SureTrader Nadex Advertisement PGUS
Home > Boards > US OTC > Banking and Finance >

Fannie Mae (FNMA)

FNMA RSS Feed
Add FNMA Price Alert      Hide Sticky   Hide Intro
Moderator: cooler_heads, rocco2, Dadx4, tonruf, Surfonium, Captain Jack Sparrow
Search This Board: 
Last Post: 3/25/2017 11:22:18 AM - Followers: 1900 - Board type: Free - Posts Today: 30

Fannie Mae
Web Site: http://www.fanniemae.com

About Fannie Mae:

The Federal National Mortgage Association, commonly known as Fannie Mae, is a stockholder-owned corporation chartered by Congress in 1968 as a government-sponsored enterprise (GSE), but founded in 1938 during the Great Depression. The corporation's purpose is to purchase and securitize mortgages in order to ensure that funds are consistently available to the institutions that lend money to home buyers.

On September 7, 2008, James Lockhart, director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), announced that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were being placed into conservatorship of the FHFA. The action is "one of the most sweeping government interventions in private financial markets in decades". As of 2008, Fannie Mae and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) owned or guaranteed about half of the U.S.'s $12 trillion mortgage market.

Conservatorship and Treasury Agreements:

In September 2008, through the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), Fannie Mae entered into an agreement with Treasury, which was amended in May 2008. In return for the consideration and fees detailed in the agreement, Treasury has committed to provide up to an aggregate of $200 billion in funds to Fannie Mae, as needed on a quarterly basis, to correct any deficiencies in FNM's net worth, and ensure FNM will continue to provide liquidity and support stability in the housing market.

The impact of conservatorship and the agreements with Treasury on Fannie Mae's business and financial results are detailed in the 2008 Form 10-K and the Form 10-Q for the first quarter of 2009, available under "Results and Filings."


FNMA Net income $68.8 billion in the first half of 2013

 

We recognized comprehensive income of $69.6 billion in the first half of 2013, consisting of net income of $68.8 billion and other comprehensive income of $820 million . In comparison, we recognized comprehensive income of $8.5 billion in the first half of 2012, consisting of net income of $7.8 billion and other comprehensive income of $690 million .

Q2 filing , page 3,

http://www.otcmarkets.com/edgar/GetFilingHtml?FilingID=9442903

As of June 30, 2013 , there were 1,158,077,970 shares of common stock of the registrant outstanding. 

http://www.otcmarkets.com/edgar/GetFilingHtml?FilingID=9442903


FNMA net profit per share: 59.4 dollars


NET PROFIT PER SHARE: TOTAL NET PROFIT (Q1+Q2)/ TOTAL OUTSTANDING SHARES

NET PROFIT PER SHARE: 68.8 BILLION DOLLARS/ 1,158,077,970 COMMON SHARES= 59.4 DOLLARS

------------------------------------------------------------------

So far FNMA/FMCC paid 146 billion dollars to US government as dividend. The company received 187 billion dollars from The government.

 


 

WSJ~ monster news out!~ HEDGE FUND Fairholme Fund May Increase Bet on Fannie, Freddie

Manager Bruce Berkowitz believes Fannie and Freddie are undervalued.

By KIRSTEN GRIND And NICK TIMIRAOS


Bruce Berkowitz, a mutual-fund manager with a history of bold bets, is doubling down on a risky wager that the U.S. government ultimately will sell mortgage giants Fannie Mae FNMA +7.32% and Freddie Mac FMCC +9.65% back to private investors.

Mr. Berkowitz is reopening his $8 billion Fairholme Fund to look for new investment opportunities, including potentially increasing his stake in Fannie and Freddie, Mr. Berkowitz said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal.

Mr. Berkowitz said he continues to believe Fannie and Freddie are a "very important element of the U.S. economy" and undervalued. "We haven't found a way to disprove our thesis about Fannie and Freddie," he said.

The investor's comments come less than 10 days after a speech by President Barack Obama that was dismissive of the idea of again giving control of Fannie and Freddie to investors.

Mr. Berkowitz, founder and chief investment officer of Miami-based Fairholme Capital Management, disclosed in June that he held a position in Fannie and Freddie.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have become enormously profitable, buoyed by a federal backstop, an improving housing market and little competition from private investors. Last week, Fannie and Freddie reported second-quarter profits of $10.1 billion and $5 billion respectively.

