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.
All money paid by F and F to Treasury has been deemed by Treasury to be equity distributions - dividends
Yes the LP is not dented
While it may be wishful thinking - the GOV could - in an arrangement - wipe out the LP - SP obligation under cover of the amount of profit they have already made --- AND IMO 100B from exercise of WTS for shares and sale of those shares for about 100B ---- if the GOV (IMO wisely) declares no more share for at least 5 years and then Treasury - say in the case of FNMA - backs up - in second place the 50B on hand
Again - may be wishful thinking
but things 10000x crazier have happened on this yellow brick road to hell
thank you
logical ---- moving money from common to JPS -- may not be the way to secure the highest multiple return -- but on a expected probability return basis it makes sense to have feet in both camps -- as pure speculation --- thus AGTHX the more logical holding
True on margin trades, tried to do one last month for the same FMCC shares I held and tried to double my position with uncleared funds they wouldn’t let me. I called they said not on shares under $1
What’s your take on this latest rumor of a merger? Even if it’s a pipe dream I’d sure want to know what happens to the common shares.
yes - I've traded GSEs the same day I transferred $$$ as well
recently TD is much more strict on allowing Trades until it settles
even when you have a MARGIN acct where they fwd/loan you cash
OTCBB Trades are more restrictive than BIG Board Equities ...
I totally know how it works Navy. Funds been in there for a month. You normally can edit an order even if it’s partly filled. What I meant is the order could be filled but the transaction won’t finalize until opening bell this morning.
The time stamp doesn’t match my order placed time. Who knows let’s wait see what happens this morning!
Another trick I’ll share with you about TD is if you transfer $$ into your account during the trading day and want to buy the next day place your order between 1am and 3am the next morning and the order will be placed and trade that day without waiting the 3 days. ( But only on the app on your phone)
If and that’s a BiG if !
The idea has been floated around over the years.
A few posts said that a merger would wipeout commons share holders and the company’s would issue new common shares.
Would know the in’s and out’s of that kinda deal but wouldn’t be good for common shareholders.
you can ALWAYS Cancel a GSE Trade ORDER ...
if you recently transferred $$ to TD Ameritrade account you
can't use until it clears/settles for 3 days - even using ACH
electronic transfer - cash balance & buying power doesn't mean
you can TRADE - only FUNDS $$ available for trading
Only inside your head..
Not an official authoritative source. Just opinions of Tom dick and harry journalists
Anyway keep believing
I put an order in @ 4.59 for 120k @ $0.41. FMCC .This morning it shows as 4:01pm placed and not filled nor partly. But I can not edit or cancel it as TD says my buying power is $94 and my cash balance says $50,021.
Federal Housing Policies Make It Easier To Get A Loan But Not Be A Homeowner
Jul 5, 2022,04:18pm EDT - Norbert Michel - Contributor
Last week I testified at the House Financial Services Committee hearing Boom and Bust: Inequality, Homeownership, and the Long-Term Impacts of the Hot Housing Market. It was not the first time I’ve testified—or written—about these topics, so I wasn’t the least bit surprised how many witnesses (and members of Congress) want to throw even more of other people’s money at the so-called housing shortage.
But given Rep. Ed Perlmutter’s (D-CO) comments, I want to keep the record straight.
According to Perlmutter (at about the 2:55 mark), I don’t want to do anything about housing supply, and I want to “cut the demand by making sure people don’t have any cash.” But that’s an inaccurate description of what I suggested.
I have no problem with building more housing, whether single family homes or apartments. The problem is that housing is always somewhat supply constrained. In many locations that people want to live, there simply is not enough land to appreciably increase the supply.
Some of this scarcity is due to state and local zoning restrictions, such as those that keep high-rise apartments out of most suburban neighborhoods. Those neighborhoods are dominated by single family homes, and they’re going to stay that way. There simply is not much vacant land left in the most desired urban and suburban areas, so even lifting all zoning restrictions won’t bring about enormous changes anytime soon.
