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.
Well, you've managed to deride women, and the poor so far. Any other group you'd like to make blanket statements about. BTW: I'm sure Janet Yellen and Maria Bartiromo would LOVE to hear you explain how women do not understand complex financial topics.
I disagree. I believe women are more inclined to seek fairness. While men are more inclined to think, "How does this affect me".
A man is likely only to see the tax implications of a government loss.
Correct me if I am wrong ...
1) If FHFA loses at trial, GSE's will have to pay
2) If GSEs have to pay, their cash, and thus, their capital reserves are depleted.
3) If their capital reserves are depleted by X amount, they must raise or accumulate X amount to get back to where they are now, thus increasing the liquidation preference just to get back to where they are now.
4) GSEs would then have to resume raising capital and further increasing the liquidation preference, thus keeping GSEs in conservatorship even longer and creating a higher "exit price"
5) In this case, are we not awarded some sort of damages WITHOUT surrendering our shares? Not the absolute best case scenario, but certainly not horrible.
How is that a loss at all for the forces that want to maintain the status quo longer?
You are suing me, but if I lose, Joe, who I hate, has to pay you. How is this a bad thing for me?
Is the current lawsuit is against the companies, or the government?
You said ... So, you see..like the interpretation of PAR, the 20.1% is used incorrectly on this board by some.
My question is this, it is clear that the market is currently pricing the shares at drastically less than 100%. Do you think the market has baked in that the shares are currently worth less than that 20%?
Thank You!!!
{What’s your take on Lamberth scheduling a conference on Tuesday June 15 ?}
Possible that Lambreth doesn't want to have to rule, and is calling this conference to see if either side is feeling squirrely and might like to explore a settlement?
Number one priority.
He has absolutely burned all of his trust. He's a damned liar!
My instinct tells me that if the ruling comes BEFORE the last damned minute, we're gonna wish we had lubed up for it.
You're not wrong!
I hope like hell that you guys predicting $30 and up are right. I'm anticipating $4 to $8 ... but I'd love to be way off and have to say, "Welp, you were right and I was wrong!!! [Raising drink] Here's to you being smarter than me!"
Please ... no dropping trou permitted.
PPS jumped. I'm thinking this is the typical 15 to 30 minutes in which the market begins to understand the impact of news.
My understanding is that there are two matters before the court ...
1) The plaintiffs (us) seek backward relief in consideration of the acts of the unconstitutionally structured agency. If I understand properly, we want a GVR on this matter so that the 5th circuit can then reconsider the matter and possibly grant the backwards relief which we seek.
2) The Defendants seek a reversal of the finding that the agency was unconstitutionally structured. I imagine we want that request for hearing outright denied.
Now I may be way of because I get mixed up with all of the various trials that we find ourselves watching. I may also not be using all of the correct legal terms, But I'd love to know if everyone else has the same general understanding.
Listen to what Christian said near the end. He said, "Joe Biden wants the GSEs released." I wondered about that because I read that Biden has a prior relationship with (I think) Gary Hinde. If that is correct, might Biden simply be inclined to let a slow capital build happen through retained earnings?
The guy hosting this interview KEEPS interrupting! We are not here to listen to him. He needs to shut up and let Christian speak.
I don't think he is. I just heard a news piece about a Lambreth ruling on some other matter a few days ago.
The preferred aren't terribly liquid, are they? I'm not stating that as some blowhard expert. I am honestly asking. When I look, it always seems like their volume is SO much less than that of the commons.
Aren't you the same guy who kept saying that commons would be wiped out and only preferred would get any value? Didn't you say common shares wouldn't even be trading anymore?
3.60s !!
Which explains Calabria's little "Liquidation Preference" gambit that he pulled after the En Banc decision. It's a way of clawing EVERY dime right up to the moment they pull the trigger on the exchange.
We're all going to need adult diapers if he ends up being RIGHT!!
I wish I could say with absolute certainty that you are full of excrement.