Teddy/GME Shareholder #111

942 posts

Teddy/GME Shareholder #111 banner
Teddy/GME Shareholder #111

Teddy/GME Shareholder #111

@jay111finance

Yes.

Katılım Ekim 2020
174 Takip Edilen57 Takipçiler
MrBeast
MrBeast@MrBeast·
First person to reply with the exact number of pennies in this room win $10,000
MrBeast tweet media
English
472.4K
7K
209.9K
51.9M
Internet Computer Today
Internet Computer Today@DfinityToday·
10000 $ICP to 10 people who predicts correct score. ends in 5 hrs
Internet Computer Today tweet media
English
11.8K
860
5.6K
836.2K
Saty
Saty@satymahajan·
Little mid-week $SPX analysis update: - So far the week has played out largely as expected. We expected more downside, D21 was resistance 2x. Demand zone was tested and hourly divergence played out from demand. - Now we're testing the strength of this weekly trend and if we get a full weekly mean reversion or find some footing near the W13. - We have a 60% chance of -1 Monthly ATR this month, which lines up with a deeper Weekly pullback. So I won't be surprised if we see 7200 under Tuesday's low. Some daily bearish expansion as well so that can take us lower in the range on the PO before we find support.
Saty tweet media
Saty@satymahajan

We got the drift up and slowdown we were looking for last week. Some $SPX analysis into this week. Weekly (Top Right) Daily + Long-term ATR (Top Left) Hourly + Daily Ribbon + Position ATR (Bottom Left) Hourly + Swing ATR (Bottom Right)

English
16
10
223
27.4K
Teddy/GME Shareholder #111
Teddy/GME Shareholder #111@jay111finance·
@satymahajan Been trying to create a strategy inside trading view with your indicators to back test and automate it but can't...
English
0
0
0
38
Saty
Saty@satymahajan·
@jay111finance All you need is the current ones to trade my system.
English
1
0
4
477
Saty
Saty@satymahajan·
Price Volume Levels Trend
English
16
12
271
11.9K
ThePPShow
ThePPShow@ThePPseedsShow·
ARE YOU READY TO BE REMEMBERED FOREVER? GET READY BECAUSE YES ITS HAPPENING. GME X BBBYQ x IEP
English
36
29
488
24K
Ryan Cohen
Ryan Cohen@ryancohen·
Who’s the one Wall Street analyst actually worth talking to?
English
1.9K
1.2K
7.5K
790.3K
Nikita Bier
Nikita Bier@nikitabier·
Top cashtags searched on X recently
Nikita Bier tweet media
English
1.2K
223
4K
1.2M
jake2b
jake2b@jake2b·
welcome to the 12 Posts of $BBBYQ -mas. my goal is to try to review and simplify concepts from my research into $BBBY (old). no. 9! today we will conclude the multi-post about Interests, highlighting the nuanced, individualized application of the Plan for each Debtor, the differences between Debtor Entities and why the plan man says yer shares are gone. from the Plan: “Although for purposes of administrative convenience and efficiency the Plan has been filed as a joint plan for each of the Debtors and presents together Classes of Claims against, and Interests in, the Debtors, the Plan does not provide for the substantive consolidation of any of the Debtors.” this is a very important concept to clearly understand because not only does the Plan apply separately to each of the Debtors, so do Interests: I tried making my highlight as eye-catching as I could. substantive consolidation would mean that whatever is written into the Confirmed Plan applied equally to each of the 74 entities (parent co and subsidiaries) that entered Chapter 11. the U.S. Trustee and some creditors even tried to appeal Plan Confirmation by saying that it should be consolidated.. and this was denied! the only way that is possible is because there will be different outcomes for different entities, otherwise the Judge would have no basis to side with the Debtors in their objection for consolidation. wow! this is the beginning of the roadmap for how the Reorganized Debtor was formed. this is how we will tie everything together to explain the Holder of Interests, the Reorganized Debtor, and later on, the third-party release. let’s look a little more. have you ever noticed that in some dockets filed by the plan man and his attorneys it will state “..solely in his capacity as..”? usually it sounds something like “..acting as Plan Administrator, solely in his capacity..”, or “..solely in his capacity as Plan Administrator to DK-Butterfly-1..”? that is intentional legalese and it means that whatever claims, statements, whatever! are being made, apply only to one specific entity and it acts as a legal protective umbrella. that is why “yer shares are gone, bro.” it is because the old Common Stock of the old company were Interests in the old Parent Co—Bed Bath and Beyond—which we know became 20230930-DK-Butterfly-1 on September 21, 2023. when the plan man speaks of share cancellation he is being very specific in his wording, too. the plan is very specific in its language about the cancellation of Class 9 shares and it outlines “Interests in BBB”. in the definitions section of the Plan, it clarifies that BBB refers to the old parent co.. only. a reorganized debtor is exactly that, a new company that was formed from the building blocks of the old company but is reassembled in a different way. before the effective date there were the Debtors and their affiliates, after the Effective Date there is 20230930-DK-Butterfly and 20230930-DK-Butterfly-1.. notice the difference of -1? it is because 202309930-DK-Butterfly is the new, reassembled Company made up of the seven old subsidiaries that are filed in independent global notes in the PCR filings and 20230930-DK-Butterfly-1 is an entity that is completely separated from them and exists to pursue Causes of Action. it is not part of any corporate structure and the Old Company shares existed in this entity. that is why it does not matter that the Interests of BBB were cancelled, you wouldn’t want those anyway because that Company will stop existing once all of the litigation is completed. always pay attention in the dockets when you observe the word “solely”: I hope the distinction in the above example makes a lot of sense. legalese does not use unnecessary language and the use of the word “solely” in the context of Interests is intentional. remember: • the plan applies separately to each Debtor entity; • the classification of Interests applies separately to each one too (critical!); • when the plan man states “solely in his capacity” he is making a statement with limited parameters; • just because Interests were cancelled in the old parent company does not mean that new Interests cannot be issued into a new, Reorganized Debtor. spoiler: that is exactly what will happen, but that is for another day. we can get even more detailed with a specific example of this being argued in the Court by the plan man himself: again, notice the use of the word “solely”. the plan man himself is arguing that the objection brought forward to the Court is against 20230930-DK-Butterfly-1—note the -1!—which we know is an independent entity with no affiliates or subsidiaries. the objection is against the cancellation of Interests and he himself argues that even if a cancelled Interest became an allowed Interest, the objection must fail because the Interest would not apply to 20230930-DK-Butterfly-1; why? because.. it is separate! notice how he says that even if the Interests became Allowed, they would not apply to 20230930-DK-Butterfly-1 because the Interests were cancelled “solely” as to the Debtors and their affiliates. separate! Notice how “..shall be deemed solely..” is written in bold? it is not presented like that in the Confirmed Plan so the plan man’s attorneys themselves have applied emphasis on the fact that Interests are cancelled “solely” as to the entity that will not be associated with the Reorganized Debtor. I hope that makes sense! it is my belief that the Holder of Interests has control of this entity: and that a distribution of non-voting equity securities will be issued from it. this is the entity that has global notes linked to seven former Debtor subsidiaries, separated and filed independently from the other 66. ask yourself.. why would they do that? because they have to, they will have different outcomes! remember, the Plan applies separately for each of the Debtors. I hope that wasn’t too confusing! I wish you a very relaxing start to the weekend and.. until tomorrow!
jake2b tweet mediajake2b tweet mediajake2b tweet mediajake2b tweet media
jake2b@jake2b

