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.
I just don't see it, CF. Not to say it couldn't happen, but it makes no sense to wind them down and start new companies that do the same thing. I'm sure the Bob Corkers and Jeb Hensarlings of the world would love it, but nothing Mnuchin has said so far has me worried.
A shareholder rights plan allows control of the shares, so how do you conclude manipulation of the shares can overcome that? You realize nobody shorts a $0.07 stock? Most brokerages don't even allow you to short OTC stocks.
My speculation and impression is the CEO is concerned manipulators could gain control of the company for a fraction of its value, take it into receivership, strip out the IP and leave all of us with nothing. If that is the case then current ownership of those couple of patents of his invention is understandable.
A passthrough passes through the interest and principle of the mortgages (your image calls them assets, but same difference, they're not owned by a bank) that are in a trust. So it doesn't make any sense to separate the three, they're inextricably linked.
Then they don't own anything at all because you can't separate mortages, passthroughs, and trusts. After all that's the whole point of putting the mortgages into a trust that backs a passthrough.
I said Fannie Mae doesn't own the trusts, and they don't. I'm done here. Argue with Alvarez & Marsal Valuations Services, LLC. They agree with me.
The document I supplied is from their 10-k.
why are you so optimistic on preferreds?
So they've sold a lot of what they own recently. But that doesn't mean that their business hasn't historically been buying loans from banks, putting them in a trust, and then securitizing them into a mortgage-backed security. Subsequently they've sold many of the MBSs.
Think you're talking about a different subject than I was.
Alvarez & Marsal is one of the top valuation companies in the world. They're hired by banks, hedges funds, and corporations from every industry to value assets. In 2013, they valued Fannie Mae. Here is a portion of that valuation. Pay attention to the section where they discount the consolidated trusts. Why would they discount those items? Because Fannie Mae does not own them.
If your thesis has been that they do, you should sell today and find an easier business you understand.
They buy and sell the mortgages and guarantee the payments. they retain some of the assets but most go into consolidated trusts where they earn the guarateed fees.
I didn't say they don't purchase mortgages. I said they don't own $2.9 trillion of assets. Reading comprehension isn't that difficult.
What's your point?
That's one way you're wrong.
No. I've been aware of him since 2009. He sells subscriptions just like Timothy Sykes. None of them can make a buck and keep it.
Fannie Mae "OWNS" $204.318b of mortgage loans. $2.896t is "OWNED" by mortgage holders (not Fannie Mae). Learn to read a balance sheet and the footnotes of a 10-k.
I'm certain he earns his money by selling subscriptions to his investment advice and that's the extent of his money making activities.
Correct.
Good because nobody makes money charting.
Chartings attempt to predict the price on a daily basis. Fundamental investing attempts to value the business recognizing that there's no such thing as a crystal ball.
Investing based on valuations alone, as you contend, without even looking at a chart (at least historically at a bare minimum) is like reading a menu, ordering your food and eating it with a blindfold on.
Give you another piece of information. After today's news, I'm seriously considering shorting the commons. When/if I do, I'll dump millions into it.
No they're not. They have nothing to do with the cash accounts of the business. A technical chart does not measure assets and liabilities. It has no idea what portion of net income is the result of operations versus a one time sale of assets. It's a completely useless mechanism that's never produced a forbes 400 member. I see technical investors come and go on a daily basis. Risking thousands to obtain pennies. How many times has Timothy Sykes filed for bankruptcy? Gee, I wonder.
I started in this business 25 years ago with $1,100. I'm worth $34 million. I've never looked at a chart. You have no idea what you're talking about.
No, actually don't. It would benefit me more for them to be released. You'll see soon within months.
Receivership is on its way.
Investing based on a chart is speculating. Has nothing to do with business. Isn't a business owner in the country that makes a business decision based on whether a chart is up or down. He decides using math. Goodluck.
I don't need you to buy in order for my preferreds to increase in value. The preferreds are secured by the equity, not dependant upon who buys and who sells.
iPad, big thumbs, who cares. 2 + 2 = 4. Practice.
Continue what uptrend? They're down nearly 6% today. Smh.
I agree on Tilson. Ackman is brilliant though . He has compounded at a rate higher than the s and p over the course of pershing square's history, valeant debacle notwithstanding. Moreover, real estate is his main circle of competence. Think GGP and his early days . Study ackman . He has a history of nailing his real estate ideas.
She doesn't know that much about the business, only the basics. Can't fault her for that. Isn't like you can learn about this business in 5 minutes. Many here still know nothing about the business.
Ackman & Tilson do. No way to know if Icahn still does. I'm not a fan of either Ackman or Tilson. Tilson's averaged annual return over the last 18 years has been barely 5%. Ackman had to start a public company in order to raise capital for his fund because he lost so much money. He's still in the red.
No it doesn't. It simply says the commons have risen and fallen. Lol. Your reading comprehension is horrid.
Preferreds will be called. They'll recieve 80-90% of par. Commons will recieve nothing.
Where does it specify in that article that he owns FnF commons? Lol
No. YOU think banks want that business. They haven't expressed their desires to have that business. Your thesis is wrong.
No he doesn't. He owns preferreds.
Had nothing to do with the release of Fannie Mae.