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.
In this board, we are serious people. Go to the meme stocks' boards to talk about paranormal activity moving the share prices, Roaring Kitty, etc.
The JPS valuation depends on the estimated resumption of dividend payments, which, in turn, depends on the Common Equity built.
With the ongoing Common Equity Sweep, every year there are 17 years left to resume the dividend payments.
— Conservatives against Trump (@CarlosVignote) May 15, 2024
Until someone realizes that the JPS need the Common Equity to fetch a fair value of par value w/ the resumption of div payments.
$402B capital shortfall over Leverage ratio😂
(*)2.5%, versus 0.45% before (not 0.25%) of MBS Trusts.
People love to buy debt. I do it all the time.
Debt ownership makes me $$$
Questions Questions Questons!
Quote:
Short version: I think the juniors will end up with somewhere between 50% and 100% of par (stated) value via a conversion to common. Not converting the juniors makes no sense due to the CET1 capital requirement in the ERCF.
Answer:
I agree with you there. I don't see JPS getting 100%. But I do not understand how and why a write down from 100% due to a conversion when JPS holders have to vote on it and it clearly states in the contract ( non convertible) so either they change the contracts or offer JPS holders a carrot or cream pie or something! I really don't know how the Gov can wingle that one? Do you have any insight on what it might look like or offer JPS holders?
Quote:
I think the commons are worth about $8 at the most when FnF are recapped and released, and that's only if Treasury chooses to write down the seniors entirely. If they convert those seniors to commons instead, as Mark Calabria wants them to do and as KBW expects, they will be worth somewhere between $0.25 and $2.00 per share, depending on how FHFA and Treasury structure the transaction. Probably towards the lower end of that range since there is no reason for either FHFA or Treasury to fear any lawsuits and that the situation for FnF common shareholders is far worse than that of AIG common shareholders, who got diluted down to 8%.
Answer:
I agree with you there also. However $0.25 is on the very low end if the greedy Gov does convert everything however more likely between $.70 to $2.25. If they don't convert the warrants then yes maybe just maybe around $8 to $12.
Quote:
I expect the commons to rise and fall roughly in line with the juniors until recap/release time so I wouldn't short them, at least not for more than very short periods as an attempt at statistical arbitrage, but I avoid them entirely.
Answer:
It sure is going to be a rough ride ! Buckle up cup cake and hang on!!
He doesn't have anything to share other than a rcwhalen tweet
Lost your limb?
Why preferably in dollars?
Moelis made a useless plan to end C-ship, benefiting the government.
It did not gain any traction, but they must know what it is going on.
So, for them to upgrade maybe something is going to happen.
Don't worry, there will be no flying monkeys. I kinda laugh at the notion that Treasury will become charitable after all these years of self-serving.
How about Huckleberry season?
If we even get to $100 per share, I'll show you the uncensored video of monkeys flying out of my butt. lol.
It’s closer to 2 billion shares between both gse’s
So $45-50 cash per share
Then have to do PE etc etc
Why share rumours? Is Patrick a Moelis client? He has been asked about the link or to provide more information, but is unable or won't provide any information. It's no different than moving couches a few years ago.
private clients are ? glen? paglara? lol
is this the guy behind amc and gme on redditt? great 🤣
who will fire her? if the other party wins? the current director will bungle it on nov 6th as she knows she will get fired. just like calabria foked it when he knew.
this a guess ? "My guess for next 3 yrs"
why allow and why give ideas to govt to pocket 360 billion? after foking up retirement and 529 and after so many died without seeing their hard earned money?
moelis has very little credibility left. they are after pfds as we know and last time did not deliver.
Link will be available probably in a week or so. Right now it is a private report for Moelis clients only.
approx $90 assuming 1 billion shares approx but should be $1500/share , so higher
If common shareholders receive $90B what share price does that equate to preferably in dollars ?
My guess for next 3 yrs:
— Mark Hutchinson (@Mark01162579) May 14, 2024
1. FHFA Dir fired in 2025
2. More earnings retained for 2 yrs
3. Capital req to be 2.5%
4. No stock offering needed
5. Gov pockets $360B or more.
6. Common shareholders get $90B, after 18 yrs
7. Preferred collect div
Moelis & Company Release A New Bullish Report On $FMCC $FNMA $FMCKJ $FNMAS
— Patrick (@InvestIt3) May 14, 2024
If it hits $12.50 and there is no definitive exit news, it would be prudent to sell off a large chunk.
To go from $12.50 to PAR @$25 is a 2x.
