Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (LEH)

Bis 18:30 Uhr hätte man eine Schablone auf beide Charts legen können. Danach wurde bei LEHMQ jedoch alles durch 'kleine' Verkäufe zunichte gemacht. Aber noch sind es ja ein paar Minuten....

Schönes WE!

 

http://www.world-of-stocks.com/individual_values/lehmq

http://www.world-of-stocks.com/individual_values/wamuq

 

http://de.advfn.com/...rt&s=NO%5Elehmq&p=0&t=39&vol=1  

http://de.advfn.com/...rt&s=NO%5ELEHMQ&p=0&t=29&vol=1

http://de.advfn.com/...rt&s=NO%5ELEHMQ&p=1&t=29&vol=1

http://de.advfn.com/...rt&s=NO%5ELEHMQ&p=2&t=29&vol=1

http://de.advfn.com/...rt&s=NO%5ELEHMQ&p=3&t=29&vol=1

http://de.advfn.com/...rt&s=NO%5ELEHMQ&p=4&t=29&vol=1

http://de.advfn.com/...rt&s=NO%5ELEHMQ&p=5&t=29&vol=1

http://de.advfn.com/...rt&s=NO%5ELEHMQ&p=6&t=29&vol=1

http://de.advfn.com/...rt&s=NO%5ELEHMQ&p=7&t=29&vol=1

Um über 0,05 U$-Dollares zu kommen, brauchte es zunächst ein Volumen von über 200 Millionen Shares, dann reichten schon mehr als 100 Millionen Shares, danach dann über 50 Millionen Shares; inzwischen reicht schon ein Volumen von etwas über 40 Millionen Shares, um die Marke von 0,050 U$-Dollares significant zu überspringen...

Mit chartistischen Grüßen:
Der olle Teras.

dass es nun weniger shares braucht wie früher seh ich genauso. das ist ja schon mal ein sehr positives zeichen. die marke von 5 us-cents haben wir eh schon übersprungen.
http://de.advfn.com/...rt&s=NO%5Elehmq&p=0&t=39&vol=1

daher nehme ich bevorzugt das Big Picture zur anschau, da ich zu einstelligen euro-cent kursen eh nichts abgeben würde. da ja bei wamuq über settlement und relativ hohen fair values diskutiert wird, bin ich gespannt, wohin die reise bei lehmq gehen könnte.

börsenwert-vergleich aktuell: wamuq 250 mio euro, lehmq 27 mio euro
http://www.ariva.de/chart/...vents=None&indicator=None&box5=0  

meint ihr wohin die Reise gehen kann ?  

Eine Prognose für den deutschen Handel am Montag ist ziemlich schwierig, da wir eben DEUTSCHE Skeptiker sind und es keine Fakten für den Kursanstieg gibt ;-)

LEHM hängt irgendwie am WAMU-Tropf. Das hängt u.a. auch damit zusammen, dass auch sie gegen JPM prozessieren. Hier wird mit einem Auge immer auf WAMU geschielt. Wenn dort am Montag der Umsatz stimmt und das Ding auch so rasant steigt wie in der letzten USA-Handelsstunde wird sich das auch auf LEHM übertragen. Da die Kurse jedoch über'm großen Teich gemacht werden, kann ich mir vorstellen, dass auch erstmal bis 15:30 Uhr abgewartet wird. Gewinnmitnahmen wird es in der 1.USA-Handelsstunde mit Sicherheit auch noch geben. Wird dort anschließend der Anstieg vom Freitag bestätigt, könnte es hier am Montag wieder bis auf die 0,045-Marke laufen. Mal schauen was drüben passiert - es wird echt spannend!

Schönes WE!

 

Bitte folgenden Satz aus Beitrag #7915 wegdenken: "Das hängt u.a. auch damit zusammen, dass auch sie gegen JPM prozessieren."

...habe da etwas durcheinander gebracht...

