Washington Mutual - Grösste Sparkasse der USA! Chancen & Risiken. (Seite 21862)
eröffnet am 10.04.08 16:35:03 von
neuester Beitrag 24.04.24 15:00:31 von
neuester Beitrag 24.04.24 15:00:31 von
Beiträge: 343.748
ID: 1.140.302
ID: 1.140.302
Aufrufe heute: 27
Gesamt: 18.351.566
Gesamt: 18.351.566
Aktive User: 0
ISIN: US62482R1077 · WKN: A2N7G5 · Symbol: 07WA
77,62
EUR
+0,15 %
+0,12 EUR
Letzter Kurs 17.05.24 Tradegate
Neuigkeiten
24.04.24 · Business Wire (engl.)  |
23.04.24 · Business Wire (engl.) |
05.04.24 · Business Wire (engl.) |
09.02.24 · Business Wire (engl.) |
Werte aus der Branche Finanzdienstleistungen
| Wertpapier | Kurs | Perf. % |
|---|---|---|
| 0,5080 | +102,39 | |
| 2,2600 | +50,67 | |
| 11,950 | +49,37 | |
| 1,3400 | +41,05 | |
| 7,5000 | +28,21 |
| Wertpapier | Kurs | Perf. % |
|---|---|---|
| 1,1000 | -14,73 | |
| 26,00 | -16,13 | |
| 1,0000 | -16,67 | |
| 25,00 | -37,50 | |
| 10,500 | -39,38 |
Beitrag zu dieser Diskussion schreiben
Feedback
nun ja, wenns dann doch nichts wird mit dem kurs dann
sind hald die bösen amis u.s.w. schuld, wo man ja eh schon
dauernd sich darüber beschwert.
sind hald die bösen amis u.s.w. schuld, wo man ja eh schon
dauernd sich darüber beschwert.
Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 38.346.258 von peler am 09.11.09 11:23:14Sind gerade Ferien oder schwänzt du?
Posted by: survivor Spain Date: Monday, November 09, 2009 2:26:46 AM
In reply to: JohnnyWinter who wrote msg# 119169 Post # of 119203 [Send a link via email]
Johnny, I will tell you what I think.
1.- I think the BK process has a given timming for presenting claims. In BK valid claims cannot keep showing up at any time like mushrooms in a rainy season. As example, the "potential" claim behind last motion from FDIC in BK arrived more than 6 months late. Only this means it can be inmediatly rejected by the judge and eventually firmly contested by WMI and other creditors. But you consider it valid anyway. Besides this, the fact is that FDIC menace contradicts itself by default. I will not repeat in full my previous arguments and I will not repeat what other posters more skilled than you and me in legal matters have argued. But in a nutshell I will repeat: if THJMW decides that the 4B are WMI's money ( therefore not WMB's money), then by default not any of the P&A clauses are applicable.
2.- In at least one of your numerous posts you stated - as a fact - that there have not been enough discovery about the 4B turnover, and that it will therefore require a full trial because of this. That Logan's written declaration and her deposition are useless as proof. My friend, this is not a fact, this is your opinion - at best - and by the way an unfounded opinion. I remind you that Logan's deposition was requested by JPM, not by WMI. The fact that it backfired JPM is just one more sign that JPM is wrong to claim the money. But there are other signs: a) in the initial steps of BK-about one year ago- JPM agreed that it was WMI's money, it was later than they started claiming it was a capital contribution; b) the money is accounted and has always been accounted by JPM as a deposit; c) after a year of holding the records, JPM has not been able to produce a single proof that it was a capital contribution, ... and they have filed thousands of pages in the court ( what more evidence a full trial discovery could bring, that was not yet brought?); d) on Oct, 22rd, the best JPM could present was a verbal declaration by the FDIC and JPM people about what they intended to transfer within the P&A, or what they understood it was transfered. Verbal, ad-hoc, interpretation of the written P&A which by the way could again backfire to FDIC, because this would be a fraudulent transfer of a WMI's asset that FDIC was not entitled to convey.
3.) I think that the one that has to demostrate that it was a capital contribution is JPM. It was and it is a deposit account, and therefore WMI's has not to demostrate it's a deposit, but the other way around: others have to demostrate that it is not a deposit. And after one year, with all the information in their hands and most former WMB employees working for them, JPM has not been able to demostrate anything.
4). I used to like your posts. Why?, because until some weeks ago the only negative arguments spreading fear in this board used to be based in one single statement dressed in diverse flavors: WMI is a BK stock and BK stocks are worthless because ultimately the commons get wiped. We've heard this speech very often since day one. Others, like me, consider that this is normally true in BK but this case has many unique elements that will result in a different outcome.
Yes, Johnny, belive it or not, we all already know this is a BK stock. Belive it or not we know it involves serious risks.
Initially your posts used to add some fresh elements to this board that should be considered as additional risks to factor in our decision making. I used to like them for this.
But the more I read you the more it sounds like the old basic argument: it's worthless because it's in BK.
