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.
What it did say was - To see the company in action, how we came together, how we communicated with our stakeholders, how we assessed our risk, I was able to see firsthand the impact and scale of our organization during a potential time of crisis across the financial sector,” Almodovar says. “It really accelerates one’s learning when you’re in it. [We have an] amazing team of people. They’re smart, very committed to what we do, and it’s that mission—what Fannie Mae does—that brings the entire company together.”
Personally I don’t care about the current share I care about the success of the company
Ask that P dude Bradford about that. He seems to always have the inside scoop.
I red the whole article no were in there does it talk about releasing the gses 🌵🛹🇺🇸🤔
Hahaha you think 1.45 is expensive? You can’t even get a Costco hot dog for that price!
Don’t be so cheap lol
Well it's going to end at some point they need to tank it one more time so I can buy @ 50 cents 🌵🛹🇺🇸
Glen Bradford saying cship ending!!
She's taking us out of conservatorship $FNMA #FANNIEGATE https://t.co/atiQTqcqwP pic.twitter.com/EIMRRtf6zo
— Fanniegate Hero (@DoNotLose) April 17, 2024
Feels like don’t dare say any positive about FNMA or you’ll get crushed
Pessimistic only need apply lol
No one is stopping you and your pref posse from leaving fnma, funny how that pref narrative continues to swirl like water in a flushed toilet bowl. Sorry you can’t meet your quota.
Fnma
Artificial FNMA intelligence lol
"A while back I decided to just check the board every few days, craft all the responses that I wanted, and then post them all at once."
Maybe conversation isn't your strong suit? Glad to see you here practicing on this board as a safe environment. I can't imagine what you are like in person. Do you just stare at someone blankly and then an hour later blurt out 5 responses?
You'll be a hoot at the GSE release party!
Whalen was the last evil to attack Fannie Mae
If there’s another who pops up we’ll attack him right back.
Ps: I wonder how many shares Chris bought?
are you sure shareholders won't get foked like mnuchin and calabria did? i have been here long time and recall seeing many such messages at that time, followed by cnbc interviews. be careful.
I understand your jaded emotion however the tide has turned
Cship cannot go on forever if your patient enough to wait but on the other hand nobody is holding a gun to your head to maintain ownership of the twins
Sorry, don’t mean to come across as a jerk but it is what it is
If there is enough of a trump bump... it's time to sell out a chunk or GTFO of this.
They thought they were smart taking only 79.9% which was the max they could steal without…
They knew what they were doing but f***** up not putting them in rship.
We have Obama admin to thank for making us rich one day if ya think about it lol
Without Bo, we’d be paying $200 / share to own the twins hahaha
"The utter lack of any details as to what you would be suing over (you have said in the past that you think the LP ratchet itself is a cause for action), or where, or in what court, or what remedy you would seek, leads me to believe that you aren't serious about filing your own lawsuit."
At no point did I claim that I intended to sue anybody.
The current sweep of the profits is into the LP. It would follow a similar logical argument that the action does not allow the shareholders to realize the benefits of their shareholder agreement. Possibly more so than a cash sweep because the LP sweep means they need to pay down the LP being taken (same amount as cash sweep), PLUS also paying 10% dividends on the LP amount or the entirety of the increase in net worth until they can pay it off. The net result is the shareholders get screwed more with the LP sweep than with the cash sweep. Again, you act like these are complicated concepts. They really aren't.
After so many years in this I'm jaded. I only believe an event after it has happened. Words are cheap.
Hi REAL…
Thank you for continuing to share with this community.
Great insights…
Michael
In general, the government cannot be sued unless they let you. So yes, FHFA and Treasury have operated with impunity and the GSEs as private entities are the ones that have been targeted. This shines the light on the behavior of the FHFA acting on behalf of the GSEs. It's not complicated.
"I will put it bluntly: do you think a senior-to-common exchange negotiated by FHFA and Treasury would be challenged in court? What court, and what would the requested remedy be?"
Only if it's challenged proactively, which I think is very remote. Requested remedy would be preliminary injunction so that the ownership of the equity could be challenged prior to new shares being created and possibly sold to other owners.