 

stark ansteigen .Wenn ich so die letzten Wochen ansehe ist die Aktie immer stark angestiegen, wenn sie stark gefallen ist.Mitte Mai gab es denn Anstieg von 0,03$ auf 0,042$(gestiegen 0,012$) ,dann ist sie auf 0,036$ (gefallen 0,006$)gefallen .Dann kam Ende Mai der zweite Anstieg von 0,036$ auf 0,064$(gestiegen 0,028$) .Aber  es gab auch wieder  ein starken fall auf 0,05$(gefallen 0,014$).Der letzte Anstieg ging
sogar auf 0,091$(gestiegen 0,041$) .Nach denn starken anstieg kamm auch der stärkste fall ,wieder auf 0,05$ (gefallen 0,041$).Ich glaub aber auch  das Mo. bis 15.30 Uhr  nicht viel passieren wird, bis in die USA eröffnet wird. Die starken Käufe  kurz vor Ende in denn USA kann aber auch heißen, das es bei uns Mo. Vormittag stark eingekauft wird.Was aber auch riskant ist da die Amis denn  kurs machen. Man könnte  aber auch billig einkaufen  wenn vielleicht der 4te starke Anstieg kommt. Aber wie schon gesagt höchst riskant. Es wird ein interessanter Mo.  

Tuesday, June 28, 2011


10:00 AM
 11-10005-jmp   Angel Almanzar    Ch. 7
 
 Hearing RE: Dismissal of Duplicate Case

 
 05-10026-jmp   Esther Yang    Ch. 7
 
 Hearing RE: Trustee's Final Report and Applications for Compensation and Deadline to Object

 
 11-12521-jmp   Genco Importing Inc.    Ch. 11
 
 Initial Case Conference

 
 08-10152-jmp   Quebecor World (USA) Inc.    Ch. 11
 
 Status Conference

 
 08-13178-jmp   Jacqueline Godoy    Ch. 7
 
 Motion Filed by the Former Trustee for an Order to: (i) Reopen the Debtors Case so that a Previously Undisclosed Asset of the Debtor may be Administered by a Trustee; (ii) Direct the Office of the United States Trustee to Appoint a Trustee; and (iii) Defer the Filing Fee for Reopening the Case

 
 09-13083-jmp   PetroRig I Pte Ltd    Ch. 11
 
 Motion Filed by Larsen Oil & Gas Entities for an Order Estimating and Temporarily Allowing the Claims of the Larsen Oil & Gas Entities

 
 Motion Filed by Larsen Oil & Gas Entities for an Order Converting the Debtors' Chapter 11 Cases to Cases Under Chapter 7 or, in the Alternative, Appointing a Chapter 11 Trustee

 
 10-15438-jmp   Raymond A. Dillulio and Lisa M. Interdonato    Ch. 7
 
 Motion Filed by Maklihon Mfg. Corp. for Relief from the Automatic Stay to Permit the Continuation of State Court Litigation

Objection Filed
Stricken from the calendar THIS MATTER HAS BEEN RESOLVED

 
 11-12521-jmp   Genco Importing Inc.    Ch. 11
 
 Motion Filed by the Debtor for an Order Authorizing the Employment and Retention of McGrail & Bensinger LLP as Its Bankruptcy Counsel
Stricken from the calendar THIS MATTER HAS BEEN RESOLVED

 
 08-13555-jmp   Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.    Ch. 11
 
 Doc# 15078 Motion to Approve / Motion (I) for Approval of the Disclosure Statement and the Form and Manner of Notice of the Disclosure Statement Hearing, (II) Establishing Solicitation and Voting Procedures, (III) Scheduling a Confirmation Hearing, and (IV) Establishing Notice and Objection Procedures for Confirmation of the Debtors Joint Chapter 11 Plan (related document(s)[15077])
Adjourned ADJOURNED TO 7/20/11 AT 10:00 A.M.