Either way, it takes time to build new housing units, and people can’t just go pick one up at Walmart. (Yes, it’s possible to buy a shed or a small barn at Home Depot.)
Another problem is that people generally must pay for large expenditures over long periods of time, and the ability to consistently make those payments depends on a whole host of economic and social factors. Many of these factors have nothing to do directly with housing finance policy.
So, while I am all for building more homes and apartments, the truth is there is little that the federal government can do other than refrain from making supply constraints worse and from shrinking economic opportunities. Yet, historically, that’s exactly what federal policies have done.
Federal policies have consistently boosted demand by making it easier to get loans in all geographic areas of the country, with the trend toward ever-lower equity and longer terms to maturity. All this approach has ever done is push more people into the market to bid up the same constrained supply. And it has often done so with sheer disregard for individuals’ ability to deal with the high risk of long-term, low equity mortgages, thus leaving people with more debt and less affordable housing.
Astonishingly, federal policymakers remain fixated on boosting demand even further by pushing more people—especially those with lower incomes—into the market with huge mortgages.
The pitch often includes some version of closing the wealth gap because housing makes up a large portion of Americans’ wealth. But if any member of Congress proposed increasing poor peoples’ wealth by subsidizing margin accounts to gamble on stocks, the proposal would be laughed off Capitol Hill. Yet, equity markets and home prices have exhibited similar volatility—i.e., similar financial risk—for decades.
So, to clarify, I’m not in favor of taking peoples’ cash away.
I am, however, in favor of letting them keep more of their cash and deciding on their own when it’s the right time to take on debt. Put differently, I’m saying that it is well past the time for the federal government to stop making it so easy to get low equity, long-term mortgages. That approach clearly does not achieve the results—making housing more affordable—so many members of the House Financial Services Committee claim to want.
In fact, it makes no sense to profess that affordability is the main goal while doing everything that is known to accomplish the opposite. Even the president of the National Association of Real Estate Brokers concedes (see the 2:55:56 mark) that “demand is much higher than supply right now,” so even continuing the same level of federal policies that boost demand will put upward pressure on prices.
Long term, the solution to high housing prices cannot simply be to increase supply because federal policy would still be boosting demand, something that’s much easier to do than increase the supply.
Rather than allow individuals’ shelter decisions to evolve with their economic circumstances, federal policy has essentially told people to forget about those circumstances and take out bigger loans with less money for a downpayment. This approach often fails for the borrower—just ask the millions who went through foreclosures after the rise of Fannie and Freddie—as well as everyone trying to save to get more secure before taking on a giant loan.
What’s so astounding is the atrocious track record from exactly the same policy prescriptions that all my hearing counterparts and most House Financial Services Democrats are calling for now.
The New Deal era Federal Housing Administration created redlining and segregated neighborhoods, extended mortgage terms, and pushed downpayments well below 20 percent. The GSEs were then created in the late 1960s (as a budget gimmick, for what it’s worth) but the homeownership rate has barely budged. Bill Clinton’s 1994 strategy of using the GSEs to get the rate up by making it even easier to obtain long term, low-equity mortgages was an unmitigated disaster, and the black ownership rate went even lower after decades of these policies. Many Democrats even want to expand the most abysmal housing policies of the 1900s, public housing and rent subsidies.
Aside from these obvious failures, federal policies have crowded out private sector businesses that could have helped build a more sustainable system. Private companies could, for example, provide more diverse lending and insurance options if they weren’t forced to compete with the federal government. But the federal government dominates the market.
So, no, I do not want to make sure people don’t have cash to buy homes. But I do want the federal government to stop taking people’s cash away to fund more federal programs and more loans that ultimately take even more of their cash away.
