esconder...
counsel moves the admission pro hac vice of Philip Bentley of the firm Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP to
represent Aurelius Capital Management, LP in the above-captioned cases.
Ya veremos a ver si William48 tiene razón con sus hipótesis.
What might Susman be holding?
Many here (and on Y) seem to hope/believe/speculate that Susman’s aberrant behavior of late tends to suggest that he is quietly holding some sort of bombshell that will be detonated at a time of his choosing. While there’s certainly no possible way of determining whether or not this is in fact true, we’ve all been here long enough to know exactly what a ‘bombshell’ would constitute at this stage in the BK proceedings. Five separate requirements can be identified for something to be a ‘bombshell’ in this case:
1. First and foremost, the bombshell should be PORTABLE, and SPEAK FOR ITSELF, as opposed to being some subjective concept arrived at by virtue of, say, putting, an expert witness on the stand, and having him/her attempt to convince Walrath as to the accuracy of what they would be testifying to. In this regard, the bombshell would, ideally, be a simple DOCUMENT, such as Susman’s now famous ‘sealed doc’, which was carried by briefcase into Walrath’s chambers, where it ‘spoke’ entirely for itself, and was immediately deemed to be a show-stopper.
2. The bombshell should have come into the possession of SG from some unrelated 3rd party, as opposed to its having been created by SG, or the EC, or their retained professionals. This requirement confirms the credibility of the bombshell.
3. The bombshell should be something that is absolutely protected by the attorney work product rule, and thus not subject to discovery on the part of Rosen, so as to maintain its element of complete surprise.
4. The bombshell should be exactly what the term implies, a true bombshell; something that’s an instant game-changer, as opposed, to say, PJS unearthing a hidden asset valued at a mere $500M; a significant discovery perhaps, but certainly not a game-changer.
5. And lastly, the bombshell should have come into SG’s possession at sometime during this year, as opposed to 2010 (the thought being that if SG had it last year, it would have raised it with the Examiner, and/or proffered it at the confirmation hearing).
So what then could possibly satisfy all 5 of these criteria? Surprisingly, there are not many candidates. Think as I might, I’ve been able to identify only five which are (in their order of likelihood):
a. Susman has an executed understanding in principle with a large financial institution or syndicate to purchase WMI2 at a price in excess of $8B.
b. Susman has a copy of an executed understanding in principle between the SNHs and a large corporation or syndicate to purchase WMI2 at a price in excess of $8B.
c. Susman has an internal document of the SNHs which values WMI2, for purposes of a subsequent sale, in excess of $10B.
d. Susman has an internal document of WAMU, dated just days prior to the seizure, which valued its assets in excess of $100B, and that document had been prepared for purposes of WAMU obtaining access to the Fed’s discount window and/or TARP relief in light of the run on the bank that was then taking place.
e. Susman has a copy of the original 3.1(a) asset listing, given to him by either a disgruntled WAMU employee, or a disgruntled JPM employee.
I sincerely ‘hope he’s ‘holding’ … and holding something very, very strong.