 
 Doc# 16317 Notice of Hearing to Consider Approval of Disclosure Statement with respect to the Amended Joint Substantively Consolidating Chapter 11 Plan for Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and Certain of Its Affiliated Debtors Other Than Merit, LLC, LB Somerset LLC and LB Preferred Somerset LLC
Adjourned ADJOURNED TO 7/20/11 AT 10:00 A.M.

 
 09-16593-jmp   GWB II, LLC    Ch. 7
 
 Adversary proceeding: 10-03241-jmp   Pereira v. Fodiman
Pre-Trial Conference
Adjourned ADJOURNED TO 9/8/11 AT 10:00 A.M.

 
 Adversary proceeding: 10-03242-jmp Pereira v. Fodiman
Pre-Trial Conference
Adjourned ADJOURNED TO 9/8/11 AT 10:00 A.M.  

Thursday, June 30, 2011


10:00 AM
 08-13555-jmp   Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.    Ch. 11
 
 Debtors' Thirty-Fifth Omnibus Objection to Claims (Valued Derivative Claims)

 
 Debtors' Sixty-Seventh Omnibus Objection to Claims (Valued Derivative Claim)

 
 Debtors' Ninety-Fifth Omnibus Objection to Claims (Valued Derivative Claims)

 
 Debtors' One Hundred Third Omnibus Objection to Claims (Valued Derivative Claims)

 
 Debtors' One Hundred Eleventh Omnibus Objection to Claims (No Liability Claims)

 
 Debtors' One Hundred Twelfth Omnibus Objection to Claims (Invalid Blocking Number LPS Claims)

 
 Debtors One Hundred Seventeenth Omnibus Objection to Claims (No Liability Non-Debtor Employee Claims)

 
 Debtors' One Hundred Eighteenth Omnibus Objection to Claims (to Reclassify Proofs of Claim as Equity Interests)

 
 Motion of Claimants Palmyra Capital Fund, L.P., Palmyra Capital Institutional Fund, L.P., and Palmyra Capital Offshore Fund, L.P. to Permit Late Filing of Their Guarantee Claims

 
 Debtors' One Hundred Nineteenth Omnibus Objection to Claims (Amended and Superseded Claims)

 
 Debtors' One Hundred Twentieth Omnibus Objection to Claims (No Blocking Number LPS Claims)

 
 Debtors' One Hundred Twenty-First Omnibus Objection to Claims (To Reclassify Proofs of Claim as Equity Interests)

 
 Debtors' One Hundred Thirtieth Omnibus Objection to Claims (to Reclassify Proofs of Claim as Equity Interests)

 
 Debtors' One Hundred Thirty-First Omnibus Objection to Claims (to Reclassify Proofs of Claim as Equity Interests)

 
 Debtors' One Hundred Thirty-Second Objection to Claims (Valued Derivative Claims)

 
 First Motion Filed by Mark Glasser to Extend Time for Claim

 
 Debtors' Eighteenth Omnibus Objection to Claims (Amended and Superseded Claims and Duplicate Claims)

 
 Debtors' Twenty-Eighth Omnibus Objection to Claims (Valued Derivative Claims)

 
 Debtors' Fortieth Omnibus Objection to Claims (Late-Filed Claims)

 
 Debtors' Forty-Sixth Omnibus Objection to Claims (No Debtor Claims)

 
 Motion Filed by Cathay United Bank to Have Claim No. 35181 Deemed Timely Filed

 
 Motion Filed by Nagy es Trocsanyi Ugyvedi Iroda for an Enlargement of Time

 
 Debtors Ninety-Eighth Omnibus Objection to Claims (Insufficient Documentation)

 
 Motion Filed by Symphony Asset Management LLC to Deem Proof of Claim Timely Filed

 
 Debtors Ninety-Ninth Omnibus Objection to Claims (Insufficient Documentation)

 
 Motion Filed by Pearl Assurance Limited to Deem Proofs of Claim to Be Timely Filed