Just BTW, A Merger was the original plan floated in 2008 to secure the secondary market. It was also brought up several times over the years; even Bloomberg suggested doing it…, BTW…
How FNF can create over $20B overnight…
https://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/02/business/worldbusiness/02iht-sorkin.1.15819674.html
“the economics of a merger are compelling!
Consider the math: For the first six months of this year, both companies spent $1.825 billion in overhead costs combined; on an annualized basis, that means the companies are spending about $3.65 billion.
Given that the companies do pretty much the same thing - buying mortgages from banks, insuring them and creating mortgage-backed securities - there might be opportunities for savings if many of their managers and staff are, to put it politely, redundant.
Conservatively, a combined Fannie and Freddie could probably cut a third of its overhead and staff, saving some $1.2 billion annually.
The way Wall Street values companies, that means - presto - billions more in value, perhaps as much as $18 billion or $19 billion, could be created overnight.”
"It would instill a huge amount of confidence. The market will know that both entities combined will have much more consistent, stable margins," John Lekas, chief executive of Leader Capital, an investment firm, said on CNBC last week. He added that it "doesn't cost taxpayers one nickel."
your totally right, 100%, as much in your facts, and as much as any other opinion about how the facts apply forward.
Again totally false. I say in and at the end of pretty much every post of mine that it is JMO. Just My Opinion.
Yes, I said it. The government has been paid back that is the truth. Not opinion.
Plus I addressed the equity vs debt issue you raise. Semantics. You know exactly what was meant, but if you didn't...Now you do. We know why sp was issued why get into a war of words.
It does matter what "bless" means. They didn't bless what happened. Only what they think happened. Kind of like the untouchable Confirmed Director. He/She was okay until they weren't. Just give it time. Truth should come out. But if it doesn't then maybe YOUR opinion will come true.
Also, I never said me calling conversion or warrants "garbage" changed anything. Just sharing an opinion. But you knew that too.
Similar to the dozens of repeated conversion and dilution doom and gloom I get to skim through daily.
Thanks Again.
JMO *Just My Opinion
Did you understand what I've said about securities fraud violations?
I've told you that the SPS increased for free are missing on the balance sheets and why.
Just read what's the SPS outstanding as of end of the quarter and compare it with the SPS in the balance sheets that are used to see the net worth.
The SPS that are increased at the end of the next quarter must be recorded in this quarter too.
You are participating in the conspiracy of deception.
$Public $Reference $Docs posted along w $GSE $Net $Worth
*****************************************************
Tuesday, July 05, 2022 3:10:13 PM
Post# of 726001 Go
$Fannie $Mae’s $Net $Worth $Increased to $51.8 $Billion as of March 31, 2022.
https://www.fanniemae.com/newsroom/fannie-mae-news/first-quarter-2022-financial-results-media-call
Freddie Mac's net worth $Climbed to $31.7 $Billion, up nearly $13 billion from the same time last year.
https://www.housingwire.com/articles/freddie-mac-now-worth-31-7b-average-loan-300000/#:~:text=Freddie%20Mac%20reported%20net%20income,refinance%20activity%20continued%20to%20decline.
Gone a bit. WTH happened? Memorial Day massacre?
Thought the Fannie bottom was in then. Why the slide?
FNMA
2024 or sooner?
Nice tweet
I like it!$FNMA $FMCC $FNMAS $FMCKJ https://t.co/3aVG0rmINT
— familymang (@familymang1) July 6, 2022
They should’ve acted on this long ago
All buys on low volume and all sells on high volume. Pump and dump in progress.
Seller is dumping all shares. They do not care about the price anymore. FMCC has way more shares to dump than FMCC... You can see in FNMA vs FMCC price. I told you FNMA is better.
SCOTUS rightly said Gov can take it but did not gave JUST COMPENSATION because taking claim was not made in Collins case. When SCOTUS rule on taking claim then JUST COMPENSATION with INTEREST & FINE will rewarded. Therefore, Gov will chicken out before that by doing 3R.
