Freddie Mac-No Politics (FMCC)

[ItsMyOption]

I gave you the link open it.

https://ih.advfn.com/stock-market/USOTC/federal-home-loan-mortgage-qb-FMCC/trades

[tw3141]

Any screenshots?

[ItsMyOption]

Volume what is form T as there was a lot at same time 8 million each

https://ih.advfn.com/stock-market/USOTC/federal-home-loan-mortgage-qb-FMCC/trades


Form T is an electronic form that FINRA requires brokers to use for reporting equity trades executed outside of normal market hours. Form T trades occur during extended hours — before the market opens and after it closes. The objective of the Form T report is to maintain market transparency and integrity.

[tuzedaze]

98 mill sell… then 72 mill in buys… hmmmm

[EternalPatience]

They (govt, treasury, Fhfa) are invincible. You can't do anything other than shouting at message boards (when I say you, I mean we)

[Bostonsesco]

I wanna bring a civil suit now the deal was fix them and release now they just abusing power! Free Britney

[Viking61]

Three month cup and handle is about there. It looks like $1.50 is the next move high line.

[EternalPatience]

Wow I see more posts from the users of fnma board here now. Will this board be for fmcc commons and vest interests of Commons alone? Let's see

[Lite]

Great post.

I believe when Treasury jumped in and invoked the 3rd Amendment - the breached the terms and killed the share price going forward because of their intention to send all profits to themselves.

https://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/tg1684.aspx

(Short note, each time I read ‘taxpayer’ I sub/use the term ‘Government’ - this is who is who is directly spending the taken profits.)

[Mnemonic]

I agree with what you're saying in the context of a taking. I'm actually expecting it to play out that way.

For breach of contract claims, however, it seems counter-intuitive that you could claim damages on an anticipatory breach if you don't currently own anything. Even with the dividends, weren't all payments halted while in conservatorship? How do you claim rights to future dividends if you currently own no stock?

This is all going to get really hairy with direct vs derivative as well, because although contractual rights to dividends were essentially extinguished (direct), the real injury is that the companies squandered money that would have allowed them to escape and resume dividends in the future (derivative).

I don't know what the remedy is going to look like in this case. I don't know what the authority of the court is to grant a particular remedy is either. Seems to me that the contract that violated shareholder rights should be voided, but idk if that's possible.

[FFFacts]

Idk about that. Seems to me that you can only assert breach of contract claims if you own the contract and can prove damages. Both seem to be satisfied here for current shareholders whose dividend/liquidation rights have been stripped.

You will see the arrangement in actually filing a lawsuit and remedies to previously owned shareholders in securities class actions. It is actually quite common.

If you don't own the contract, then you wouldn't be part of the class plaintiffs, so you couldn't be awarded damages. Someone correct me if I'm wrong there.

It depends upon the timing of when you owned the contract and the dates the violations occurred.

Not that companies who mislead investors don't regularly pay damages to shareholders who owned on particular dates. But in this case it's not about a drop in share price but instead anticipatory breach of liquidation preference and dividend rights.

I don't see the difference. Not sure what anticipatory breach of liquidation preference means but dividend rights also could be attributable to those shareholders who owned at specified times. It will depend on how the parties and the judge define the class and the dates/times involved.

[Mnemonic]

The right to collect on damages is different than the right to sue.

Idk about that. Seems to me that you can only assert breach of contract claims if you own the contract and can prove damages (i.e. - you have standing). Both seem to be satisfied here for current shareholders whose dividend/liquidation rights have been stripped.

If you don't own the contract, then you wouldn't be part of the class plaintiffs, so you couldn't be awarded damages. Someone correct me if I'm wrong there.

Not that companies who mislead investors don't regularly pay damages to shareholders who owned on particular dates. But in this case it's not about a drop in share price but instead anticipatory breach of liquidation preference and dividend rights.

I'd be interested to hear from someone who knows more about litigation as far as what possible outcomes there are and how damages are typically awarded in cases like this.

[FFFacts]

I have heard rights travel with the shares but that is not what it seems to be when damages are awarded. The right to collect on damages is different than the right to sue. I have seen numerous securities verdicts in which remedy was provided to shareholders only that owned shares during a specific time.

[Mnemonic]

I agree, Lamberth is kind of a piece of shit.

I would say that the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing applies to shareholders' contract rights, which should hypothetically travel with the shares.

If you're assessing things from a damages model, then it's unclear. The net worth sweep harmed shareholders over many years; it's difficult to argue that OG holders were the only ones harmed. Would this be a pro-rated damage model? I've owned shares on and off since 2016 and I would gladly take retroactive dividends for my time of ownership.