Over the past year, hedge funds and other investors have bid up the shares, once considered worthless. But those are effectively political and legal bets, not financial ones, because Fannie and Freddie's bailout agreement doesn't allow them to pay back the government, meaning they can't emerge from government control without action from Congress or the Treasury Department.

Several investors, including Fairholme, sued the U.S. Treasury last month to challenge the government's bailout terms, which allow taxpayers to recoup all of the companies' profits.

The Fairholme Fund holds about 6.9% of its portfolio in the two companies, a position valued at $566 million as of May 31, according to the company. The fund, which closed on Feb. 28, will reopen Aug. 19.

For Mr. Berkowitz's bet to pay off, he and other investors need one of two things to happen: persuade Congress and the White House to revamp or liquidate Fannie and Freddie in a way that will preserve value for the shares, or win a fight in court.

Bills introduced in the House and Senate would liquidate the companies as part of a broader mortgage-market overhaul. Last week, President Obama weighed in, saying the country "couldn't have a situation in which the government" would backstop all of the loans made by "these quasi-private institutions, and then if things go wrong, suddenly taxpayers are on the hook."

"Each of the major decision makers who has weighed in on this…has said emphatically and repeatedly that they will not allow these shareholders to be paid off," said Jim Parrott, a former White House housing adviser. Without a successful legal challenge or "an entirely different set of decision makers," he said, "your bet faces mighty long odds."

Mr. Berkowitz said he doesn't take that view.

"I think common sense will prevail," he said. "There's a huge win out there for all constituents—the taxpayers, homeowners and preferred shareholders."

Under mutual-fund regulations, Mr. Berkowitz could invest up to 25% of Fairholme's portfolio each in Fannie and Freddie, although he has no plans to reach that maximum amount as it would require him to downsize his other positions, he said. A more realistic scenario would see him increasing his position to about 5% each of the portfolio, or a total of $800 million based on the value of the shares today, he said.

Mr. Berkowitz is no stranger to unpopular bets.

He bought into American International Group Inc. AIG -2.12% in the first quarter of 2010, when the insurer was trading in a range of $22 to $34 a share, and when many investors were still shying away from financial stocks. AIG was trading late Thursday at about $47. He eventually accumulated a position of 86.1 million shares, making Fairholme Capital Management —the management company of the Fairholme Fund—AIG's largest investor as of June 30, according to the company.

"The seeds of great performance are usually sown in times of intense fear after a disaster," Mr. Berkowitz wrote in an October 2011 letter to investors.

The bet didn't initially pay off, and investors pulled billions from the fund as performance plunged.

By 2012, as the share prices of AIG and other financial stocks rose, the fund rebounded, posting a yearly return of 35.8%, compared with 16% for the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index. Fairholme is up 21% this year through Aug. 14, compared with 19.8% for the S&P 500.

After the government seized Fannie and Freddie, it agreed to inject vast sums of aid in exchange for a new class of stock—so called "senior preferred" shares—that initially paid a 10% dividend. It also received warrants to acquire 80% of the common shares; it didn't assume full ownership to avoid bringing $5 trillion in assets and liabilities onto the federal ledger.

Few saw any value in those shares after their collapse, but some investors, including hedge funds Perry Capital LLC and Paulson & Co., began buying the preferred shares at deep discounts.

The government upended investors' positions last year when it amended the terms of its rescue. The revamped bailout doesn't require any dividend payment when the firms lose money, but when they turn a profit, all of those earnings are sent to the Treasury as dividends.

Fairholme's lawsuit challenges those terms. A Treasury spokesman said, "We fully believe our actions have been lawful and appropriate."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324139404579015032274244954.html


Most Recent financials Results

Mar 31, 2012 Net Income 2,718,000,000 dollars

Jun 30, 2012 Net Income 5,119,000,000 dollars

Sep 30, 2012 Net Income 1,813,000,000 dollars

Dec 30, 2102 Net Income 7,570,000,000 dollars

March 31, 2013 Net Income 58.7 billion dollars 

June 30, 2013  Net Income 10.1 billion dollars

 

Fannie Mae CEO:  We will have strong profits for the foreseeable future

By: Bloomberg TV interview | Thu, Apr 11, 2013


In his first TV interview since the company reported record profits, Fannie Mae (FNMA) CEO Tim Mayopoulos told Bloomberg TV's Peter Cook today that U.S. taxpayers could see a net gain from their bailout as the housing market rebounds. Mayopoulos said, "I do think, given the strength of our future profitability, that it is possible that we will be able to pay dividends that would be equal to or greater than the amount of money that we've received from the Treasury Department."