welcome to the 12 Posts of $BBBYQ -mas. my goal is to try to review and simplify concepts from my research into $BBBY (old). no. 10! today we will continue our thought experiment into substantial consummation and understand why this hot topic is very valuable to understand. the question was posed.. has substantial consummation occurred? similar to how we shared the snippet from the Plan, here’s the reason why this question is so important: the definition of substantial consummation—according to Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute—must include the starting of distributions under the Plan. so ask yourself, did that happen? well, according to the PCR (post-confirmation report) financial disclosures since the Effective Date, no it hasn’t. as far as I remember there has not been of any mention of a distribution occurring under the Plan. if that is the case, then the legal standard for substantial consummation to occur has not been met. hmm. so then if substantial consummation has not occurred, have a look over here: that would mean that the Confirmed Plan allows that the Plan could still be modified at any time; wowza! here’s the thing, it was somewhat of a trick question and I only explain it to help bring attention to the modification of the Plan and future distributions. this is why. either; • distributions had begun and the Plan was modified after Confirmation, but before the Effective Date, or, • distributions have not yet begun, and the Plan can still be modified, but.. both cannot be true at the same time. so which is it? like I said, it was a trick question: let us look at the thicker red box. if substantial consummation did not happen then the modifications to the Plan can be submitted to the Court at any time, and surprise! no one would know. if substantial consummation did happen then the modifications to the Plan were submitted to the court by the Effective Date and you guessed it! no one would know. the main point being that this explains why there is no “newer” information about future distributions, or why if the Plan was modified, it has not been submitted to the Court and for the public to see. notice how in the yellow highlighted section of the image we just looked at there is mention of Interests, but in the thin red square, the language only mentions Holders of Claims? that’s because the language is not boilerplate and the legal protections of any Plan modifications need to include Holders of Interests. wow! now why would that be? in my opinion the logical answer is because modifications to the Plan would include Holders of Interests—otherwise it would not be written how it is. c'est magnifique! speaking of intentional language.. there are other easter eggs to be found throughout the plan about Interests. here’s one example: remember the definition of Interests. now, if all Interests were cancelled and no longer existed as of the Effective Date.. then why would a statement about activity “On and after the Effective Date..”—again, a point in time where Interests no longer exist, right?—why are they included in the responsibilities that the plan man is allowed to use, acquire, or dispose of? the answer is obvious. and that’s all for today. I sincerely hope that you have a wonderful day, filled with positivity and personal success. until tomorrow!

English
48
97
510
96.2K