2.91 million shares times 2.90 per share is about 8.5 million dollars.
Someone is putting some pretty big money in this, we could exceed the average volume in just the first hour or close.
One of my posts were deleted, where I explained the settlement will be "MUCH MUCH larger", because it will be divided not by all shareholders, but just by those who participate. I think the settlement will be "at least" $2 per share, and maybe more.
Its a big deal on multiple levels. First, I think it will be much more money than expected, because it will be divided just by shareholders who send in the paperwork, not all shareholders. Next, it helps set a precedent, exposing government wrongdoing to help out not just 2008 shareholders but all of them. It helps to "keep your head up" knowing there is light at the end of the tunnel, that the government can not just steal from us and be immune from prosecution.
Just think..in a few years China will own 8/10 of American Mortgages, if our current leaders have their way of "selling out America".
Yes, thank you Sue for this, even tho some find it necessary to criticize you, too.
They probably are, but remember the government moves slowly, as blade pointed out.
Exactly. Based on that hypothesis, all banks should fold as there's is a "falied business model" which has cost taxpayers mucho dinero. Car companies, too, should fold and be absorbed by the government because GM and Chrysler both required a bailout. Insurance companies, too, should all fold and be absorbed by the government as AIG failure "proved" the government should own all companies and everyone should just work for one huge government. This myth is prevelant in government and is based on spin that govenment needs to meddle in private industry and hold fannie in cship.
Yea, thanks for the compliment. You want everyone to believe you are really smart, but you dumb down just for me. Few people buy your "underwater hypothesis" either.
Well, yes, its big. Its one of the things the bashers can not seem to refute, since this came from "da judge". So, "here come da judge".
JPD's "overpaid hypothesis" has been refuted, with an example. Its too bad you have not kept up. Maybe that is why you think "I" overpaid, when you are actually feeling guilty "you" overpaid.
You persist with your flawed "underwater hypothesis" that has been refuted by example. Its too bad you are as bad at math as you are at making complete sentences. They begin with a capital letter and end with a period. Or, can you not understand that, either?
No. You still dont get it. Example
Last year, I buy 2 shares, one for 2 dollars, one for 4 dollars. Average cost 3.00
This year, I buy 1000 more shares for 2.20 each. Total cost $2206, divided by 1002 shares. Average cost is now 2.201. That is not underwater. JPD hypothesis refuted, again. Too bad he cant understand it.
Please give dates, cost, cost per share, and number of shares as to how you arrived at that conclusion. Oh, wait. Its a guess based on last year, "assuming" I never bought/sold shares in the past year. Wrong again. Last year's price has little/no relevance. Price is time specific.