Segun mi opinión, SI podemos subir de aqui a Marzo pero será por noticias positivas que se produzcan para Wamu, como los 4 bill, el EC, etc.
Por las expectativas que generé la acción parece dificil y mas con gente que ha comprado arriba y venderán con mínima ganancia conforme se acerque a sus precios de compra.
La guinda al pastel
Peg Brickley Article - The Game Is On
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
the combination of both this article and Kirsten's article are very powerful together... they show both sides of the picture... just waiting for reporters to connect the dots
By Peg Brickley
Of DOW JONES DAILY BANKRUPTCY REVIEW
The former parent of failed savings-and-loan group Washington Mutual Bank, or
WaMu, said it has evidence that JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) plotted WaMu's
takeover by way of a federal regulatory seizure weeks before its deal plan
played out, with regulators performing the role assigned to them in JPMorgan's
script.
The alleged role: Grab WaMu in a receivership and sell it to JPMorgan, a
spurned suitor that had long coveted the Seattle thrift.
Now Washington Mutual Inc. (WAMUQ), WaMu's former parent, wants to question
federal banking regulators "to determine the extent to which JPMC and the
regulators worked together to craft a deal for JPMC to acquire [WaMu] at a
fire-sale price," according to a filing Monday in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in
Wilmington, Del.
JPMorgan has declined to comment on allegations it engineered the largest
banking collapse in U.S. history in order to get WaMu for $1.9 billion, a price
that was far too low, according to creditors left behind with billions of
dollars in unpaid debts.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. spokesman David Barr said in an email Tuesday
that the agency doesn't comment on active litigation.
Documents filed Monday in the Wilmington court were turned up in a probe into
suspicions that JPMorgan manipulated regulators and other potential suitors in
the months leading up to the seizure of WaMu. Some documents indicate JPMorgan
and regulators were working hand-in-hand by early September 2008, weeks before
WaMu was taken over.
In an internal JPMorgan email dated Sept. 11, 2008, executives discussed a
deal to "acquire the assets and liabilities of West's [believed to be a code
word for Washington Mutual] thrift subsidiaries but leave behind senior and
unsecured debt with the FDIC ($15.2 billion)."
By Sept. 19, 2008, JPMorgan presentations indicated it had been "contacted by
FDIC about interest in West" and "had spoken to FDIC about bank only in
receivership with protection."
That is exactly what happened--JPMorgan bought WaMu in a deal that offered
extra indemnification against trouble, after the thrift was placed under a
receivership. However, it wasn't until Sept. 23 that the FDIC opened up the
bidding on WaMu. JPMorgan won the bidding, and WaMu, in about a day.
Parent company Washington Mutual cited the documents in support of its
request to throw a dragnet over everyone from the board of governors of the
Federal Reserve Board to ratings agencies Standard & Poor's Corp. (MHP) and
Moody's Investor Service (MCO) to Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS), in a spreading
probe.
(part 1 of 2)
(part 2 of 2)
WaMu's former parent
is already quizzing JPMorgan about allegations that
JPMorgan exploited confidential information and access to government regulators
in its pursuit of WaMu.
The WaMu parent company's main weapon is Rule 2004, a powerful tool of the
bankruptcy code that allows creditors to gather evidence that could lead to
lawsuits.
Monday's court filing said the spreading suspicions that WaMu was set up for
a takeover can produce value for parent-company creditors if others can be held
to account for the potentially improper handling of the troubled thrift.
WaMu was in distress due to chancy home loans but wasn't in such a dangerous
condition that it needed to be seized, critics of the deal have said.
WaMu's former parent said it has turned up documents that suggest JPMorgan
misused confidential information to frighten off other suitors, including Banco
Santander SA (STD, SAN.MC).
In June 2008, JPMorgan Chief Executive Jamie Dimon told Banco Santander
Chairman Emilio Botin that he didn't buy WaMu in the spring because the
thrift's losses would be higher than estimated. Such communications lowered the
parent company's chances of finding a good buyer, lawyers for Washington Mutual
Inc. claim.
JPMorgan and the FDIC are battling WaMu's former parent company over who has
rights to $3.7 billion in cash that was in the parent company's accounts at
WaMu when the thrift was seized and sold.
(Dow Jones Daily Bankruptcy Review covers news about distressed companies and
those under bankruptcy protection.)
-By Peg Brickley, Dow Jones Daily Bankruptcy Review; 302-521-2266;
[email protected]
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
Varios medios después del cierre se están haciendo eco de las demandas presentadas.
Otro enlace:
http://www.reuters.com/article/idCNN1523851020091215?rpc=44
Definitivamente los medios van ya a la carrera, espero esto siga así.
Espero que si no se llega a un acuerdo y esto va a juicio sea porque Weil está pidiendo tanta pasta, que jpm no la puede pagar.
Ya solo falta que aparezca la noticia en Bloomberg TV en horario de audiencia comentando las cifras reclamadas con la posibilidad de indemnizar a los acreedores y entonces podriamos ver un movimiento al alza importante.
Si creiais que no ibamos a ganar este caso os dejo la evidencia más clara de fraude por parte de JPM y el gobierno. Este email lo dice todo y es de marzo 2008. Llevaban meses planificandolo. Pero lo que pone en el email no va a ocurrir.
JPM va a pagar caro.
http://www.ariva.de/tim_morgan_jpmorgan_a283928
Los medios estan devorando la noticia y dentro de poco muchos más se uniran a reportar lo que antes era Tabú. Dimon debe estar muy jodido. Sus pretensiones de ir a Washington se esfuman más cada día que pasa. Esto tendrá implicaciones muy serias para los directores de orquestra del mayor fraude perpetrado en USA.
Segunda implicación seria de "Collusion". En marzo de 2008 JPM y WAMU firmaron un contrato que JPM se lo saltó a la pirula.
Después con sus amigos de la FDIC prepararon esta clausula para evitar que JPM pagara más de 500 MM como resultado de los litigios que tendría el robo de WAMU por parte de FDIC y JPM.
Exhibit 18, the recommendation to the FDIC Board of Directors; the $500M indemnity to cover the agreement between WMI and JPM? (dated SEPTEMBER 24, 2008)
"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board hereby authorizes the Director, Division ofResolutions and Receiverships (DRR) or designee, to modify the standard indemnification to includea limited indemnity in favor of JPMorgan Chase in an amount not to exceed $500 million for any damages JPMorgan Chase may sustain as a result of litigation brought by WMI against JPMorganChase for violation of the agreement between WMI and JPMorgan Chase dated March II, 2008"
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=WAMUQ.PK
Associated Press (AP) y Reuters son las dos agencias de noticias más importantes del mundo. A través de sus miles de webs afiliadas deben estar pasando la noticia como la polvora. No se que esperarme del mercado pero creo que la cosa se debería de animar bastante.
Existe también el factor presión, estamos a 2 días de la cita de corte y la Juez ya debe ver que su trabajo estará siendo seguido por muchas personas de manera muy minuciosa. ¿ha llegado por fin nuestra hora? eso espero.
Todo sube olgadamente... Parece que los articulillos han sido leidos... esperemos que haya más de aquí en adelante nos vendría muy bien!!
TODO SUBE?? SERIO?
Saludos de Chikis! ^_^