[FFFacts]

What is Lael Brainards stance of the GSEs?

[FFFacts]

Q: who would settle a case in which the highest court in the land just rubber stamped?
A: No one

Not many. Those who think lamberth new was positive does not understand he could very well be shutting out post net worth sweep shareholders out.

[Robert from yahoo bd]

Thanks for taking the time to respond. Real estate cycles have been going on for a long time and the boom bust cycles are a persistent characteristic.

There's no question that real estate busts cause havoc but I think that the limited capital available on the books, coupled with average ltvs in the 50's, strong underwriting, the inevitable 80 to 90 percent of GSE borrowers who will continue paying on time, stronger counterparty risk sharing partners, and the inability of the housing market to keep up with the supply necessary each year for the last 10 years to meet demand from obsolescence and population growth is more likely than not to ride out the eventual downturn.

We'll just have to wait and see what happens in the next inevitable housing crash.

[Robert from yahoo bd]

Punitive damages seems like a long shot given the courts tremendous latitude to government actors. But when a government actor says the intent of the net worth sweep was to "salt the Earth with their carcasses", I would imagine that would raise the eyebrows of even the most adamant pro government federal judge. We'll see what happens.

[FFFacts]

1.

I agree

Done.

2.

With #2 are you referring to MC's "extra capital requirement" when us housing prices increase above an historical benchmark? I heard MC left and there's a new sheriff in town who doesn't exactly see eye to eye with the former FHFA Director.

Yes, regardless the new FHFA mandated capital requirements are on the books right now until they are formally changed.

3.

Remember that California representative in the hfsc giving MC sh*t over the adverse market fee?

Yes, also other members of congress who didn't have a clue and kept on berating Calabria. His forbearance scheme saved the housing market from a crash.

4.

Refinance activity was up 7 percent overall, with gains in both conventional and government refinances. Additionally, the average loan balance for a refinance application was the highest in a month.

To my point. What happened in 2007-2008 with rising and unsustainable home prices? Look at HELOC lines and the inevitable rising interest rates.

4.

Reduced loan terms reduce the overall risk of the gses book of business because mortgagors build equity at a much higher rate thus reducing ltv even further.

Yes but it also reduces profitability for the gses in the long term. The gses are insurance companies what payoffs occur quicker than anticipated the longer term loans can't offset. So you will have a situation where the gses are turned into FHA loans which have much higher default rates.

The MCAI rose 0.1 percent to 125.7 last month. An increase in the MCAI indicates lending standards are loosening,

To my point.

6.

however a large cohort of millennials and baby boomers could simply put more money down from their inflated equity portfolios and/or other assets and salaries and wages could rise.

Money moved from inflated assets into hard assets like real estate will only worsen the rising real estate prices situation. When the stimulus money is works its way back to the govt via taxes the money supply decreases. When infrastructure projects start to wind down where will the new money come from? The macroeconomic situation will again be one of the typical boom and bust cycles.

7.

Zillows algorithm was mispricing housing assets. I've seen so much incorrect information on Zillow that I usually cut their estimates by 20% to 33%

Yes, I don't think they managed their buying process well at all but they also have internal forecasters that see some exogenous macroeconomic factors.

8.

yes

https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/index-family/indicators/sp-corelogic-case-shiller/sp-corelogic-case-shiller-composite/#overview

https://wolfstreet.com/2021/09/28/the-most-splendid-housing-bubbles-in-america-holy-cow-september-update/

https://www.ft.com/content/bc521dda-023e-48e0-8e63-5718ac77289c

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/moodys-says-this-is-the-new-housing-bubble-2021-11-01

https://www.pods.com/blog/2021/10/housing-bubble/

http://housingbubble.blog/

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/16/billionaire-jeff-greene-says-this-housing-boom-is-in-a-bubble-too.html

[clarencebeaks21]

"Do you know for sure whether or not punitive damages are off the table in federal court on temporary or permanent unconstitutional taking cases were the federal government acts with malice?"

Robert, I do not know to a certainty. IMO such punitive damages are *theoretically* STILL available. But it would be a rare bird, a true case of first impression for each court to consider, and such a rare award IMO would very likely go up on Writ of Cert to SCOTUS who would then reverse it, for any number of reasons, none I necessarily think are entirely persuasive, but that's that. Better off taking just compensation as the gift horse in a settlement, rather than pushing to trial, let alone all the way to the horse-trading of SCOTUS & federal friends. Just keeping it real.