Excuse you but why are you speaking facts on this board?
Facts belong on the FMCC board.
Your entire response is entirely incorrect. An opinion is an opinion. I even say so in my post. You can call it wishful thinking because that's YOUR opinion. They didn't bless or authorize based on what actually happened and I believe you know what I meant because I've said it many times. They ruled it was fine based on lies. Nws was not blessed under the circumstances in which it was applied. So that is why I say they didn't bless anything. Bless the lie..Okay. Fine they blessed a lie. What happens when truth is revealed? They won't care?
And....
Yes anything COULD happen with warrants or seniors, BUT that's why I said it was my opinion. At least I always make clear it is my opinion. Never guarantee anything.
Maybe with the exception of calling seniors equity and not debt is true. But that's semantics.
We all know why the seniors were issued. So.....
Hey thanks for response.
100% commons LFG
JMO
Try a little bit earlier in the afternoon but I am certain you already know that period regardless, I'm quite certain that the individual selling over 400 K shares did not put in the sell order all or nothing. Subsequently, it was broken down based on the chuncks actually bought. Amateur hour
Still looking to jump back in around a quarter or so but a truck load hope it booms up to 75 cents or so......I'm in southern California real estate is still hot but foreclosures are popping up everywhere.
Well, I am not L2 Man, but observed two trades, well over 400K each. I consider that a big dump in light of the fact pps dropped two pennies as result.
If you can access the info, that would be great FNMA board news. TIA
Looking forward to Bhatti v, FHFA. Can't hurt to have more cases moving ahead for FNMA than in limbo.
06/17/2022 08:30AM 17-cv-2185: Bhatti v. Federal Housing Fina Judge Schiltz Courtroom 14E (MPLS) Motion Hearing
06/17/2022 08:30AM 17-cv-2185: Bhatti v. Federal Housing Fina Judge Schiltz Courtroom 14E (MPLS) Motion Hearing
Are you thinking about the oral arguments from 2019? https://www.courtlistener.com/audio/65849/atif-bhatti-v-federal-housing-finance-agency/?type=oa&q=bhatti&type=oa&order_by=score%20desc
Also, I do have a pacer account, it's essentially free for the public, I think I was given the wrong pacer link but haven't checked back. If you want any docs just let me know.
Thanks for the in depth legal analysis again as always, Cardozo! Just remember, that the first thing that the JPS holders will hear is the sound of their heads hitting the floor after the several years of appeals and trials on the current pending litigation has come to an end and a shareholder files a new lawsuit and begins the process all over again.
Don't worry though, I understand the fulcrum security has a noncumulative feature !
How long does it take a court reporter to post the BHATTI transcript on PACER in 2022 remains a mystery...I'll need a PACE maker by the time the snail does the job...If I'm lucky I'll be able to buy a classic 1984 PACER, I'll cruise down the streets with the aquarium look. lol
FNMA
I believe someone had a pacer account and emailed Navy the Bhatti docs but it was from June 2017 and not June 2022. So looks like it's not on pacer yet
How does this relate to fnma. Wrong board, many lng boards out there
Does anyone have the BHATTI transcript that dealt with the GSEs.
It would be interesting to see what was discussed and how it pertains to FNMA.
He must be kite's alter ego,. lol
FNMA
def a big dump into the close
Depends if you're talking pre or post Reverse Split.
It's too little too late for FNMA unfortunately. At least future companies won't need to worry about an FHFA-like overreach. But for FNMA, it's too late.
No Bueno Amigos
If only that occurred prior to 2008, now Irrelevant
didnt you post this yesterday?
he should go see carlos
they can take meds together
IMO, they already missed their chance on APA.
Followers
|
2315
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
36
|
Posts (Total)
|
800453
|
Created
|
07/14/08
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators not one red cent ~NORC~ stockprofitter Ace Trader EternalPatience jeddiemack FOFreddie |
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |