From the kinda-funny but kinda-sad files, comes this revelation of how the arrogant and loose WaMu culture that led to its huge sub-prime losses. From one of their lavish retreats, the lyrics of a Sir Mix-a-lot adapted rap with lyrics like “I like big bucks and I can not lie …”
An article in the Wall Street Journal today fails to close the books on WaMu’s failure/seizure, but instead continues to raise the question that WaMu might have been seized prematurely. Striking is the fact that documents related to the seizure obtained by the WSJ were heavily redacted and provided little information into actually what went on. The article also presents the image that JP Morgan Chase was essentially stalking WaMu. Truly striking though is the image that there still has been no clear cut impetus for the seizure presented by those involved.
Given how JP Morgan Chase continues to treat its customers, it is very believable that it believes it can do whatever it wants and had an active hand in determining WaMu’s fate before it was seized.
With a draft of the report on WaMu’s failure in hand, the New York Times has produced an article about WaMu’s failure. Seems that the two regulators who were supposed to be, you know, regulating the bank, the Office of Thrift Supervision and the FDIC, were in a bitter feud over whether WaMu was messed up or not. They only declared the bank unsound a week before it was seized and sold off to JP Morgan Chase.
Seems to me that this could add some fuel to the argument that WaMu was seized improperly.
Whether or not you owned stock in Washington Mutual before it was seized, the fact that more of the parties involved in the Washington Mutual bankruptcy (now the bondholders) opposing the proposed bankruptcy plan, that gives JP Morgan Chase billions on WaMu’s tax credits, is a good thing.
Now the FDIC is backing away from its support of JP Morgan Chase getting part of the tax break that really belongs to WaMu’s former holding company. This doesn’t help WaMu’s common shareholders though, as even with an additional $1.4 billion, there isn’t nearly enough money to make the bondholders whole, and that happens before shareholders get any money.
Interesting. This article in the Seattle Times seems to indicate that the Washington Mutual logo and name actually belong to the former holding company, not Chase.
As expected, WaMu shareholders have filed an objection to the Chase/FDIC settlement, basically because they get nothing from it. My concern is that the settlement helps sweep this whole event under the rug and the shenanigans that caused so much pain for WaMu customers and shareholders does not get fully investigated. If you have been affected by the WaMu seizure, I urge you to contact your representatives to ask them to support the investigation in to the WaMu seizure.
The BIG news is that WaMu’s former holding company has announced that is has reached an agreement with JP Morgan Chase and the FDIC that gives it back $4B in assets it had claimed and allows it to keep 1/2 of the $5.6B in tax credits. This is good news for WaMu bondholders, but not enough to give shareholders anything. I hope this doesn’t kill the impetus for lawmakers to continue to look into the fiasco of a siezure that gave WaMu to Chase.