[Robert from yahoo bd]

1. The CRT's are giveaways that are uneconomical and take away from the profits of the gses.

2. Required capital increases with home price appreciation.

3. The adverse market fee is gone.

4. Early payoffs and reduced loan terms hurt the long term profitability of the gses.

5. FICO scores are bs and can be easily manipulated.

6. Home prices are unsustainable in many parts.

7. Zillow is getting out of the ibuying business. What's the reason?

8. Want more reasons?

I agree that the CRT's are nothing but giveaways to the financial establishment.

With #2 are you referring to MC's "extra capital requirement" when us housing prices increase above an historical benchmark? I heard MC left and there's a new sheriff in town who doesn't exactly see eye to eye with the former FHFA Director.

3 was a missed opportunity to build much needed capital and Sandra and the current administration totally caved to the progressive left of their party and the TBTF banks. Remember that California representative in the hfsc giving MC sh*t over the adverse market fee? Classic MC, "Mortgage forebearance isn't free."

4. In the meantime the unamortized gfees over the life of the refinanced or paid off loan is accelerated to earnings and that increases capital. Also loan balances on new product are increasing yoy at high single digit to double digit rates, this is from todays WP:"Joel Kan, an MBA economist, said in a statement. "Refinance activity was up 7 percent overall, with gains in both conventional and government refinances. Additionally, the average loan balance for a refinance application was the highest in a month."

Reduced loan terms reduce the overall risk of the gses book of business because mortgagors build equity at a much higher rate thus reducing ltv even further.

5. Yes Fico scores have been overly inflated over the last several years. However mortgage underwriters continue to be conservative. From todays WP: "The MBA also released its mortgage credit availability index (MCAI) that showed credit availability increased slightly in October. The MCAI rose 0.1 percent to 125.7 last month. An increase in the MCAI indicates lending standards are loosening, while a decrease signals they are tightening.

"Credit availability inched forward in October, but the overall index was 30 percent lower than February 2020 and close to the lowest supply of mortgage credit since 2014," Kan said in a statement."

6. Agree, however a large cohort of millennials and baby boomers could simply put more money down from their inflated equity portfolios and/or other assets and salaries and wages could rise.

7. Zillows algorithm was mispricing housing assets. I've seen so much incorrect information on Zillow that I usually cut their estimates by 20% to 33%.

8. Yes.

[FFFacts]

1. The CRT's are giveaways that are uneconomical and take away from the profits of the gses.

2. Required capital increases with home price appreciation.

3. The adverse market fee is gone.

4. Early payoffs and reduced loan terms hurt the long term profitability of the gses.

5. FICO scores are bs and can be easily manipulated.

6. Home prices are unsustainable in many parts.

7. Zillow is getting out of the ibuying business. What's the reason?

8. Want more reasons?

[Robert from yahoo bd]

It is very possible once the bubble bursts Fannie and Freddie go into receivership

I don't see receivership as a likely scenario because of the 10 year under supply of home building that has resulted in a 3m to 5m deficit of needed housing, capital should rebuild substantially over the next 6 to 10 quarters, the gses have forced lender buybacks on many loans not meeting their strict underwriting criteria, credit enhanced mortgages should perform much better than during the gfc as MI companies are monitored more strictly, the average gfee is 49.6 bps and 80% to 90% of homeowners will continue paying to save their home, the stress test says it's not a problem, the gses book of business has an average ltv in the 50's, the average fico score is 740, do you want some more reasons?

[FFFacts]

Why don't they just do the death by a thousand cuts route and load the gses up with expenses associated with their social and equitable agenda under the guise of "the public it serves"?

Who is to say they haven't or aren't in the process already. You heard the CEO's on the last conference call put out statements supporting 'progressive' housing agendas.

If a federal court never orders them to stop, being 100% in control and loading them up with money losing social programs specifically aimed at their voter base could work for them while we wait for the federal courts to figure out what if anything they are going to do.

We are already in the middle of a manufactured bubble. It is very possible once the bubble bursts Fannie and Freddie go into receivership, sell off assets via their living will mandates, formally go through bk and it's even possible that a recap occurs. There is no catalyst to do anything right now because the party in control has the senate, house and executive.

[Robert from yahoo bd]

Each of the two political parties have their own almost 180 degree agenda's and after this summer we know that POTUS ultimately calls the shots at FHFA.

Do you know for sure whether or not punitive damages are off the table in federal court on temporary or permanent unconstitutional taking cases were the federal government acts with malice?

[Robert from yahoo bd]

Why don't they just do the death by a thousand cuts route and load the gses up with expenses associated with their social and equitable agenda under the guise of "the public it serves"?

If a federal court never orders them to stop, being 100% in control and loading them up with money losing social programs specifically aimed at their voter base could work for them while we wait for the federal courts to figure out what if anything they are going to do.