As example, you recently talked again about the IRS $10B claim, that never held water and that has recently been expunged. But it doesn't matter to you if it held water or it's already been expunged. You mentioned it again, so it can contribute to spread fear.
Other example is your treatment of the WMB bondholders claims. The fact that WMB's claimants have been allowed to be represented in the BK process doesn't make their eventual claims against WMI valid. In essence WMB debts is either FDIC's problem or JPM's problem. It will not at all be easy for them to change that essencial fact. It would require much work for all of them to demostrate in court this is a valid sort of claim against WMI. And after many months, they have not made any progress about it yet.
So far, the only valid significant claims are the original ones: WMI's bondholders and pref's owners. Nevertheless you keep spreading fear while your position is to consider WMB's debt as WMI's debt without any single point to support it.
There are other examples in your speech.
5) Finally, you explained us that you have 1 share. So we are supposed to buy that all your efforts with hundred of posts are due to your good faith and your good intention to inform us, to educate us and to save us. All this advice your give us about "sure claims", "the way things work", reposting past motions, picking up just the menacing paragraphs, etc... is advice given in good faith to protect us.
I just don't buy it. I do think your intention is to spread fear in order to buy as cheap as you can. I may be wrong and if it's so I would need to apologize in the future. But, since this whole thing is about making assumptions based on incomplete known facts, and the facts I have about you are your posts .... my assuption is that you are not anymore trustworthy for me.
Your circular biassed arguments are starting to smell too bad for me. At this point I am convinced that all you want is to buy cheap, ... and by the way, considering your strong efforts you it seems want our shares badly.
In reply to: JohnnyWinter who wrote msg# 119169 Post # of 119203 [Send a link via email]
Johnny, I will tell you what I think.
1.- I think the BK process has a given timming for presenting claims. In BK valid claims cannot keep showing up at any time like mushrooms in a rainy season. As example, the "potential" claim behind last motion from FDIC in BK arrived more than 6 months late. Only this means it can be inmediatly rejected by the judge and eventually firmly contested by WMI and other creditors. But you consider it valid anyway. Besides this, the fact is that FDIC menace contradicts itself by default. I will not repeat in full my previous arguments and I will not repeat what other posters more skilled than you and me in legal matters have argued. But in a nutshell I will repeat: if THJMW decides that the 4B are WMI's money ( therefore not WMB's money), then by default not any of the P&A clauses are applicable.
2.- In at least one of your numerous posts you stated - as a fact - that there have not been enough discovery about the 4B turnover, and that it will therefore require a full trial because of this. That Logan's written declaration and her deposition are useless as proof. My friend, this is not a fact, this is your opinion - at best - and by the way an unfounded opinion. I remind you that Logan's deposition was requested by JPM, not by WMI. The fact that it backfired JPM is just one more sign that JPM is wrong to claim the money. But there are other signs: a) in the initial steps of BK-about one year ago- JPM agreed that it was WMI's money, it was later than they started claiming it was a capital contribution; b) the money is accounted and has always been accounted by JPM as a deposit; c) after a year of holding the records, JPM has not been able to produce a single proof that it was a capital contribution, ... and they have filed thousands of pages in the court ( what more evidence a full trial discovery could bring, that was not yet brought?); d) on Oct, 22rd, the best JPM could present was a verbal declaration by the FDIC and JPM people about what they intended to transfer within the P&A, or what they understood it was transfered. Verbal, ad-hoc, interpretation of the written P&A which by the way could again backfire to FDIC, because this would be a fraudulent transfer of a WMI's asset that FDIC was not entitled to convey.
3.) I think that the one that has to demostrate that it was a capital contribution is JPM. It was and it is a deposit account, and therefore WMI's has not to demostrate it's a deposit, but the other way around: others have to demostrate that it is not a deposit. And after one year, with all the information in their hands and most former WMB employees working for them, JPM has not been able to demostrate anything.
4). I used to like your posts. Why?, because until some weeks ago the only negative arguments spreading fear in this board used to be based in one single statement dressed in diverse flavors: WMI is a BK stock and BK stocks are worthless because ultimately the commons get wiped. We've heard this speech very often since day one. Others, like me, consider that this is normally true in BK but this case has many unique elements that will result in a different outcome.
Yes, Johnny, belive it or not, we all already know this is a BK stock. Belive it or not we know it involves serious risks.
Initially your posts used to add some fresh elements to this board that should be considered as additional risks to factor in our decision making. I used to like them for this.
But the more I read you the more it sounds like the old basic argument: it's worthless because it's in BK.
As example, you recently talked again about the IRS $10B claim, that never held water and that has recently been expunged. But it doesn't matter to you if it held water or it's already been expunged. You mentioned it again, so it can contribute to spread fear.
Other example is your treatment of the WMB bondholders claims. The fact that WMB's claimants have been allowed to be represented in the BK process doesn't make their eventual claims against WMI valid. In essence WMB debts is either FDIC's problem or JPM's problem. It will not at all be easy for them to change that essencial fact. It would require much work for all of them to demostrate in court this is a valid sort of claim against WMI. And after many months, they have not made any progress about it yet.