Mayopoulos also said, "There is a risk that policymakers will look at our profitability and say we don't need to act on this soon. I think that would be a mistake. There needs to be clarity about what the future of the housing finance system is going to be."

Mayopoulos on Fannie Mae's turnaround:

"We are obviously pleased with the turnaround and from our perspective. This is not something that miraculously came upon us. This is the result of four plus years of work that we've been doing at Fannie Mae. We've really been very focused on building a new book of business that will be profitable. We've been managing the legacy book to minimize losses and we've been focused on pricing appropriately for the risk that we take. While it probably seems like a very sudden turnaround to those outside the company, for those inside the company we've been working on this for years to try to get to this place."

On whether the profits are sustainable over the long-term:

"We do think that we will have strong profits for the foreseeable future. The degree of confidence about that varies the farther out you go because we can't predict the future years out, but for the next few years we expect clearly to be profitable."

On whether taxpayers could earn a profit on their investment in Fannie:

"We are paying substantial dividends to taxpayers, so the company received payments from the Treasury of $116 billion. So far we have paid dividends in excess of $35 billion. I do think, given the strength of our future profitability, it is possible that we will pay dividends that will be equal to or greater than the amount of money that we have received from the Treasury department."

On whether the debate for the government to replace Fannie Mae will happen sooner rather than later:

"I'm not sure if it will happen sooner rather than later. I do think there is a risk that I think people should not accept, but there is a risk that policymakers will look at our profitability and say we don't need to act on this soon. I think that would be a mistake. There needs to be clarity about what the future of the housing finance system is going to be. I think the sooner we get there, the sooner private capital is likely to come back to this market."

On whether the reality is that the better Fannie Mae does, the sooner it goes away:

"That's one possibility. I think what our return to profitability does is allow policymakers to think about a full range of potential outcomes. They don't have to start with the assumption that creating some successors to Fannie and Freddie necessarily means that we have to accept hundreds of billions of dollars of losses for taxpayers. I do think the taxpayers may well receive their money back. I think what this has done is freed policymakers to think about what the full range of possibilities should be. There is a lot of debate about that, but I think the key is getting to an answer in the foreseeable future because no matter what you think the future housing finance system should look like, everybody agrees that at the moment the taxpayer shouldn't be on the hook for 90% of the market. Between Fannie, Freddie and FHA, the taxpayers are guaranteeing 90% of all the mortgages that are being written across the country. That doesn't make sense no matter what you think the future of the housing finance system should look like."

==============================================

Catch the full interview this Sunday on "Capitol Gains," airing at 11:30 am ET on WUSA9 in Washington and nationally on Bloomberg Television at 12 pm and 5 pm ET.

===========================================

http://www.bloomberg.com/video/taxpayers-may-receive-money-back-fannie-mae-ceo-gE75HM8_SOCGgvHCjFEq4Q.html
 
 

January 07, 2013

Fannie Mae Reaches Comprehensive Resolution with Bank of America, Yielding Positive Outcome for Taxpayers

Agreement Results in Payment of $3.55 Billion and Repurchase of 30,000 loans for $6.75 Billion

Fannie Mae Approves the Transfer of Servicing Rights of 941,000 Loans from Bank of America to Specialty Servicers

Bank of America Will Pay $1.3 Billion in Compensatory Fee Obligations

Pete Bakel

202-752-2034

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Fannie Mae (FNMA/OTC) today announced a comprehensive resolution with Bank of America, including a $10.3 billion agreement on existing and prospective repurchase requests on a specified population of loans and an additional payment of $1.3 billion to address servicing issues. Click here to read the Form 8-K.