There are plenty of other stocks out there that can 2x with significantly less risk.
That is enough for me.
We will be at $5 by blueberry season.
I'm surprised our OTC ticker and name has not been changed to-
-Fannie Mae not leave conservatorship
-cement boots and can't swim
-6' feet under but still breathing
-"bring out yer dead, but I'm not dead yet. yes you are-conk on the head"
LOL
any others?
YES
but - he put in Calabria - so how would that help on day one !!!!!! seriously - would the cap reserve level be higher ?
and - you seem happy to ignore the reality that the head of FHFA has 10% of the power of the head of Treasury (and indeed the Justice Dept that we face over and over during DJT time)
you seem to fly 50,000 feet above the reality that DJT had his Secretary of Treasury -- who for 4 years could have called the SPS/LP paid in full (as $300B went in for 200B to F and F) -- and did not. DJT appointed him and at any time - in 5 minutes time - could have fired him if DJT really thought of F and F and wanted us free
Seriously - why talk about Watt and Calabria when the power is nearly all elsewhere and THUS was with DJT as POTUS for 48 months - day one
OK - I can understand your argument and want to believe it
But no court has agreed and we have been to a ton !!!
Because we still live in a free society based on the rule of law, this inconvenient fact pattern of the common law of contracts is an unmovable barrier to implementing the SPSPAs as they are currently written. The SPSPAs do not square with the letter or spirit of the applicable laws and clearly undermine the terms of the existing (legacy)share certificates
YET no court has done shist
I am going to go out on a limb and say tomorrow we will close at $1.49
because the MM's like us so much
LOL
and that would be an $8 common ?
does not seem right
Interesting
i too would see the JPS in F and F I hold at 50% ($12.50) --- or say half of it for sure
Using Yahoo Finance Historical Data by month for FNMAS here is what I found
DJT was elected Nov 2016 ---
Between Nov 2016 and March 2017 --- the month end PPS ranged $8.22 to $6.60. (Month end price)
The high end of month is $9.27 during January 2017 -- and if I look by week - it did hit 10 for two weeks in March 2017
If DJT wins - if JPS goes to say $9 - I will sell 75% of the JPS
Then liquidate 100% of your position & piss of from this board !!!
Would micro KT or Nano KT be the right insult in that case?
I never said I had no position.
I sold off ~25% a few weeks ago.
I still have 75% of my original position left.
As much fun as it is to hang out with all of y'all. I'm preparing to exit at a moments notice as soon as it seems semi favorable. I'm not sitting through all of the ending credits of this movie.
It's been way too long.
Anywhere from $8-12 around election time is enough for me to reduce down another 50%... Aiming for 25% left by the end of this year. However, if price holds around that range after Jan 1st.
I will be exiting completely down to 0%
"I'm liquidating at least half of my position"
you have posted this at least once before that you are liquidating half. lol. you have also posted that you have no position, you are funny.
"Last I saw of you on twitter you were pitching it short "spicy trade" to a crypto hedge fund. You are a liar."
right on but don't worry he had no editorial assignment and was day off . look at it 30 posts within 2 minutes.
Ok mini kt. Obviously filing another claim against the Gov for the net worth sweep would not fly for the reasons you state. However, FHFAs duty to act in good faith and fair dealings is still mandatory should the current SPSPA terms and conditions be implemented and as a result undermine legacy shareholder share certificates.
As usual, you state the facts only in a way that supports your narrative. This would be accurate only if you included the fact that DJT wanted to fire Watt on day one but because of language in place (that was ultimately reversed in Court) Watt could NOT be fired.
The simple answer - with no context
I do acknowledge that capital appears to be growing under DJT
And as I have said - to be fair to me - that while overall I liked BO - he funked us with the illegal NWS
Now - more context
I believe in 2018 or so Mel Watt convinced Mnuchin (who may be the real culprit) to allow F and F to keep 3B each as cash - capital. Does that ring a bell ? So yes it started under DJT MNUCHIN WATT
but - the total ability to count lots of money - earnings as capital comes with a MASSIVE catch
For every dollar of capital - and it is capital - that F and F grow (by keeping cash !!) the obligation that Treasury keeps on it books - the LP - that to ESCAPE conservatorship if Treasury so insists -- also grows by $1
So - as you have seen me say over and over - to me its smoke and mirrors
F and F keep cash - but write an IOU to TREASURY - that at its discretion it can collect for same $
now
as I see it- here is the lay of the land on capital given that the cash/capital is building up at F and F - but the LP is also growing - dollar for dollar!!!