 
 Doc# 17317 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney

 
 Doc# 15008 Motion for Omnibus Objection to Claim(s) : Debtors One Hundred Ninth Omnibus Objection to Claims (Insufficient Documentation)

 
 Doc# 16530 Motion for Omnibus Objection to Claim(s) / Debtors One Hundred Thirty-Third Omnibus Objection to Claims (To Reclassify Proofs of Claim as Equity Interests)

 
 Doc# 16856 Motion for Omnibus Objection to Claim(s) / Debtors One Hundred Forty-Third Omnibus Objection to Claims (Late-Filed Claims)

 
 Doc# 16858 Motion for Omnibus Objection to Claim(s) / Debtors One Hundred Forty-Fifth Omnibus Objection to Claims (Settled Derivatives Claims)

 
 Doc# 16860 Motion for Omnibus Objection to Claim(s) / Debtors One Hundred Thirty-Seventh Omnibus Objection to Claims (Valued Derivative Claims)

 
 Doc# 16865 Motion for Omnibus Objection to Claim(s) / Debtors One Hundred Thirty-Eighth Omnibus Objection to Claims (No Liability Derivatives Claims)

 
 Doc# 16855 Motion for Omnibus Objection to Claim(s) / Debtors One Hundred Forty-Second Omnibus Objection to Claims (Amended and Superseded Claims)

 
 Doc# 16867 Motion for Omnibus Objection to Claim(s) / Debtors One Hundred Thirty-Sixth Omnibus Objection to Claims (Misclassified Claims)

 
 Doc# 18042 Notice of Hearing on Debtors Ninety-Ninth Omnibus Objection to Claims (Insufficient Documentation) (related document(s)[14494])

 
 Doc# 16871 Motion for Omnibus Objection to Claim(s) : Debtors One Hundred Forty-Fourth Omnibus Objection to Claims (To Reclassify Proofs of Claim ss Equity Interests)

 
 Doc# 16854 Motion for Omnibus Objection to Claim(s) / Debtors One Hundred Forty-First Omnibus Objection to Claims (No Supporting Documentation Claims)

 
 Doc# 16853 Motion for Omnibus Objection to Claim(s) / Debtors One Hundred Fortieth Omnibus Objection to Claims (Duplicative of Indenture Trustee Claims)

 
 Doc# 16852 Motion for Omnibus Objection to Claim(s) / Debtors One Hundred Thirty-Ninth Omnibus Objection to Claims (Inconsistent Debtor Claims)

 
 Doc# 16874 Motion for Omnibus Objection to Claim(s) : Debtors One Hundred Forty-Sixth Omnibus Objection to Claims (Settled Derivatives Claims)

 
 Doc# 16873 Motion for Omnibus Objection to Claim(s) : Debtors One Hundred Forty- Fifth Omnibus Objection to Claims (Settled Derivatives Claims)

 
 Doc# 16808 Motion for Omnibus Objection to Claim(s) : Debtors One Hundred Thirty-Fifth Omnibus Objection to Claims (To Reclassify Proofs of Claim as Equity Interests)

 
 Doc# 16532 Motion for Omnibus Objection to Claim(s) / Debtors One Hundred Thirty-Fourth Omnibus Objection to Claims (To Reclassify Proofs of Claim as Equity Interests)

 
 Doc# 18040 Notice of Hearing on Debtors Ninety-Seventh Omnibus Objection to Claims (Insufficient Documentation) Solely as to Certain Claims (related document(s)[14492])

 
 Doc# 18041 Notice of Hearing on Debtors Ninety-Eighth Omnibus Objection to Claims (Insufficient Documentation) (related document(s)[14493])  

CHICAGO (BRAIN)—SRAM has paid off its private equity investor, a step the company previously said it would make before going public.

An updated prospectus filed with the Securities Exchange Commission on Friday indicated that SRAM refinanced its current credit facilities on June 7 in part to complete the buyout of Trilantic Capital Partners.