[Lite]

Knit one, pearl two…and We wait.

[FFFacts]

if and when this happens, it will be out of Mercy of the government that enough is enough.. Until then, it will continue to be milked and dragged... Right now no one is accountable to release it so it is languishing..

The catalyst will be because they need to sell their stake to raise money for govt operations or to implement admin policies.

[FFFacts]

Another question: what are your thoughts on the statement of work that FHFA posted?

Nothing. Agencies routinely solicit bids for contracts. Professional services are just another service they are seeking from vendors. It is still a requirement that they disclose documents professionally to the SEC.

[FFFacts]

Can a Jury can untangle this and offer punitive damages towards the Govt for 13+ years of Shareholder abuse via the 3rd Admendment. It doesn’t appear that there is a real reason why they are still in conservatorship.

Not under a nationalization scheme. Generally the govt as a soverign can't be sued unless it is explicitly authorized.

[FFFacts]

No didn't grow up in the south but people like southern food and it's good business just ask the current fhfa director.

[FFFacts]

"I say fmcc could go no more than 7 cents up or down from yesterdays closing price." Looks like I was right.

[clarencebeaks21]

He was better than predecessors.

One public comment that speaks volumes was his request that Congress revise HERA to grant the Director power to grant federal charters for new competing guarantors. He was looking at today & far forward. We never know if he was speaking from theory, practicality, frustration, and/or just having his strings pulled. It was a Long shot seeing as how Corker-Warner and other bills with similar ideology never made it very far. (No way that happens under Biden. Zero chance.)

[Robert from yahoo bd]

One thing MC did that I liked was at least he brought up the idea that the government should be following the law and at least had a plan for release, UNLIKE ALL OF HIS PREDECESSORS. Although he was idealistically opposed to having the government interfere with free markets and like any Libertarian thought those that exclusively use government services should pay for their costs. Here, he tried to bring in more competition from the private label market and portfolio lenders by jacking up the gfs so high that the private market would come in. You grew up in the South and I don't mean SoCa, didn't you, cause that's some good eating there !

Maybe when all this is over with we can open up a Memphis barbeque restaurant in SoCo with a bluesy theme like this one https://redhotandblue.com/

[FFFacts]

Calabria knew what he was doing. He had higher capital standards but so what? They can always be changed at a later time. He was on a mission to release the gss's from conservatorship and he was setting up the framework to appease all sides.

Yes, someone got to the current fhfa director probably threw her a bucket of fried chicken turnip greens, mashed potatoes with all the fixins and a gallon of sweetened iced yes and she definitely doesn't know what she is doing.

[Robert from yahoo bd]

I think the giveaway of $15B of much needed capital to the financial establishment is a problem, yet our dear leaders (except MC to some extent) choose to ignore HERA's mandate to preserve and conserve their wards assets. Either the current head of the FHFA is getting bad internal advice, is purposely depleting billions of dollars to satiate her powerful lobbying critics, or WORSE HASN'T A CLUE!

[FFFacts]

A little color from TH on CRT from last night: "What’s missing, though, is the economic context. These are mortgages that carry private mortgage insurance, which significantly reduces their loss severity on default. Fannie publishes data on recent annual default rates and loss severities for these loans in its Connecticut Avenue Securities Investor Presentations. In the January 2021 version of this publication, it says that for its five most recent origination years that have enough loss data to be meaningful—2012 through 2016—the average annual default rate for loans with LTVs over 80 percent and up to 97 percent has been 0.2 percent, and their average annual loss severity has been 0.11 percent. That’s an annual credit loss rate of 2 basis points per year. It would take 30 years of credit losses of 2 basis points per year for the 60-basis point threshold of credit losses to be reached—at which point the mortgage insurers that are counterparties to this deal would have to begin picking up losses—and the term of the insurance is only 12.5 years. On top of that, Fannie is paying for insurance for up to 375 basis points of losses, which is close to 200 years of losses at the current credit loss rate. As I noted in my current post, even in a repeat of the Great Financial Crisis the total losses on an insured pool of loans are unlikely to exceed 150 basis points of the pool balance. This deal is a giveaway to the mortgage insurers, just as similarly-structured Connecticut Avenue Securities deals are giveaways to investors.

The only reason Fannie is doing these grossly uneconomic deals is to get the capital relief FHFA is proposing to offer them. And that’s the scandal. FHFA knows the Calabria capital standard is far too onerous, but rather than reduce it, it only allows the companies to “buy it down” somewhat by issuing CIRTs or CRTs that will lose them billions of dollars in the real world, through greatly overpaying for insurance that will never pay off. And Fannie’s customers are bearing the cost of that. Shame on FHFA."