IF TREASURY decides it wants the full LP obligation then nothing good was done - that cash capital is wiped out to zero - to zero as GOV calls in the IOUs
IF TREASURY decides to reduce (cut by 50% or kill !!) the LP obligation THEN and ONLY THEN
the capital in cash that F and F hold becomes - that day - TRUE capital and we win and I will post a TY to DJT
oops
reading more and more of your various responses
you assume - expect a SR to common equity conversion ---- and JPS to be worth 50% or more of PAR - and indeed common worth MAYBE MAYBE 8
IF
IF the below is true ---- and true for JPS and Common - why own only JPS?
Not without running FnF through receivership and transferring their charters to newcos. This is fully half of my investment thesis in the juniors.
i.e. if this is not going to happen (50-50 or whatever) would not common be in similar position ?
thank you
while numbers in the billions begins to lose meaning !!! as people talk about 2T impact of this or that
those numbers seem something the GOV BS could "lose" without insane impact - but noticeable
I assume they are listed as either equity or assets ?
You're more than welcome to file suit. Then you can learn about res judicata, limitations and standing.
“we still live in a free society based on the rule of law“. Good Lord….. you must’ve been in a coma for the last 20 years!
Hi Kthompt, I am pretty confident that your explanation of a breach of good faith and fair dealings is wrong and why it would not carry foreword to new claims. As I understand it, the implied covenants arise from common law. In the United States, they are a permanent feature of all contracts imposed on all parties to a contract. Can a judge or court ruling really make it go away because of a prior ruling of 800 million awarded to shareholders? In the case of GSE shareholders, the implied covenants are a permanent feature of the share certificates (contracts). The covenants are separate and distinct from the fiduciary duty to act in good faith. That duty arises from Statutory law, and can be waived and indeed has been waived. Because of the terms of the Conservatorship, the FHFA-C assumes the role of the GSEs as the counter-party to the shareholders in the share certificate contracts. FHFA-C under common law (implied covenants) has a duty to act in good faith and fair dealings in upholding the terms of the share certificates.
Because we still live in a free society based on the rule of law, this inconvenient fact pattern of the common law of contracts is an unmovable barrier to implementing the SPSPAs as they are currently written. The SPSPAs do not square with the letter or spirit of the applicable laws and clearly undermine the terms of the existing (legacy)share certificates. FHFA had the opportunity to put the GSEs in receivership. The implied covenants would not have applied and congress could have drafted new charters and created a new housing finance system. FHFA chose instead to be a conservator. Common law is the foundational law of the United states, upon which all of our statutes are based on. Common law requires that FHFA-C for as long as it remains conservator must act with good faith and fair dealings with respect to the terms of the share certificates. It cannot be satisfied and waived in the future by a court ruling awarding monetary damages. The duties remain. I believe shareholders can continually sue to prevent the terms of the contracts from being undermined by a Conservator who fails to act in good faith and fair dealings. In my opinion the current terms of the SPSPA continue to undermine the shareholders. If I am wrong, please educate me. Be specific, if you know of court cases that support your thesis that the Lamberth Court case puts an end to future litigation of implied covenants because a Jury awarded money damages please let me know.
Bye
(F and F are not going anywhere in PPS until they "either disappear or EXPLODE to the upside")
Do you think DJT was good for us - equity holders of F and F - as the expectation PPS went away entirely - and what was left was a growing LP obligation to Treasury and a capital level that is WAY TOO high --- (F and F keep passing every STRESS test with flying colors at current capital shown on books --- but the level required - as set by DJT - is way way higher --- WHY? (in the pocket of TBTF banks?)
tariffs
DJT loves them - 100% on EV cars from CHINA promised (to both save MUSK ass and ..)
DJT - unfortunately IMO - keeps saying the CHINESE pay the price ($ cost) of tariffs v tariffs are inflationary as we pay higher prices (duh)
(A legitimate debate - tariffs to protect industry -- VERSUS lower prices and lower inflation)
YET - right now - this raise in tariffs is a political move to show he is protecting US production in key areas OF THE SUPPLY CHAIN (having fun as supply chain was not a word - phrase 99% of us knew two years ago -) . THE news of protecting is now --- and the price we will all pay in higher prices (for Chinese Goods and their sister goods made here) will not show up until CY25
meanwhile lower mortgage rates - F and F - may yet happen this CY with the 3.4% Year over Year (trailing) CPI (v 9% a year ago or whatever)
Followers
|
2323
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
36
|
Posts (Total)
|
801558
|
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: |