Ambac Rocky Balboa oder chapter 11

vieleicht gehts dann mal ordentlich hoch hier.  

 

Ambac Files Disclosure to Explain Plan Alternatives

Ambac Financial Group Inc., the parent company for an insurer partly in rehabilitation, filed a proposed disclosure statement on July 8 explaining the Chapter 11 reorganization plan filed two days before.

If the Wisconsin insurance commissioner doesn’t accept one of the alternatives in the plan for dividing $7.3 billion in net operating loss tax carryforwards, the Ambac parent will proceed with what it calls a deconsolidation plan where it will transfer to a third party more than 20 percent ownership of the insurance company subsidiary. The resulting change in ownership could limit the inability of the rehabilitated insurance company to utilize NOLs.

The parent’s Chapter 11 case will be converted to a liquidation in Chapter 7 if the commissioner doesn’t accept the settlement and the deconsolidation plan won’t work, according to the disclosure statement.

The options for the insurance commissioner include paying the parent 40 percent of the tax savings realized from utilizing the NOLs. Or, the rehabilitated insurance company could pay the parent $300 million in cash over four years.

A lawsuit is pending in bankruptcy court with the Internal Revenue Service over the NOLs. The parties are currently in mediation.

Under both the settlement plan and the deconsolidation plan, the Ambac parent’s senior noteholders would receive new stock. General unsecured creditors are slated to receive new stock and warrants. Holders of subordinated debt are to have subordinated warrants and 1.5 percent of the new stock if the class accepts the plan.

The disclosure statement has blanks where creditors eventually will be told the percentage recovery to expect. The amounts of claims in the various classes are also blank.

Under the settlement plan, the parent would retain ownership of the insurance company and receive a $350 million junior surplus note together with $30 million cash.

The insurance commissioner said the parent’s plan would “negatively affect” policyholders and he would “vigorously contest” it.

If the commissioner accepts one of the alternatives, lawsuits between the parent and the insurance company would cease. In the deconsolidation plan, a trust would be formed to continue lawsuits by the parent against the subsidiary.

The plan says the claims of senior noteholders would be fixed at $1.25 billion. The subordinated notes would be pegged at $444.2 million.

Ambac said in May that it would file a Chapter 11 plan in June with or without agreement from Wisconsin regulators. From the outset, the parent and the insurance commissioner have been at loggerheads over a division of net tax loss carryforwards.

Ambac’s insurance subsidiary stopped paying dividends to the parent in 2007 and stopped writing new business entirely in mid-2008.

The Ambac parent filed under Chapter 11 in November, listing assets of $90.7 million and liabilities of more than $1.6 billion. Almost all the debt is made of up $1.62 billion owing on seven note issues. One issue for $400 million is subordinated.

The parent’s Chapter 11 case is In re Ambac Financial Group Inc., 10-15973, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan). The state insurance rehabilitation case is In re The Rehabilitation of Segregated Account of Ambac Assurance Corp., 2010cv001576, Dane County, Wisconsin, Circuit Court (Madison).  

Kann das mal einer zusammen fassen, was die vorhaben wen die nicht annehmen?

 

http://www.world-of-stocks.com/rt_data/abk  

benötige mal Deine Hilfe kannst Du mal bitte den Link von Aktienbase einstellen
komm nicht mehr reine.
danke    

Die Seite ist heute den ganzen Tag schon nicht erreichbar, aus welchen Gründen auch immer!

 

Hoffentlich kriegen  sie`s bis morgen irgendwie wieder hin!  

Takefuji customers file plan to recover debt
Jul 8 (Reuters) - Customers of Takefuji presented a plan on Friday to recover the debt that the bankrupt Japanese consumer lender owes them, saying they want members of the founding family to inject money into Takefuji to help repay creditors.

The group of 265 customers is seeking refunds of overcharged interest they paid to Takefuji in the past. Takefuji's business was crippled by a 2006 legal ruling forcing Japanese consumer lenders to repay overcharged interest to customers.

"Takefuji's family members accumulated a fortune from dividend payments made from profits Takefuji had made from illegal interest rates," said Mitsuru Naito, a lawyer representing the group. "Some customers were forced to lead miserable lives saddled with high interest rates on the money they borrowed."

Japan's supreme court earlier this year granted a 200 billion yen ($2.5 billion) tax refund to Toshiki Takei, the son of Takefuji's founder, based on a ruling that the son did not need to pay gift taxes imposed on assets he received from his parents.

That money should be used to repay money to customers, Naito said, adding that if other family members inject their own money, the debt recovery rate would be higher.

The recovery rate would be around 14 percent with the 200 billion yen injection, Naito said. That would be higher than in the plan presented by Takefuji's trustee, which Naito estimated around 2 to 3 percent.

The plan from the customers would become the third proposal, following the motion filed by a group of foreign bond investors on Friday last week, who sought to liquidate the consumer lender.

Takefuji's court-appointed administrator is also presenting its own plans on July 15, under which South Korean consumer lender A&P Financial is allowed to take over Takefuji and continue business.

Takefuji has about 1.5 trillion yen in debt, of which 1.4 trillion yen consists of overcharged interest the company is obliged to repay to its customers, Eiichi Obata, Takefuji's court appointed trustee said in May.