Now a blunt question for you: What difference does it make to Treasury to take 92%, 22% or 2% of the GSE equity? What motivation do they have to engage in profiteering on the GSE draws that the taxpayer has already received a +10% return on?
Rick, where is your FNMA horn?
Leave Gabby alone for a while and get to work lol
Market maker has to eat too!!
"From the government's point of view, if FnF have enough capital, where "enough" is defined by law and regulation, what purpose would there be for the companies to have more?"
This one is simple to answer. Because it's not their companies or property to limit.
"On the other hand you get posters here that throw out common share price targets based on either fallacies ("it traded at $60 before the conservatorships started!") or nothing at all, but you don't call them out on it. Why?"
Why? I've already answered that. Because YOU ARE THE ONE calling people hypocrites while using the EXACT same logical fallacies you are calling them out on.
Others: The stock traded at $60 prior to conservatorship. FACT.
Others: Trump is the best hope to release the twins. OPINION
You: Treasury took a 92% stake in AIG. FACT
You: Treasury does not fear any lawsuits. OPINION
What you can't seem to realize, is that the facts and opinions stated are on equal ground. They are useful to see someone's thought process and stir discussion but they have nothing to do whatsoever with the actual release plan, unless someone is an insider and part of the planning. We are all in the dark. You seem to think you are the light of truth. I assure you, you are not.
Apparently you are just incapable of understanding my point so I'm going to give up trying to explain it to you. I'll just call you a hypocrite like you do to others.
Friday, April 19th marks 30 days since Lamberth signed the verdict. Is Friday the deadline for the government appeal? TIA
Kdomp - are you long, short,common,preferred, pita? Lol
Not expecting an ounce of honesty
Nearly every one of your messages since this one arrive once in a while have a time delta of about 5-30 seconds.
The only pattern of behavior that coincides with that is prepared remarks and minimizing billable hours.
FHFA passes a rule and must require an act of congress to reverse which implies that the rule is equivalent to legislation.
The FHFA was established as an independent agency. SCOTUS ruled that the director could be removed at will. Shouldn't that imply that the director serves at the will of the president?
because the agency is run by a single director and not a panel, the agency is no longer an independent federal agency.
That interpretation reads far too much into the term “in-
dependent.” The term does not necessarily mean that the
Agency is “independent” of the President. It may mean in-
stead that the Agency is not part of and is therefore inde-
pendent of any other unit of the Federal Government. And
describing an agency as independent would be an odd way
to signify that its head is removable only for cause because
even an agency head who is shielded in that way would
hardly be fully “independent” of Presidential control.
So, I don't think the agency has the same status after the SCOTUS ruling as before. How do you define it? Is it an executive agency that is independently funded? Whatever it is, no one has bothered to question it or update any rules, laws...etc.
From what I understand they are involved with like 60% of bank mergers so they aren't exactly huffing gasoline.
"Without the Treasury making a concession (either a write-down or a conversion to common) of its senior preferred position, the current shareholders will have no value," KBW said. "And even with a conversion to common, which we think is the most likely scenario, the common shares are likely to be diluted down to close to zero."
The preferred shares might have some value, but that is dependent on how the government restructures Fannie and Freddie, the report continued.
Here’s something to ponder: I just read a clip from Paul Mampilly in January. Where he thought that the Government was getting close to turning back on the preferred dividends in a form of re normalizing the Twins. Would that basically solve the preferred’s problem?
If that happened what then would the common’s price be? $100- $200- $300 or as Stock analyze thinks $1,500?
Paulson is a preferred holder not commons.
Trader I know at Freddie has indicated to me 2028 is the year he's been told to expect to have the capital to exit conservatorship.
Compliance with the regulatory capital requirements can be ignored until 2028 at this point in time.
Stop conflating a regulation with the law.
The current capital rule is a regulation. It is purely at the discretion of the Directorto set the risk based level once the APA requirements are satisfied.
There is nothing stopping the Director from proposing to set a revised risk based level at say 2.6%, have a public hearing and comment period and publish the new rule in the federal register.
Obviously it is entirely possible to do what dajester wished for.
If I were to file a lawsuit, there would be a TON of prep work prior to filing. I don't need to do all that prepwork just to respond to IH posts however.