The agreement covers current and future repurchase obligations related to loans with an outstanding unpaid principal balance of $297 billion as of November 30, 2012 that were originated between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2008. As part of the agreement, Bank of America will make a cash payment to Fannie Mae of $3.55 billion. In addition, Bank of America will repurchase approximately 30,000 loans, which  have the potential to cause significant future losses to Fannie Mae, paying par plus accrued interest, for an additional approximately $6.75 billion, subject to certain adjustments.  As a result of this resolution, the amount of Fannie Mae's outstanding repurchase requests will decrease substantially in the first quarter of 2013.

"A favorable resolution of this long-standing dispute between Fannie Mae and Bank of America is in the best interest of taxpayers," said Bradley Lerman, Executive Vice President and General Counsel of Fannie Mae.  "Fannie Mae has diligently pursued repurchases on loans that did not meet our standards at the time of origination, and we are pleased to have reached an appropriate agreement to collect on these repurchase requests."

Under the agreement, Bank of America remains liable for repurchase obligations arising out of specified excluded defects (for example, Fannie Mae Charter Act violations) and certain unresolved servicing and indemnification obligations. Bank of America also will be responsible for certain payment and other obligations related to mortgage insurance.

The comprehensive resolution also includes Fannie Mae's approval of Bank of America's request to transfer the servicing rights of approximately 941,000 loans from Bank of America to specialty servicers.  Fannie Mae's approval of the transfer is consistent with its strategy to leverage the enhanced loss mitigation capabilities of specialty servicers to reduce credit losses on high risk loans. 

In addition to the $10.3 billion resolution and in connection with Fannie Mae's approval of the servicing transfer, Bank of America will pay Fannie Mae $1.3 billion to resolve loan servicing compensatory fee obligations.

 
FNMA Security Details
Share Structure
FNMA Security Details Other Company Securities
Share Structure
Market Value1 $844,238,840 a/o Apr 12, 2013

Shares Outstanding

1,158,077,970

a/o Feb 28, 2013

Float Not Available
Authorized Shares Not Available
Par Value No Par Value
Shareholders
Shareholders of Record 14,000 a/o Apr 02, 2013
Corporate Actions
  Ex. Date Record Date Pay Date
Dividend () Jul 29, 2002 Jul 31, 2002 Aug 25, 2002
Security Notes
  • Capital Change=shs increased by 4 for 1 split. Ex-date=01/16/1996. Rec date=01/08/1996. Pay date=01/12/1996.

Short Selling Data
 
Short Interest 18,686,843 (19.95%)
Mar 28, 2013
Significant Failures to Deliver No
Transfer Agent(s)

 


 

  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 2M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 2Y
  • 3Y
  • 5Y
FNMA
Current Price
Volume:
Bid Ask Day's Range
SureTrader
PostSubject
#395669  Sticky Note GSE EVENT TIMELINE obiterdictum 03/11/17 05:35:46 PM
#395546  Sticky Note Executive Privilege - Secrets of Fannie & Freddie Captain Jack Sparrow 03/10/17 11:56:26 PM
#392960  Sticky Note Fannie Mae stock would support $30/share with GSE not one red cent ~NORC~ 03/01/17 03:48:41 PM
#382828  Sticky Note Many of you here seem to be of IH Admin [Edward] 01/31/17 10:34:29 AM
#373230  Sticky Note David Fiderer : GSE Reform And A Conspiracy mrfidlsticks 12/22/16 10:00:34 AM
#398925   It's a big deal for the shareholders. RCChristian 03/25/17 11:22:18 AM
#398924   I think that this means is that they matmlg 03/25/17 11:12:11 AM
#398923   "Treasury now disagrees with FHFA that it is RCChristian 03/25/17 10:55:14 AM
#398922   AGREE ... unless any resident legal beagles see navycmdr 03/25/17 10:53:53 AM
#398921   What does this mean? Does this mean we're Cockster434 03/25/17 10:16:41 AM
#398920   My lay persons take: The appeals court blocked imtheshadow 03/25/17 10:16:06 AM
#398919   investorshub.advfn.com/uimage/uploads/2017/3/25/ouvet3.JPG navycmdr 03/25/17 10:09:31 AM
#398917   Awesome, thanks! Letgoofmyfannie 03/25/17 09:39:31 AM
#398916   Yes,,agree...NWS should stop Monday as far as I'm Patswil 03/25/17 09:05:43 AM
#398915   It is a conspiracy. I believe it was BaGr 03/25/17 09:00:28 AM
#398914   * * $FNMA Video Chart 03-24-17 * * ClayTrader 03/25/17 09:00:05 AM
#398912   What does that mean lol? TheDon3 03/25/17 08:34:06 AM
#398911   Treasury notified Houston case they believe that is john2332239 03/25/17 08:16:35 AM
#398909   https://doc-0k-4k-docs.googleusercontent.com/docs/securesc/ha0ro937gcuc7l7deffks kip128932156 03/25/17 08:13:13 AM
#398908   it is 'suspected' to be so because it camacho 03/25/17 05:06:45 AM
#398907   "Forgive me if I have it embarrassingly wrong, rekcusdo 03/25/17 04:10:49 AM
#398906   But noone ever discusses if the contract is valid. Steelhead9 03/25/17 03:01:44 AM
#398905   Also, assuming this whole ACA funding holds truth, TheDon3 03/25/17 02:57:36 AM
#398904   But then there would become the question of TheDon3 03/25/17 02:54:00 AM
#398903   That could happen, when money talks everyone has Stockman1010101 03/25/17 01:47:58 AM
#398902   On the other hand, what if Trump uses jcromeenes 03/25/17 01:44:52 AM
#398901   If NWS money was used to pay off Stockman1010101 03/25/17 01:43:52 AM
#398900   Not to mention the convenient timing of IronPantz 03/25/17 01:14:43 AM
#398899   I know that, but the NWS went into rgd1350 03/25/17 01:11:36 AM
#398898   I don't think Trump/Mnuchin were ever going to Release us 03/25/17 01:08:32 AM
#398897   Trump now has big reason to stop the IronPantz 03/25/17 12:36:19 AM
#398896   Unfortunately you are correct. I haven't seen the jog49 03/25/17 12:26:27 AM
#398895   Doesn't even matter that that is illegal as jcromeenes 03/24/17 11:45:08 PM
#398894   Congress did not appropriate funds for Obamacare. bcde 03/24/17 11:36:47 PM
#398893   Oh yeah. Just as posters wrote preceding Clark6290 03/24/17 11:18:11 PM
#398892   Don't the funds go into the General Treasury rgd1350 03/24/17 11:00:43 PM
#398890   As far as I know, the money just Patswil 03/24/17 10:54:01 PM
#398889   I was too, also pleasantly surprised to see Patswil 03/24/17 10:51:02 PM
#398888   Maybe but until it is proven its all Stockman1010101 03/24/17 10:49:48 PM
#398886   You missed one: Red Captain 03/24/17 10:30:54 PM
#398885   Frank M Fosco Jr. Retweeted 11L 03/24/17 10:26:56 PM
#398884   It is baffling to me how so many observer21 03/24/17 10:22:12 PM
#398883   Trump wins on so many levels, and promises, Zaadx 03/24/17 10:19:49 PM
#398882   http://www.glenbradford.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/14-5243-1667742.pdf Dax1 03/24/17 10:16:31 PM
#398881   Can anyone educate me, on what this is? Dax1 03/24/17 10:16:13 PM
#398878   Carl Icahn, John Paulson, Steve Mnuchin. I would Guido2 03/24/17 10:00:41 PM
#398877   Obama is gone, If Trump allows the next micar 03/24/17 09:59:39 PM
#398875   Thank you commander. Dax1 03/24/17 09:44:48 PM
#398874   Good job on ignoring me. That's probably wise action8101 03/24/17 09:37:05 PM
#398871   Finally, someone with solid common sense posts a Stockman1010101 03/24/17 09:18:44 PM
#398870   Trump will now have no excuse. Stop the IronPantz 03/24/17 09:16:21 PM
#398869   I dont agree with your conclusion. there is Stockman1010101 03/24/17 09:16:09 PM
#398868   I can envision President Trump doing this and 955 03/24/17 09:14:52 PM
#398867   The Institutional Plaintiffs delivered their petition this afternoon navycmdr 03/24/17 09:12:20 PM
#398865   The government needs ten additional days to reply navycmdr 03/24/17 09:08:11 PM
PostSubject