Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
This stock is almost certainly a way for Trumps friends to insider trade. I hope the SEC is taking a close look at who short sold this on day 1.
Then don’t buy a big mac meal. Be an adult and go to the store and cook your dinner :)
You, sir, win the internet.
Sup man!
To be honest, I’ve been swamped in my life (all good things) and have really not been paying attention to the stock.
Since I don’t plan to sell this stock any time soon, I have kind of left it alone for the better part of 6 months.
That being said, if you could link me the decision, I’d love to read it and give my legal feedback :)
Is there an article or interview corroborating this?
Sup SGINPHX!
Yup...still in. Got tired of the constant platitudes on the board but not selling till my original price target of either $20 or $0. :)
Bought my commons at 0.57 cents. Up 601.754% as of today. Not sure where you got 25%.
Also, it doesn’t take a lot of research to figure out that if you look back a few years (your time frame) and look where commons could have earned 25-33%, then the MAXIMUM that a preferred share could have made in the same time period is 160% if you bought at the best time...so not sure where you got “several hundred percent”.
Welcome to reality. Been saying that for almost 3 years.
Maybe with the next president.
Amazed there isn’t more negative movement on this stock considering the news they are implementing akin to slave labor from asylum seekers who are being forced to work for $1 a day and threatened if they don’t.
Where did I mentioned usurping powers from common shareholders?
You said this:
but this is to what he is referring: preferred shares would have voting rights if their existing shareholder contracts were amended
Any voting rights added to preferred shareholders automatically would usurp common shareholder voting rights. Generally speaking, the only way that preferred shareholders have voting rights is if the articles give preferreds voting rights or if the classification of stock changes, which wouldn't happen without common shareholders voting for it.
Other than that preferreds only have voting rights for issues that directly affect their stock, not the company as a whole. An example of this might be if the preferreds are voting to cut their dividend payment in an attempt to put the company into a better financial situation.
Talking about this (page 23: www.freddiemac.com/investors/pdf/FtFPrefStock-oc.pdf):
The section that you've referenced is talking about the preferreds right to vote when there is ambiguity in the preferreds' contract language in order to cure the ambiguity. This section does not give preferreds the right to additional voting rights. Preferreds can vote on issues that directly affect their stock, but not on issues of the company.
If you take issue with FHFA/UST converting preferred shares to common share and ostensibly usurping powers from common shareholders, HERA allows for capital restoration plans to be submitted by the GSEs and approved by FHFA (as you are well aware).
It's not that simple. Preferred stock can only be converted to common in two situations. 1.) If the preferred stock classification is convertible. 2.) If the common shareholders vote to let it happen.
I know that the common shareholders wouldn't vote this way, likely, but I'm unaware whether preferred stock is classified as convertible. If it is, please edify me! Is there a conversion clause in the preferred stock?
If not, then the company can't just decide to convert on its own...that would violate several corporate laws.
Now, if you are talking about the GSE doing this in violation of the law, citing HERA as a reason they are able to,...then they will likely face another decade of lawsuits. The only difference is that a Takings lawsuit would now be valid, and the price of the Takings would be at current price, not when the NWS occurred. And just to remind you, ...Takings cases are not prohibited by HERA.
Hahaha.
I don’t know if I’d call that a “right”, but you aren’t wrong.
Still, that would only influence what Congress can affect...like HERA.... where has the preferred buttkissing gotten us there?
Please refer me to the clause in preferreds contract that lets them vote to usurp voting rights from common shareholders.
Said what? That working with congress doesn’t mean legislation?
If he said that, then he’s wrong and stupid.
So basically, you are talking about fantasy world. Lol
For the record, preferred shareholders don’t have voting rights in FNMA.
“Note that "Working with Congress" does not mean legislation”
Uhhh...Yes it does. Congress’s only function is legislation other than voting on Presidential nominations.
Holy crud man, what happened to you?
Thats not the Stockman I remember. Haha
Since when do preferred shares have voting rights? Lol
The company wasn’t going to wind down regardless of who won.
There’s no point in winding down companies that are paying so much money to the government.
Trump, like Clinton would have, will continue to syphon FNMA money as long as he can.
Why do you feel you made a good choice?
Agreed.
We don’t even know what “getting the GSEs out of conservatorship” would look like or if it would be good for shareholders.
But after 10 years, I’m more than ready for a conclusion to this saga.
I can only hope that this Ottinger person is the change I’ve been waiting for!
Omg! Should I dare to have hope!?!
Been burned so many times on “good news”, but Im going to be hopeful for a few days. Haha
Haha. No problem. I am still in common, but I bought at 57 cents so still in the green. Haha
Thanks kthomp...I’ll need to do some research on Otting to see if my opinions have changed.
I still don’t see Trump releasing the GSEs in the next 2 years. He has no reason to and hasn’t made even a mention he might do that.
But would be good to know Otting’s position on the GSEs...
Sup man. Well, more specifically, I said that there’s no way we’ll be released while Trump is President.
I honestly haven’t been paying much attention to the stock...keeps my hairline in better shape. Haha.
I got intrigued by the sudden jump, so came on to see if there was any new news, but not seeing any.
Very honest and true post.
How you only have 8 followers astounds me.
All of your answers are perfectly accurate.
I believe they are in a link in my bio. If not there, I can find them later for you...im on my phone and functionality is limited.
Haha, fair enough.
Please point me to the section you are referring to. Page or section number at least.
The warrants are a separate issue. Ive posted a few dozen times in the past why I dont think the warrants will be executed...and it has nothing to do with finances. There are more legal, political and administrative issues with the warrants than anything else.
8-10 years.
This is pretty much it...though my statement would be something more like....
One thing we know of Trump is that he follows a singular playbook. He doesn’t deviate from his well-worked strategies that he has used for so many decades.
The biggest strategy Trump follows is to stick to a plan until it wins or loses. Bankruptcy after bankruptcy...failed business after failed business, Trump never deviates from an original plan.
In the past nearly two years, Trump has made it clear that he intends to keep the GSE piggy bank because he has not made a move to release them...and Trump never waits to do anything. Trump will hold on to the GSEs because it is the plan he has started already...and he’ll follow it to the end.
Also, he has no morals. Lol
Your logic stems on some connection that the plans popularity with shareholders will determine if it gets passed or not. That’s simply not accurate.
Again, I agree with the conclusion...the plan will not be approved. The GSEs will not be released voluntarily during the Trump administration.
Your reasoning makes no sense.
That being said, I agree with the conclusion.
There is an old adage that says “everyone is an expert in a trend, but no one is an expert in a trend change.” (Or something like that). It basically means that when something is going up, and someone says “it will go up!” Then they can claim to be an expert, even though they are just reading the trend that already exists.
Along is always right when we are in a trend, but rarely when the trend changes. Kudos to him for being able to read a trend chart...but it doesn’t give him some sort of credibility in being able to identify where the stock is going long term.
And people would probably pick on him less if he stated his opinions with less arrogance.
I can explain the 15 cent pop...
It is explained by...
...
...
Its 15 cents. Who cares? Lol.
Thanks for the compliments!
I have read over 100,000 cases so you get to know what to expect and where the strong cases are.
Still...every once in a while the judges do surprise!
I wish one would here, lol.
I can’t remember what you said about MAGA Trump.
But I am 99.9% sure Trump will never get behind any kind of release of the GSEs that would benefit shareholders.
Agreed.
Watt won’t get fired for something his boss is also guilty of.
I guess time will tell.....
.......
.......
.......
.......that I’m right;)