SRAM paid Trilantic $575 million to regain the shares it owned in the company. Trilantic, then known as Lehman Brothers Merchant Bank, invested $234.8 million in SRAM in September 2008.

SRAM announced last month that it intended to make an initial public offering in order to repay the debt it would take on to buy out Trilantic. At that time, the prospectus said it expected to raise up to $300 million in the offering of common stock.

The updated prospectus doesn’t say when the IPO will be made or the share price, but the company intends to trade on the Nasdaq stock exchange under the “SRAM” ticker symbol.

After the offering, SRAM will liquidate the SRAM Cycling Advocacy Fund, which was capitalized with $10 million receiving after the Trilantic investment. Since then, it has distributed $3 million to support advocacy in the U.S. Europe and Asia. The remaining assets from the fund will be transferred to a new nonprofit called SRAM Cycling Foundation, NFP, which will be dedicated to giving grants to charitable organizations that promote safe cycling and its public health and environmental benefits. The foundation will also continue to support non-charitable advocacy organizations that received grants from the fund.

According to the prospectus, SRAM has continued to see an increase in sales, reporting a 20 percent jump in first quarter sales. Revenue rose to $146.4 million for the first three months of this year, up from $122 million in the same time period last year. OEM sales increased 20.7 percent to $97.7 million, and aftermarket sales increased 18.8 percent to $48.8 million. SRAM’s net sales have increased at a rate of 16 percent annually since 2007, growing from $283.8 million to $524.1 million last year.

http://www.bicycleretailer.com/news/newsDetail/5614.html  

0,048  

Uns Allen einen LEHMAN-grünen Daumen!

Stets guter Dinge:
Der olle Teras.

Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc is delaying its fight to block bankrupt real estate developer SunCal from challenging $1.5 billion in claims Lehman asserted as a creditor in SunCal's bankruptcy.

Related Articles

Feature: Yes, The Wall Of Worry Has Grown, But...
Barclays: Lehman not owed $500 million in bonuses
Court clears Lehman unit settlement with JPMorgan
Related Topics

Lehman BrothersCaliforniaCourtNew YorkLawyerSubscribe to The Economic Monitor

           

Subscribe to The Economic Monitor to get the day's most relevant news, data and anlaysis .
Sample
In court papers filed Tuesday, Lehman said it would delay until July 20 the matter initially scheduled for a hearing Wednesday in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan.

A spokeswoman for Lehman declined to comment on the reason for the delay, but it comes a day after the California judge overseeing SunCal's bankruptcy ruled against Lehman on a similar dispute in that court.

Lehman, which invested more than $2 billion in the 20 SunCal projects now in bankruptcy, is the developer's major creditor and has asserted about $1.5 billion in claims against it. SunCal has sought to disallow the claims, saying it should be entitled to recoup for losses because Lehman played a key role in causing its bankruptcy.

Must Read

New York Senate Legalizes Gay Marriage
Apple iPhone 5 release date, secret models and more surprises
Lehman breached an agreement to make payments to vendors and bondholders in an attempt to gain control of the projects, SunCal has argued.

According to court filings, Lehman planned to argue before Judge James Peck, the New York judge handling its own bankruptcy, that SunCal's attempt to "recoup" damages was actually a veiled attempt to recover money from Lehman. Such recovery is barred by bankruptcy's automatic stay provision, which protects bankrupt firms against creditors looking to collect on debts, Lehman said.

But in a hearing on similar issues held Monday in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Santa Ana, California, Judge Erithe A. Smith, overseeing SunCal's bankruptcy, ruled for SunCal, saying its objections to Lehman's claims were defensive in nature and not barred by automatic stay.

Lehman took the matter off the New York agenda Tuesday afternoon, tentatively moving it to July 20. A lawyer for Lehman declined to comment on when, or if, the matter will actually be heard.

