CynicalScouter Posted August 30, 2021 Share Posted August 30, 2021 Century attorney Shamah: This is all insurance arguments, not bankruptcy. You are right on judge. This has NOTHING to do with what is before you. ALL of this is pure conjecture. No RSA is approved and ordered. All of this in the future. And Hartford plan that the BSA has repudiated. In terms of bankruptcy context, there are 3 bankruptcy related arugments. 1) Hartford settlement, which is in flux and about how much Hartford pays in a hypothetical. I don't see how Century on discovery applies. 2) Estimation motion, which was abandoned? 3) Main argument: plan confirmation. They can't put toothpaste in tube. They signed the RSA. They signed onto the Plan. They cannot now claim they need this in order to approve the plan or support the plan. They signed the RSA knowing DARN WELL there was questions about Century/INA deal in 1996/1997 transaction. They cannot say "we need this data now" after they already signed a deal WITHOUT THAT DATA. That plan has WARNINGS about insurance and claimant recovery. Claimants can vote with the warnings and take their risks/chances. This entire process is about getting mediation leverage, and that's all this is. It is NOT a permissible use of discovery to dig up dirt for mediation. Chubb counsel: 1996 transactions is my focus. Chubb is 5-steps-removed from Century. These discovery requests deal with insurance liability requests. NONE of that is a bankruptcy issue. NONE of that has anything to do with before the court right now. Nevertheless Chubb produced 8 boxes of documents about Chubb and Century about their financial statuses. Coverage obligations are disputed, we do NOT agree what Century is going to have to pay or if there are or are not per-person or per-occurance limits, etc. NONE of those issues will be adjudicated in this court. Even more remote is the question of whether there is a Chubb backstop. NONE of this are bankruptcy related, this is for another court to deal with insurance issues. We don't understand why this request is even happening. We gave tons of financial data. As for the restructuring in 1996, we categorically disagree that anything that happened in 1996 was fraudulent. This was all approved by 8 regulators. (I need to step away) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted August 30, 2021 Share Posted August 30, 2021 Before I step away: the judge is I think going to rule that the claimants are going to have to vote on a plan NOT KNOWING what the potential insurance policies are or are not worth since Century/Chubb are not seeking releases they don't have to say how much they have to offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNow Posted August 30, 2021 Share Posted August 30, 2021 6 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said: $800M seems light for 40% of total insurance liability. Yup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted August 30, 2021 Share Posted August 30, 2021 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said: I believe the TCC said in a Townhall that Harford represented 40% of total insurance liability. Does this mean the rest, combined, would be $1.2B? My guess is that they would want more, but since Hartford got BSA to sign onto a deal, they have them over the barrel. $800M seems light for 40% of total insurance liability. I cannot believe that BSA would cut a Hartford Deal 2.0 without having the TCC/Coalition/FCR sign off on it first. Then again, maybe I can believe they'd be that stupid. EDIT: Or we get into another fight. BSA/Coalition/Hartford vs. TCC/FCR (?) Edited August 30, 2021 by CynicalScouter 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNow Posted August 30, 2021 Share Posted August 30, 2021 1 minute ago, CynicalScouter said: Before I step away: the judge is I think going to rule that the claimants are going to have to vote on a plan NOT KNOWING what the potential insurance policies are or are not worth since Century/Chubb are not seeking releases they don't have to say how much they have to offer. Same. She has been extremely combative disfavoring the arguments by the TCC and the Coalition. Less so the Coalition, in part bc Goodman is fluent in bakruptcyese. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sentinel947 Posted August 30, 2021 Share Posted August 30, 2021 (edited) 1 minute ago, CynicalScouter said: I cannot believe that BSA would cut a Hartford Deal 2.0 without having the TCC/Coalition/FCR sign off on it first. Then again, maybe I can believe they'd be that stupid. That belief is one that nearly everybody on this forum can agree on. Edited August 30, 2021 by Sentinel947 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gilwell_1919 Posted August 30, 2021 Share Posted August 30, 2021 3 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said: Sure, continue the movement, but do not shuffle it into the hands of that organization. Get a new team together, and do it much better than they... Heck, I'll sign on...full time...at $100K per year. That's $900K less than Surbaugh got in 2018... https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/Form-990-2018.pdf Correct.... it should never be about the money or prestige... it should always focus on helping young people become the best versions of themselves. That doesn't take a million-dollar salary to do... especially if you adhere to "servant" leadership principles. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted August 30, 2021 Share Posted August 30, 2021 1 minute ago, Sentinel947 said: That belief is one that nearly everybody on this forum can agree on. Or we get into another fight. BSA got the Coalition to sign off but not the TCC. So BSA/Coalition/Hartford vs. TCC/FCR (?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sentinel947 Posted August 30, 2021 Share Posted August 30, 2021 (edited) 54 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said: Or we get into another fight. BSA got the Coalition to sign off but not the TCC. So BSA/Coalition/Hartford vs. TCC/FCR (?) I meant the BSA's leadership self sabotaging. Edited August 30, 2021 by Sentinel947 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNow Posted August 30, 2021 Share Posted August 30, 2021 10 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said: This is the fig leaf for TCC/Coalition/FCR to hide under: $650 million Hartford wasn't good enough, we got another $150 million, that's good enough to move ahead with the RSA/Plan 4.0 One fig leaf. 3 entities. Logical conclusion? Someone gonna be n'cked, depending on the size of that leaf. Just sayin'. In my book, that's a small leaf and someone's motive is suspect. Hint: starts with a 'C' and ends with an 'n'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle1993 Posted August 30, 2021 Author Share Posted August 30, 2021 4 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said: They signed the RSA. They signed onto the Plan. They cannot now claim they need this in order to approve the plan or support the plan. They signed the RSA knowing DARN WELL there was questions about Century/INA deal in 1996/1997 transaction. They cannot say "we need this data now" after they already signed a deal WITHOUT THAT DATA. Kosnoff is looking pretty good right now. I wonder how many times he laughed during the hearing. Now, the Coalition/TCC is probably luck the Hartford deal wasn't struck down. It gives them a bit more leverage. Let's see what happens now. (I wonder if that $800M deal is at risk given today). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted August 30, 2021 Share Posted August 30, 2021 Just now, Sentinel947 said: I meant the BSA's leadership being stupid and self sabotaging. I know. But what I am saying is BSA leadership may NOT have been stupid. Hear me out. If the BSA cuts a deal with Hartford AND can get the Coalition on board, maybe they believe that the Coalition will deliver the votes for the plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNow Posted August 30, 2021 Share Posted August 30, 2021 And, she's denied the motion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gpurlee Posted August 30, 2021 Share Posted August 30, 2021 1 minute ago, Eagle1993 said: Kosnoff is looking pretty good right now. I wonder how many times he laughed during the hearing. Be careful Eagle 1993 or you will end up on his Christmas card list lol. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sentinel947 Posted August 30, 2021 Share Posted August 30, 2021 Just now, CynicalScouter said: I know. But what I am saying is BSA leadership may NOT have been stupid. Hear me out. If the BSA cuts a deal with Hartford AND can get the Coalition on board, maybe they believe that the Coalition will deliver the votes for the plan. Certainly possible. Thanks for your work in compiling the proceedings. Just now, gpurlee said: Be careful Eagle 1993 or you will end up on his Christmas card list lol. He'll get a another shout-out on Twitter. 😂 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts