Kodak - Chapter 11: Quiebra

Pues nada...soy el propietario de 52500 rollos de papel higiénico...

Han hecho lo que han querido con la acción y habrán tradeado de forma salvaje forrándose los de siempre

Sigo sin comprender porque el volumen de cortos no aumenta...?

http://otcshortreport.com/index.php?index=EKDKQ&action=view#.UhvUpJKpW6N

Alguien tiene una explicacion

lo unico que puede ser que algo oculto hay no se con respecto a filialesopatentes o compra o sec

No se atreven a ponerse cortos. Las caidas son por ventas normales. En 4 djas la quitan me imagino que ya no se atrevrán.

malas noticias ricardo... he aqui una explicacion de un profesor de derecho y experto en quiebras de la universidad de Northwestern en donde explica que aunque las filiales de kodak no se encuentren en chapter 11 aun asi nos dejan sin nada...

http://blogs.democratandchronicle.com/business/?p=1658

Posted by Matt Daneman • August 26, 2013 • 5:06 pm

"in some of the objections, and in a letter filed with the court last week, one argument has come up repeatedly – if Kodak’s U.S. operations filed for bankruptcy in January 2012, and only Kodak’s U.S. operations, and if each share of stock is supposedly a small slice of the ownership in the company overall, how can Kodak’s emerging-from-bankruptcy plan involve cancelling out all that stock? Shouldn’t shareholders still own a piece of Kodak’s non-U.S. operations? It’s an interesting question. Though on the face of it, there are some logic problems. For one, Kodak’s bankruptcy and the solution of that has never been just about its U.S. operations. The $2.6 billion plus shortfall in Kodak’s UK pension fund, for example. If the bankruptcy was just about U.S. operations, then that huge debt would be the responsibility of Kodak’s international operations to take care of, right? So again, shareholders might be left holding nothing. More to the point, says Kenneth M. Ayotte, a Northwestern professor of law and bankruptcy expert, stock doesn’t exactly work that way: “The party that files for Chapter 11 is usually a legal entity of some kind. Often, it is a parent corporation (say, ABC, Inc.) that owns some subsidiaries (suppose ABC Canada and ABC Brazil are subsidiaries of ABC Inc.). The subsidiaries may also file for bankruptcy along with the parent, but they might not. The ownership interests in ABC Canada and ABC Brazil are assets in the bankruptcy estate of ABC, Inc.—not much different than any land, inventory, etc. that ABC, Inc. owns– whether or not these subs are in bankruptcy themselves. If, in a reorganization plan of ABC, Inc, the shareholders are wiped out, these shareholders lose their ownership interest in everything that ABC, Inc. owns—the land, etc. and also ABC, Inc’s ownership interests in its subsidiaries. This happens because the ABC, Inc. shareholders own a piece of the subs only indirectly, through their ownership of ABC, Inc.”

El SSVolume se está demostrando otra herramienta de manipulación, igual que el premarket. Además, igual que hay compradores intradia para aprovechar rebotes, hay cortos que se cierran el mismo día. No hace falta que haya cortos para que caiga, con que los largos vendan es suficiente.
..
Si las cancelan, como quedan con mi broker? Las seguiré teniendo en cartera con valor 0? Y la custodia? Alguien lo sabe?

si fuera asi las filiales tiene 1300 millones en efectivopatentes y inmuebles eso no esta en el balance y los ingresos tambien eso cambia el balance