It is very difficult to successfully sue a government agency. However, this does not mean it is impossible as we have now seen.
If the FHFA makes another egregiously bad agreement while in bed with Treasury, I expect FHFA will be sued... again.
Whether it's successful or not, or how long it takes is another story
Because FHFA doesn't pay a cent does NOT mean they have carte blanche to making additional agreements that violate the GSE covenant with shareholders.
They have been put on notice, so if FHFA does it again - the courts may grant a contract remedy instead of or in addition to monetary?
Right, why would they possibly want any of the capital taken from the GSEs over the past 15 years to do anything useful. Like say, ummm. Pay off the SPS - Shares that can't be legally paid down.
There is no need for a fact check of every detail, or hyperlink, or for me to go to the court house to file some paperwork in order to express an opinion.
1) In what court would the suit be filed, and why? - Could be anywhere, pick one. One or more may get to SCOTUS again.
2) Which law was/would be allegedly violated? - Depends on future FHFA actions. Another breach of implied covenant seems likely. Could also be a takings. Could be a injunction or prospective relief request to prevent share increase.
3) What would the plaintiffs seek as remedy? - Depends on the suit obviously. Damages from profit sweep to LP. Damages from cash sweep after capital threshold is reached. Could be a monetary remedy or a contractual remedy.
4) Given what has happened in all the other court cases, what reason is there to believe this new suit would succeed? Because one has succeeded.
5) How long would it take, in light of the government having fought every other case tooth and nail, for the suit to ultimately succeed? Don't know, but likely less time than the first win.
So for you to call out others for their predictions, you should also come to realize you are doing the exact same thing.
Not officially released
It would be a great estate planning move for John Paulson?
real777mellon is the Real Deal! Lots of interesting insights and knowledge!
Have we been officially released? If so, why isn't the stock flying?
8-0..proves otherwise
Yes, but the US Gov't owns FNMA! lol.
thanks for that Augie doggie🐶
Once $1.59 breaks through then it’s off to mid $2s’
Taken a while but she’ll get there
For those on the 20
Delay we hit $1.50. Down at 1.47 now
It was Trump FNMA bonds that I knew of not commons
if x and social media could get a story out on how the gse's would help more houses being built, better loan rates, and a housing market free from government control,
I could see this turning into a AMC reddit movement and force the gov't's hand to release the gse's.
YES YES
I have argues such for months and years - to each President
IMO Reality is F and F (free) do not have the biggest stick in reducing cost of mortgages-period
But as noted before a SPLASH - GOV will not charge its usual FEE - no fee - suspended for one year - to LOWER cost to almost every buyer would IMO stimulate activity and be a super PR win
I will say ---- I 100% disagree that F and F being in conservatorship has LED TO THIS HOUSING Crisis --- that is the FED and a free market where - without some GOV hand out - builders will never build lower cost-price houses when they can maker more money in a free market by building higher cost - price homes - for which there is still a huge market. This is not GREED this is Fair Market Capitalism. Those of us who lean left - inside democracy and free markets - would LOVE to see GOV hand outs - help to those builders (but that action will be called Socialism or Communism and those not getting help will bitch "THEY THEY" (immigrants - minorities - lazy - patronage) get it all - even when designed say on a lottery !!!
Gosh damn you, you just had to say something!
But but but
Bradford told us this is a Biden trade and happening soon..
Oh wow great find! Paulson owns FNF common I had no idea.
BRAVO.
The FHFA will have its motion for JMOL to override the verdict, forfeited.
It was submitted on Friday.
(*) Pending to know what the judge has to say in a reply.
#FANNIEGATE ATTYS DRAMA TV SERIES
— Conservatives against Trump (@CarlosVignote) April 17, 2024
7th amnt:"No fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court",blasts an attempt to appeal a jury issue already decided.
Only a JMOL Rule 50(b),which needs 50(a):same sufficiency-of-the-evidence arguments w/ oral motion?
Forfeited https://t.co/AcdRN7ctRQ
Followers
|
2319
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
38
|
Posts (Total)
|
799116
|
Created
|
07/14/08
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators not one red cent ~NORC~ stockprofitter Ace Trader jeddiemack FOFreddie Wise Man |
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |