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

la mejor noticia ha sido que el us trustee niegue el ds,lo que decia maximunae,sera otra instancia la que nos conceda el examinador

Considero importante el hecho de que las 2 partes esten sentados y hablen de modificar el DS, esto se ha comentado, si luego le dan 2 chavos a los accionistas será otra cosa, pero esto es mejor que ir a la guerra a lo cual la juez no juega.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idCNN1721268620100617?rpc=44

Las partes esperan "ver si la solución se puede llegar a modificar el plan y la declaración de divulgación", dijo Brian Rosen, abogado de Weil, Gotshal & Manges, que representa a la empresa

Rosen dijo que las conversaciones continuarían con los accionistas y la compañía presentaría una declaración informativa actualizada de la declaración y el plan de reorganización ante la corte el 30 de junio. El juez, María Walrath, indica los cambios realizados después de esa fecha podría retrasar la audiencia declaración de divulgación de nuevo

There's a lot of discussion about what happened in court today. I believe the following is factual based upon statements made in court:

1.) Is there a settlement? NO
2.) Are they negotiating with equity to include them in the POR? YES
3.) Will there be a settlement before 7/8? Maybe. Most likely NO.
4.) Does "good faith" negotiations refer to discovery? NO.

I suspect (3) will not happen because the EC will see the offer as too low. Justin Nelson stopped himself from giving something away in court that I'm sure other caught "..there's no way..." and then he abruptly ended his thought. This was in respoonse to Rosen talking about a potential adjustment to include the fruits of their negotiations and apply them to the POR. It was also in response to the TPS counsel complaining about brining another party to the (money) table. He was upset that such a major change would happen too fast.

There is absolutely no question about (4). It is about including equity in the POR. It wouldn't surprise me to see the media try and spin this.

Here are some non-factual opinions:

1.) Is this a stall tactic by Rosen? Probably
2.) Is this delay bad for equity? Absolutely not
3.) Is equity now "in the money"? Yes if the "good faith" part is true.

esta muy bien el texto,y seria exactisimo sino fuera por los antecedentes de prevaricacion que hemso parecedo que nos hace pensar lo peor.very refreshing como dirian los yankis horteras

Here is a direct quote of what Rosen said:

"We filed a second amended agenda last evening which referred to the debtor's request with respect to the adjournment of the disclosure statement hearing . As we indicated in the agenda, based on the good faith negotiations that are underway between the debtors and the equity committee, with respect to modifications of the Chapter 11 plan, we thought it was in everyones best interests to adjourn the disclosure statement hearing until July 8 so that these negotiations could continue and to see if a resolution could be reached that would result in a modification to the plan and a modification to the disclosure statement. As part of that the equity committee similarly agreed that it would adjourn its motion with respect to the appointment of an examiner and its corresponding discovery motions or applications that it had on file for 2004 requests of JP Morgan Chase, the FDIC, and with respect with discovery of the debtors."

This quote was not about discovery. It is about amending the POR. Now both Rosen and Nelson stated nothing was imminent but it is momentum in the right direction.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idCNN1721268620100617?rpc=44

Antes del 1 de Julio deberiamos estar IN THE MONEY.
Si no es así JPM va a pagar cara su osadía

http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229100617000000000004.pdf

Yo de verdad que lo siento por los que han abandonado el barco porque parece que por fin vamos a llegar a alguna parte, no se si a puerto pero cerca seguro.