So far, the only valid significant claims are the original ones: WMI's bondholders and pref's owners. Nevertheless you keep spreading fear while your position is to consider WMB's debt as WMI's debt without any single point to support it.
There are other examples in your speech.
5) Finally, you explained us that you have 1 share. So we are supposed to buy that all your efforts with hundred of posts are due to your good faith and your good intention to inform us, to educate us and to save us. All this advice your give us about "sure claims", "the way things work", reposting past motions, picking up just the menacing paragraphs, etc... is advice given in good faith to protect us.
I just don't buy it. I do think your intention is to spread fear in order to buy as cheap as you can. I may be wrong and if it's so I would need to apologize in the future. But, since this whole thing is about making assumptions based on incomplete known facts, and the facts I have about you are your posts .... my assuption is that you are not anymore trustworthy for me.
Your circular biassed arguments are starting to smell too bad for me. At this point I am convinced that all you want is to buy cheap, ... and by the way, considering your strong efforts you it seems want our shares badly.
Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 38.346.310 von body1 am 09.11.09 11:29:23Hallo Budy
ich verstehe deinen Einwand nicht, bin weder phuscher noch
bascher. Bin seit über 1 Jahr investiert. Man muss auch mal
andere Meinungen zulassen. Muss sie ja nicht teilen.
Wenn du mir etwas damit sagen willst gerne per BM
Gruss aus Köln
ich verstehe deinen Einwand nicht, bin weder phuscher noch
bascher. Bin seit über 1 Jahr investiert. Man muss auch mal
andere Meinungen zulassen. Muss sie ja nicht teilen.
Wenn du mir etwas damit sagen willst gerne per BM
Gruss aus Köln
Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 38.346.279 von jhonfred am 09.11.09 11:25:51
das ist ja wirklich süß. ich glaub deine Rechnung wird nicht aufgehen. selbst wenn wir hier "alle" zusammen 10 Mio Aktien halten, ist das ein Mückenschiss und weit unter 1% der Papiere... Es mag hier den ein oder anderen geben, der sich Anfang des Jahes im oberen 6- oder 7stelligen Bereich eingedeckt hat. Die werden sich aber sicher nicht melden 
das ist ja wirklich süß. ich glaub deine Rechnung wird nicht aufgehen. selbst wenn wir hier "alle" zusammen 10 Mio Aktien halten, ist das ein Mückenschiss und weit unter 1% der Papiere... Es mag hier den ein oder anderen geben, der sich Anfang des Jahes im oberen 6- oder 7stelligen Bereich eingedeckt hat. Die werden sich aber sicher nicht melden 
Trading Spotlight
Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 38.346.310 von body1 am 09.11.09 11:29:23Weiß auch nicht-können oder wollen es nicht verstehen?rolleyes:
Schade-wie auch immer....es sind noch etliche hier-die es verstehen
Schade-wie auch immer....es sind noch etliche hier-die es verstehen
Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 38.346.295 von Phil09 am 09.11.09 11:27:24Ich denke jeder versteht einen Beitrag anders.
Ich bin seit über einem Jahr in Wamu investiert,
und glaube auch an eine Erfolg.
Aber warum sollte JPM zur Zeit ein Angebot machen.
Können die doch immer noch wenn Wamu die 4 Mia. hat.
Bekommt Wamu die 4 Mia. nicht, wird auch kein Angebot
folgen. Dann wird es für Wamu schwer, denn dann hat
die FDIC ja alles richtig gemacht ( ich hoffe du verstehst
den Hohn).
Recht haben heist nicht Recht kriegen.
Zu meiner Person muss ich sagen das ich nicht soviel
Kenntnise von der Börse habe, und das erste mal in einem OTC
Wert investiert bin.
Ich bin seit über einem Jahr in Wamu investiert,
und glaube auch an eine Erfolg.
Aber warum sollte JPM zur Zeit ein Angebot machen.
Können die doch immer noch wenn Wamu die 4 Mia. hat.
Bekommt Wamu die 4 Mia. nicht, wird auch kein Angebot
folgen. Dann wird es für Wamu schwer, denn dann hat
die FDIC ja alles richtig gemacht ( ich hoffe du verstehst
den Hohn).
Recht haben heist nicht Recht kriegen.
Zu meiner Person muss ich sagen das ich nicht soviel
Kenntnise von der Börse habe, und das erste mal in einem OTC
Wert investiert bin.
Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 38.346.279 von jhonfred am 09.11.09 11:25:51Guten Morgen,
klasse Idee...:O
kannst dir ja mal die Fonds anschauen die Aktien halten, die haben ein paar mehr Stück als wir.
Meine Stückzahl < TPG
klasse Idee...:O
kannst dir ja mal die Fonds anschauen die Aktien halten, die haben ein paar mehr Stück als wir.
Meine Stückzahl < TPG
Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 38.346.295 von Phil09 am 09.11.09 11:27:24ja finde ich auch schade .. man könnte sogar (absicht?!) hinein interpretieren ! nun denn...
Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 38.346.279 von jhonfred am 09.11.09 11:25:51
Durchsuchen
