Un consejo, Ten Shin. En bolsa, los soñadores palman. Se realista, y te irá mejor. Guiate por tus instintos si quieres (yo lo hago), pero siempre con cabeza, y sin dejarte llevar por las emociones.
buen consejo cual es tu posicion ahora en wamu????voy abandonando la vertiente soñadora el resto me esperare a vender a 0.05 dolares
Como dije hace tiempo, ahora estoy fuera, logicamente. Desde que vendi a 0,55, no he vuelto a comprar, aunque he estado tentado mas de una vez. Hasta que no vea algun signo claro, no volveré a entrar.
pues haces bien ahora mismo no se pueden tocar las acciones ni con un palo,si entras ya nos lo contaras.hoy parece que nos daran del derecho y del reves
July 1, 2010: There have been filings in several significant areas in the last couple of days. Regarding the Equity Committee's second motion to appoint an examiner, the Equity Committee today filed a "notice of hearing" stating that this motion will be argued in bankruptcy court at the hearing this coming Thursday, July 8. This motion was supposed to be argued at the last hearing (June 17), but at that hearing "it was announced that consideration of the [Examiner] Motion would be adjourned to the hearing scheduled for July 8... in light of settlement negotiations regarding plan confirmation with [WMI]". The filing goes on to state that WMI and the Equity Committee "were unable to reach agreement."
The court actions regarding the lawsuit to compel an annual shareholders' meeting seem to be resolving. The recent judgment in Washington State court sent this issue back to Delaware bankruptcy court. The two independent shareholders (Willingham and Esopus Creek Value LP) have now withdrawn their motion to remand (send back) the lawsuit to Washington State, and the Equity Committee appears ready to push for a quick resolution via their motion for summary judgment (filed March 11). From the Equity Committee: "It cannot be overstated — time is of the essence if a shareholder meeting is to have any real meaning for WMI's owners. The Motion for Summary Judgment is fully briefed and the Equity Committee respectfully requests the scheduling of argument as soon as the Court's calendar permits so that a decision on the merits of the claims asserted therein may be obtained without any further undue delay."
Finally, JPM appears to be stonewalling attempts to obtain information from it. Both the Equity Committee and holders of Trust Preferred Securities, which are like preferred equity shares, filed today in opposition to JPM's request for a "protective order". The Equity Committee and TPS want to obtain documents and take depositions from JPM employees, but JPM is fighting this. The Court had ordered the parties to try to negotiate a resolution but this has apparently failed. The Equity Committee concludes it filing: "JPMC complains repeatedly about the burden of having to respond to discovery requests, but these complaints ring utterly hollow. JPMC is one of the largest, and wealthiest, financial institutions in the world. By its own admission it has made billions of dollars from its acquisition of Washington Mutual. It has apparently succeeded in avoiding discovery in all lawsuits that have been filed to date over its acquisition of WMB. There is no justification for JPMC's claim that it should, once again, be entitled to avoid having to conduct a reasonable search for documents in its own files. JPMC's motion for a protective order should be denied."
Bueno si habeis tenido tiempo de echarle un vistazo al nuevo POR, como todos esperabamos, no ha habido ningún tipo de negociación de buena fe con el EC. Ni pensar darle algo a las preferentes, lo cachondo es que incluso estan mas lejos de pillar algo, en el anterior por las h's recibirían un 100% y en este sólo un 88% por lo que las preferentes y comunes aún quedan más lejos si cabe del dinero.
Lo de Rosen ya lo ve hasta un ciego, encima jpm sólo pide más acuerdos de confindencialidad, esto o lo cortan ya o se está convirtiendo en un desmadre que toma pan y moja, y la juez parece que está de espectadora ante el circo de Rosen.
Saludos
HooHoo Thread: "http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_(A_to_Z)/Stocks_W/threadview?m=me&bn=86316&tid=498661&mid=498661&tof=1&frt=2#498661"
{begin quote from marymbobh}
Someone posted a few weeks ago that...'equity has to start winning on the legal points' if we are going to prevail with a fair settlement. The upcoming hearing on July 8 will have most of the issues important to equity on the table, either directly or indirectly:
1) debtor obstacles to discovery,
2) the examiner,
3) shareholder's meeting, and
4) the disclosure statement for the 5th POR.
It was shocking that Judge Walrath didn't approve the original EC motion for the examiner. The issues were very clearcut and well laid out on both sides and the court's comments ('already investigated to death') were not legally sound.
The only charitable interpretation of the court's position is that it honestly thought that the EC could pursue discovery of the important stuff independently, without need for an examiner. That line of thinking should now be put to rest for the court, however.
The debtors have now shown to the court that they will obfuscate, obstruct, and delay every avenue of investigation open to the EC to the maximum extent possible.
The debtors have also shown to the court that they are not working to maximize the value of the estate and they are acting on behalf of equity in any way, despite their fiduciary duty and their earlier representations to the court.
If the court fails to recognize these things now, our hope for any sort of fair treatment by the bankruptcy court should shift to the 3rd Circuit where the appeal of the original examiner motion currently rests."
{end quote}
En este mensaje de marymbobh, para mi de las mejores foreras en usa, también ve claramente como el 8 de julio como una fecha clave en la que si la juez no se decanta favorablemente en el tema del examinador y en el resto de temas, se verá de que palo va, y sólo tendremos esperanza en el 3er circuito de apelacion que es donde nos mandó Susman ante la negación de la juez de declarar el examinador.
Saludos
