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

Entonces Rosen estará pensativo...ante estos 3 dias

Lo digo por ti que es quien se ha lucrado aqui arruinando a otros.

El miedo (no el pánico y la parálisis) es absolutamente necesario. Es algo natural que nos mantiene con vida y proviene del instinto de supervivencia.

Es una herramienta indispensable que mide las amenazas. Si observas a una persona sin ningún tipo de miedo, posiblemente estás ante un idiota.

Alex Ferguson, el entrenador del Manchester United dijo: "The fear is necessary, it makes you a better competitor" (el miedo es necesario, te hace un mejor competidor).

En la especulación tampoco hay que descartarlo (al miedo), mejor administrarlo.

El miedo al estar posicionado en estas acciones como consideran algunos va en proporcion a la cantidad invertida y el riesgo es inherente a la ganancia que se obtiene. Los pumpers de este foro ya no predicen full values ni otras zarandajas bopfanianas. Ahora es o mucha perdida o poca ganancia. Incluso con un POR rechazado no deben esperarse fuertes subidas sin embargo la confirmacion destruiria la inversion sea grande o pequeña.

ya sabemos que pasa si antes de un hearing "del gran día" estamos con ligeras caidas o plano, ... quien lo adivina?

Mrsimpson si es cierta la posición tan grande que decías que llevabas de p's unas 4000 y pico quiero recordar, no te va a dar tiempo a deshacer posiciones, con estos volumenes, en un sólo día.. piénsalo... ñam ñam o el come cocos tragabolas va a por ti.

Saludos

Las va a tener que vender a precio de subasta. Le esta bien empleado por enredar al personal. Y eso que se esta jugando la cartilla de los ahorros. Si es verdad que invierte el 100% de todo su dinero como alardeaba le deben estar temblando hasta los tobillos cuanto mas se acerca la hora clave. Mejor ponerle al lado un asistente de cardio para controlar sus espasmos.Jajaja. No me gustaria estar en su pellejo.
O sea que sus numeros eran 4.000 x 1.000 full value = 4 millones. Claro si pagan el 1% ofertado por Rosen seran 40.000 $, Aun le quedará para Telepizzas eso suponiendo que no eliminen las acciones y no paguen nada, entonces a hacer de picapedrero en el fuera horas. Jajaja

Pues ya vemos lo que pasa al esperar al ultimo dia el que quiere vender ha de hacerlo a la baja con perdidas del 10%, animo Simpson que aun te quedara para telepizzas Jajaja

Wow, Wow and MOR Wow's from Law 360! 11-Jul-11 09:29 am Thanks goes to Ilovestocks on IHUB answering Large Green's post with dynomite from Law 360!!!

ILoveStocks Share Monday, July 11, 2011 9:17:00 AM
Re: Large Green post# 318126 Post # of 318186

LG, your right how can JMW begin hearing before ruling on Jurisdictional issues - it would be a complete waste of estate dollars to even start the hearing and all parties know this. It should be a great week for all of us.
ILS

WaMu Securities Holders Jeopardize Ch. 11 Plan
By Samuel Howard

Law360, New York (July 8, 2011) -- A group of Washington Mutual Inc. securities holders said Thursday that recent higher court rulings barred the Delaware bankruptcy court from approving a multibillion settlement with JPMorgan Chase & Co. and regulators that underpins WaMu’s Chapter 11 plan.

The consortium of trust preferred security holders contend that decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court and the D.C. Circuit prohibit U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Mary Walrath from approving the plan and its underlying global settlement relating to the ownership of $4 billion in trust preferred securities.

The high court’s June 23 decision in Stern v. Marshall, which snuffed Anna Nicole Smith’s estate’s fight for oilman J. Howard Marshall II’s fortune, makes clear that Article III courts, not the bankruptcy court, has jurisdiction over the sweeping settlement, according to the objection.

“The relief sought by the debtors through the plan and the settlement (asking this court to resolve and/or adjudicate on a final basis issues reserved to Article III courts) exceeds the permissible bounds of the adjudicatory power of this court, as clarified by Stern,” the consortium said. “The fact that Stern was issued only days ago is of no moment. It is the law of the land, and it must be followed by this court.”

While the court has expressed confidence in the settlement, which ends litigation and ultimately sends the disputed deposits to JPMorgan, it would be overstepping its constitutional authority in approving a plan memorializing the truce, the consortium said.

Even if Judge Walrath found that Stern did not limit the court’s power to rule on the settlement, the creditors argued, the D.C. Circuit’s June 24 decision in American National Insurance Co. v. Federal Deposit Insurance Co. required her to reject WaMu’s modified sixth amended joint plan of reorganization.

Reversing the district court, the decision effectively gave the debtors ground to pursue valuable business tort claims against JPMorgan over its government-brokered acquisition of WaMu in September 2008, according to the objection.

The appeals court ruled that insurers were not barred by the Financial Institutions Reform Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 from suing JPMorgan for allegedly defrauding WaMu bondholders by engineering the bank’s downfall and buying it at a drastic discount.

“To the extent the court’s favorable view of the settlement agreement was based on the assumption that FIRREA would stand in the way of such direct litigation by the estates, the court must reconsider the debtors’ continuing attempt to compromise this potentially significant source of estate value,” the consortium said.

The debtors’ potential claims for negligence or willful misconduc could be a source of billions of dollars for the estate and could cast the global settlement between WaMu, JPMorgan and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. in unfavorable light, the objection said.