Tim Howard knows what he is talking about. CRTs have been proven to be uneconomical and a giveaway. Average person doesn't have a clue.

[FFFacts]

I am asking - define the day of nationalization - if we have been semi nationalized for years

That would be determined at trial or in the appeals opinion. I would say either in 2008 or 2012.

[EternalPatience]

FFFACTS - what do you think will be FMCC price today?


Hope this post doesnt get deleted atleast..

[Sharky777]

Government will never release Freddie because of covid. Government is going to need every penny they make from Freddie for the next 10 years or more

[makinezmoney]

$FMCC: Added 50k at $1 now........ I'm ON full board


I Know this can get to $3



Lets gooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo




GO $FMCC

[Newc]

Looks like JANE collecting on level 2 bid.

[makinezmoney]

$FMCC: Great news overnight on FMCC...... FMCC ain't goin ANYWWHERE



Added 50k $FMCC here at $1 !!!!!!!!!



AWESOME NEWS


This should easily get to $3/sh




GO $FMCC



*************************************************************************



Freddie Mac Expanding Eligibility to Help More Low- and Moderate-Income Homeowners Refinance Affordably
3:00 PM ET 10/18/21 | GlobeNewswire

Freddie Mac Expanding Eligibility to Help More Low- and Moderate-Income Homeowners Refinance Affordably

MCLEAN, Va., Oct. 18, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Freddie Mac (OTCQB: FMCC) today issued the following statement in support of an announcement by the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae's low-income refinance programs will be expanded to include those making at or below 100% of the area median income (AMI)--up from 80% AMI.

Donna Corley, Freddie Mac executive vice president and head of Single-Family released the following statement:

"Freddie Mac is taking action to ensure more deserving homeowners can benefit from today's low mortgage rate environment through refinancing. Working with our lender clients and the Federal Housing Finance Agency, we are now able to help even more lower-income households reduce their interest rate and their monthly mortgage payment through our Refi Possible solution. Our priority is to create more equitable opportunities that responsibly support sustainable homeownership."

Launched in August, Refi Possible(SM) is available to low- and moderate-income homeowners with a Freddie Mac-backed single-family mortgage. These homeowners will benefit from a reduced interest rate and lower mortgage payment, helping those who have not refinanced save an estimated $100 to $250 a month.

Freddie Mac makes home possible for millions of families and individuals by providing mortgage capital to lenders. Since our creation by Congress in 1970, we've made housing more accessible and affordable for homebuyers and renters in communities nationwide. We are building a better housing finance system for homebuyers, renters, lenders, investors and taxpayers. Learn more at FreddieMac.com, Twitter @FreddieMac and Freddie Mac's blog FreddieMac.com/blog.

MEDIA CONTACT:

Chad Wandler

709-903-2446

[e-mail]

> Dow Jones Newswires

October 18, 2021 15:00 ET (19:00 GMT)

[FFFacts]

http://www.glenbradford.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/13-mc-01288-0133.pdf

Paragraph 11.

[highwaymap]

Can you post the link to this? Thanks

[highwaymap]

Also, last hope if all else fails is Trump 2024. We still have a ways to go with fnf. I am buying the lows. V

[FFFacts]

Just goes to show how inept plaintiffs counsel are. They made a blatant mistake in their most recent filing certifying class plaintiffs.

11.
Plaintiff Borodkin owns Fannie Mae Preferred Stock in the following series:
Series P, Series F, Series N, Series S, Series G, Series M, Series N, Series L, Series T, Series Q,
Series H, and Series R. Borodkin will be appointed a class representative of the Fannie Preferred
Class.

They repeated Series N twice. Also are they suggesting that the other series are not going to be a part of the class?

[FFFacts]

We wait for the CFC Appeals which should come out with their decision within the next few months. No catalyst until then unless we get some admin action. May happen after 2022 if this still goes on it's path and there is a party split in congress and senate.

[FFFacts]

The Bhatti appeals ruling should be appealed in part for the claims that was dismmissed.

[Rk3]

To the editor,

Congress could put Facebook in conservatorship as they did with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 2008 and 13 years later they are still in conservatorship today. The government used an accounting gimmick with a deferred tax asset to fool the American people that they were in a "death spiral". They could put self dealing Treasury and the FHFA to setup the tried and true "Net Worth Sweep" to drain all the core capital from Facebook and label all their shareholders as "Greedy Hedgefunds". Sound extreme?

Fannie and Freddie are a shock absorber in real estate down cycles operating with almost no capital! Evergrande is failing, terrifying indeed!

Sincerely me

(Maximum letters)