An attorney for SunCal did not respond to a request for comment.

Lehman filed the biggest bankruptcy in U.S. history in September 2008, with SunCal following suit less than two months later. The SunCal parties have proposed a plan to pull their projects out of bankruptcy, but it would require subordinating Lehman's claims below other creditors', a move Lehman has steadfastly opposed.

http://hken.ibtimes.com/articles/162986/20110615/...suncal-tussle.htm  

Disclosure Statement Hearing - June 28, 2011

Solicitation Package Assembly Period [June 30, 2011 – July 22, 2011]

Service Period [July 22, 2011 – July 29, 2011]  

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Bondholders of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc (Other OTC:LEHMQ.PK - News) have postponed a hearing on a controversial proposal to force the failed investment bank's creditors to share details about their claims, citing a wave of objections to the plan.

The bondholders, an ad-hoc group led by hedge fund Paulson & Co, filed court papers on Monday saying the hearing initially slated for Wednesday would be pushed to July 20.

They said the delay would "permit the group to continue discussions to attempt to resolve or narrow certain objections" from units of several large banks, including Goldman Sachs Group Inc (NYSE:GS - News), Morgan Stanley (NYSE:MS - News) and Deutsche Bank AG (XETRA:DBKGN.DE - News).

A spokesman for the bondholders did not comment on Monday. An attorney for Goldman said the company had not yet begun discussions with the bondholders to try to resolve the dispute.

Lawyers for Morgan Stanley and Deutsche Bank could not immediately be reached for comment.

The banks are part of a group proposing a plan to divvy up about $60 billion in the Lehman estate to pay back creditors of the company, which filed the biggest bankruptcy in U.S. history in September 2008. The bondholders have filed a competing plan that would yield lower returns for the banks.

In court papers filed on Friday in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan, the banks said the bondholders' proposal would require the disclosure of sensitive information and would go "far beyond" bankruptcy rules.

The bondholders in April were ordered by Judge James Peck, who oversees the bankruptcy, to disclose key points about their roughly $20 billion in claims, including the price paid for those claims. An analysis by the Wall Street Journal found that Paulson's fund, which bought its Lehman debt at a steep discount, could make profits of $350 million to $726 million from the bankruptcy.

The bondholders said all parties should be required to meet the same disclosure requirements, a position supported by Lehman. The group in May proposed a uniform standard for anyone trying to influence Lehman's payback plan.

But opponents say the bondholders' proposal is a litigation tactic designed to discourage creditors from seeking to influence Lehman's repayment.

Other parties opposed to the proposal are Bank of America Corp (NYSE:BAC - News), Barclays Plc (LSE:BARC.L - News) and the Royal Bank of Canada (Toronto:RY.TO - News). Investment funds including Oaktree Capital Management LP and Silver Point Capital LP have also lodged objections. There are more than 15 objectors in total.

BI-COASTAL BATTLE

One matter still on the agenda for Wednesday's hearing is Lehman's ongoing fight with the so-called SunCal parties, a group of 20 real estate projects under bankruptcy protection in California. Lehman, which helped finance the projects to the tune of $2 billion, is one of SunCal's biggest creditors.

Claiming Lehman misled them in hopes of taking control of the properties, the SunCal parties proposed a reorganization plan that would bury Lehman's claims below other creditors'.

The sides are fighting over whether such a plan is allowed under the automatic stay provision of the bankruptcy code, which protects bankrupt firms, like Lehman, from creditors looking to collect on debts.

Lehman will also seek permission at Wednesday's hearing to sell two reverse mortgage portfolios to MetLife (NYSE:MET - News) for about $43.4 million.

Judge Peck is also slated to hear arguments over the proposed $161 million sale of a former office building on which Lehman was forced to foreclose. The ad-hoc bondholder group has objected to the sale, saying the price represents a "steep discount" on the New York property's value.


http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...delay-rb-578102321.html?x=0&.v=2