Takefuji has about 900,000 customers who are claiming the interest refund, while it has 29 groups of debt holders. It had no exposure to banks or any other financial institutions, according to documents presented by the trustee in May.

Takefuji, which failed in September, was looking for an investor to help it remain in business. A&P Financial reached an agreement to buy Takefuji in April after it was chosen from a field of bidders that included Cerberus Capital Management , TPG and Japan's J Trust

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/08/...ji-idUSL3E7I80R420110708  

....und was ist mit dem "Munibook"?  

...klar sein, das derzeit nicht viel "läuft".....

Aber trotzdem werden jedes "Quartal" Ergebnisse/Einnahmen/Gewinne erzielt, die aufgrund einer "funktionierenden operativen Einheit fliessen.

Gut, die momentane wirtschaftliche Lage sieht nicht "rosig" aus, neue Geschäfte werden derzeit nicht getätigt.....

Gut wir wissen nicht, wie sich A&P/Takefuji die Sache mit der Schuldentilgung überlegt hat.

Gut, wir wissen nicht wie die anderen Bereiche (Klagen(Vergleiche/wie auch immer) laufen werden, und ob/wann/wieviel Geld da noch in die Kassen gespült werden........

Aber wie war das noch:
Wie lange braucht Ambac definitiv maximal um CH11 verlassen zu können?

Was mich wirklich wundert, ist.....
Wieso geht niemand auf dieses sog. Munibook ein, obwohl (gem Marlboroman), Buffet dafür schon mal 40 Mrd. für geboten haben soll.......
Wieso steht dieses Munibook in keinem schriftlich verfassten Text?
Wieso geht niemand darauf ein?
Will man das "unter" den Tisch fallen lassen?
Ist es nicht "REAL"

Fragen über Fragen.........???????  

genau diesen Gedanken hatte ich auch schon des öfteren. Wenn das Munibook ins
Gespräch kommen würde hätten wir schlagartig ganz andere Kurse.  

....das, wenn heute was bei WAMU passiert, es auch Auswirkungen auf Ambac haben könnte, denn JPM (Diana Adams ist ja eine JPM-Schl...e) ist nicht mehr der weiße Ritter mit der goldenen Maske........bzw. es kann nicht mehr der halben Welt vorgegaukelt werden.......

und JPMC hat verdammt viel "Dreck" am Strecken........

Hat JPM nicht auch hier seine Finger im Spiel, um Ambac billig einverleiben zu können, zumindest haben se einigen Schaden verursacht, den es zu beheben gilt.....

Oder dreh ich jetzt total am Rad?  

Der Regulator hat bis zum 29. Juli zeit sich zu überlegen was den tun will, danach sehen wir weiter.  

es hier einen ähnlich initiierten Cowboy-Zock gibt, wie vor einiger Zeit bei WaMu

und Lehman.  

wie hoch siehst du persönlich die Wahrscheinlichkeit in % dass die Aktionäre nicht lehr ausgehen?  

http://www.ariva.de/...a_oder_chapter_11_t376704?page=231#jumppos5779

Meinst Du den POR, den Pfandbrief eingestellt hat?

Gruß  

http://www.world-of-stocks.com/rt_data/abk  

echt zum kotzen da ist ja eine aktie von arcandor mehr wert ;o(((  

Umsatz in USA rapide gestiegen.Um mehr als 2 Millionen.
Sieht ganz nach einem Break aus.
Na,ja.Hoffen wir mal.  

(Reuters) - A New York court revived Ambac Financial Group Inc's (ABKFQ.PK) lawsuit seeking to hold JPMorgan Chase & Co (JPM.N) responsible for its losses related to an investment vehicle that lost $1 billion on toxic subprime debt.  

wo hast du das gelesen?  

......die Wende?  

NEW YORK, July 14 (Reuters) - A New York court revived Ambac Financial Group Inc's lawsuit seeking to hold JPMorgan Chase & Co responsible for its losses related to an investment vehicle that lost $1 billion on toxic subprime debt.

Ambac said it lost money on notes it had guaranteed for Ballantyne, a special purpose vehicle established to reinsure term life insurance policies.

According to Ambac, JPMorgan was the investment adviser for $1.65 billion of accounts that Ballantyne funded by selling the notes, and which were supposed to provide reasonable income along with a "high level of safety."

But it said JPMorgan stuffed the accounts with risky subprime mortgages and home equity lines of credit. Ambac said the resulting loss left Ballantyne unable to make payments on its notes, obliging Ambac to make good on its guarantees.

In a ruling on Thursday, the New York State appeals court in Manhattan said a lower court was wrong to dismiss Ambac's breach of contract lawsuit.

The case is Ambac Assurance UK Ltd v. JPMorgan Investment Management Inc, New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, No. 650259/09.

For Ambac: Michael Allen and Yoram Miller of Shapiro Forman Allen & Sava.

For JPMorgan: Richard Rosen, John Baughman, Farrah Berse and Jennifer Vakiener of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison.

(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel)
http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/New_York/...uit_vs_JPMorgan/