Eagle1993

I dropped off the call and was primarily focused on work today, but a few things points I took away: The delays are done. We are now at the start of the beginning of the end. Current focus is the disclosure. Expect this to take most of the week. The judge has been clear that disclosure is separate from discovery which is separate from plan confirmation. There are some pretty big questions. Does the LC, LDS & Hartford money go to all (an LDS attorney wasn't sure and it could impact the vote)? What amount of detail is required in the disclosure ... sounds like more than what there is now, but it must be useful for claimants AND reasonable to obtain. The judge is VERY concerned about parts of the plan. She has a lot of questions. Tons of focus over insurance liability. Some LCs may back away if COs are not included. That was a shock. The LC contributions are not necessarily locked and loaded. If COs don't sign on, the BSA lawyer indicated some LCs may back away. That was a surprise to me. COs ... tons of talk about COs and if COs join, what disclosure they need to provide. For example, now that the LDS contributed $250M, should they have to disclosure details on their assets, liabilities, etc. Essentially, the same disclosure as LCs? Discovery, discovery, discovery .... while the disclosure hearing will be long ... discovery may be bigger. The judge emphasized this. Basically, if I put everything in disclosure, would you stop discovery. Stang said no. So, her point ... lets keep disclosure reasonable as you will have the opportunity to get the info through discovery.

What you are missing is: SOL ... many of these claims are probably really $0 since they are outside SOL False claims ... BSA must be assuming some are false That said ... even then I expect the math doesn't add up.

One debate right now... insurance company is stating that they have a big deductible per claim. Given that BSA is saying average claims are $6K or something, then insurance should have to pay NOTHING. The insurance companies are saying the disclosure is not clear as claimants may think there is substantial insurance when there will be none. Now, if you believe the other numbers ($600K - $2M) then there could be insurance coverage; however, BSA is not being consistent in disclosure.

Even the LDS issue is going to be debated. I don't think we know for sure. Right now, it is all 1 big pot per the plan ... unless CynicalScouter found something different in the plan.

One very interesting point that may have been missed. The FCR stated that with the LDS contribution, there is now a "framework" for CO contributions. I wonder if the FCR is agreeing to the plan as they think eventually many COs will come in with offers at similar multipliers as the LDS. Shortly after this, the lawyer for the Catholic/Methodist committee denied there is a framework or even a CO agreement. Them emphasized that there is an LDS agreement and no other CO has agreed. They lawyer was asking to delay the hearing to buy more time (but as you know that was denied). The Coalition & FCR seemed to be really emphasizing that more deals are coming and the pot of money will grow large. The TCC seems to be questioning if that is really true, given the LC, LDS and Hartford deals haven't really grown that pot of money nearly as fast as some thought ... and the number of players with large sums to negotiate with are dwindling.

For everyone ... sorry for so many posts today but for once we are starting to see more movement in this case (vs talking mostly theory).

I think the judge should tell everyone to spend the next few days, ready our 6 threads on the bankruptcy and only then can they talk in court. I'm serious ... some of these people are either intentionally lost OR they have no clue what is going on. For example, the Guam lawyer was surprised to hear that if this deal goes through no one can sue their local council for CSA prior to Feb 2020 (she may not even know that date). She had no clue about the first Hartford settlement. Come on people ... at least get up to speed.

BSA is very concerned here. Why? Because both they and Stang knows that when a claimant sees a valuation of their claim being $1.5M and if they vote yes on this deal, they can expect $15,000 ... guess how they will vote?

This is going to take FOREVER. This is herding cats. The Guam lawyer is all over the place. She should have read our threads on scouter.com ... I think she would know more than she appears to know in court.

Discovery must start and that can only start if she starts hearing on the plan. She doesn't see a benefit in a delay. More info isn't always better. She has some questions about the plan that she hopes to get answered this week. Another couple of weeks simply push this off, discussions must start now.

Judge denying request, but will start on the 4th amended plan objections which will give time to object to the 5th amended plan.

Feb 2021/June 2021 .... LC assets increased $80M.

It sounds like that will be a upcoming focus of discussion by the TCC.

What if the LDS settlement goes ONLY to LDS victims (and their lawyers). What if the Hartford settlement only go to the 40,000 Hartford victims (and their lawyers). Same question came up about Local Councils (will each Local Council settlement only go to their own victims). That is a major question not answered. National BSA is clear ... $250M for all ... but the rest?

Yes ... AND ... does that prevent them from suing the LDS if the CSA occurred during a non scouting activity.

For those not on the call, as expected, the debate over delaying the disclosure review by 2 weeks is underway. Stang kicked it off and now supporting lawyers are joining in.

Stang is saying ... be careful rushing this through. BSA attnys are saying 81% will approve. However, when someone who was raped as a child sees that their payment will be very low with this deal, will they really vote for the plan? There is a big difference from some attorneys saying they are good (as they are going to get $400M+ and actually getting the votes of the claimants. Stang also said they are the only group with actual victims in the discussions and they are not on board.

Nothing coming from the Methodist, Catholic, etc. ... only LDS per Stang.

Stang said real number may be closer to 18,000 ... what was that about?

When does voting start/end?

Reading these filings, it really looks like the claim is: National BSA is running out of time. If they don't have a plan approved with a vote soon, they will likely liquidate. If they liquidate, the pension board will take most of their money, leaving little to claimants. Claimants will have to pursue LCs & COs in state court and they will start declaring bankruptcy

Ad Hoc Committee objecting to the TCC's request to delay: https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/18922731-7312-4a0e-b52b-68cb33ecfe65_6307.pdf

That is a high hurdle. That means every non vote is essentially a no vote. So, with 84,000 voters, they need 55,440 yes votes. I think if the judge forces this through it will be very risky. The TCC and many law firms are on the other side plus 12,000+ of that 55,000 are questionable (many may listen to Kosnoff). What a mess.

Everything right now seems to be based on the belief that the Coalition can delivery the needed 55,440 votes (or more) for the plan to pass. In terms of voting... Do we know the number of claimants to coalition represents? What number of these are questionable due to AIS? Did the coalition already get letters from 100% of these claimants that their lawyers can vote for them, or is there risk that some of the claimants won't vote or will vote no even through their lawyers would recommend voting the other way? How will voting work .. is it 66% of those who voted or do they need 55,440 yes votes? It seems like BSA is putting all of their eggs into the Coalition basket. With the TCC on the other side, in addition to many other law firms, there appears to have no room for error. I'm curious how risky this strategy would be as a no vote could put BSA's survival at risk.