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.
It literally means nothing because it can be amended and extended.
Expiration date means nothing.
And? Do you even know what a holder of record is? It doesn't matter if it's 800 or 80,000.
Does.....not......matter.
So you are predicting 15 cents upside? That's how much it will be worth in today's dollars.
I wonder how much the two companies had to pay Morgan Stanley and J.P. Morgan?
Well it's a good thing it's only one. Besides there's no need to echo the same fallacies about 'optional pay downs' and what not.
Commons to the moon! There, got ya covered.
FHFA and Treasury ripped up the old agreement, and substituted in its place a new deal that created a “net worth sweep” whereby all of the funds received by the GSEs were paid over to Treasury as a dividend, even in amounts far in excess of the original 10 percent dividend. The consequences have been huge. Without the Third Amendment, all the senior-preferred stock would have been redeemed. With the Third Amendment, over $301 billion was sent to the Treasury.
Man With No Name said, Quote: “The "optional pay down" was only optional if certain conditions were met...and they never were.” Wrong
More than enough money was sent to the Treasury to pay down the LP and cancel the SPS. It is called Stealing! The FHFA is allowing the Treasury to steal the companies from the shareholders. I know it, you know it and everyone else that has studied the evidence knows it.
Sorry to tell you you are wrong in your analysis. These are all just words on a page. In no way does any of the SPSPA agreement language square with the charter act prohibition of a fee by treasury or any other agency or department of the Gov. As Lamberth likes to say “clear as day”. The seniors can be paid off for $1000 per share. In no way is the liquidation preference “equity”. It is an illegal commitment fee. Until either treasury returns all of the money under Wiseman’s super secret separate account plan or someone challenges the Treasury’s unconstitutional and illegal commitment, there will be no restructuring of any kind and no exit from conservatorship. Oh and by the way as defined in the SPSPA the warrants are part of the commitment fee in consideration to an initial $100 billion commitment that Congress did not authorize under HERA. Stop perpetuating a fraudulent transaction.
1,002. When will you learn how to read the entire contract?
recall that DJT and congress tried to pass a law that killed the ACA and 3 R votes stopped that legislation
I do not understand how the Judge could not allow the Plaintiffs to read and explain the Contract to the Jury.
For the 1000th time, that's a legal issue which means there is no "explaining the contract to the jury". Judges decide legal issues and that issue has already been decided.
Give it a rest.
The more TH speaks, the more he reveals he's simply out of his element. Some of that word salad is outright dumb.
Like 99% plus dilution is not impossible
Oh course they think I'm a bad guy....because I don't tell them what they want to hear, I tell them reality.
ALL bankruptcies are analogous to this particular Conservatorship! Yet some can't seem to grasp that scale has nothing to do capital requirements.
Why don't you give us an analogous example of the NWS and a bankruptcy reorg where two profitable enterprises with quarterly income in the billions were restructured.
A lot of people have compared AIG to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Maybe the GM bankruptcy? But that was not a government sponsored enterprise with a special Charter from Congress to be the backbone of the US Secondary Mortgage Market was it?
MC said this was an administrative bankruptcy and that all the litigation will go away.
Alternate reality describes most of these ramblings quite well.
If you had the years of experience I've have with restructurings as well as securities class actions, you'd be singing a different tune.
But you haven't.
So you really don't know what's applicable and what's not, now do you?
It didn't miss at all because it is fundamentally couched in securities law.
-If you are not damaged, you have no claim.-
As far as assuring new investors....this is child's play. With every bankruptcy reorganization, new investors are a plenty, and this will be no different. Why? Because the books will be clean, the capital buffer will be more than enough to prevent another conservatorship, and the valuation given to those backstopping a re-ipo will less than market.
New common owners will be rewarded, old common owners will not.
This is reality.
No amount of pixie dust and unicorn farts will change the leverage Treasury has with the SPS.
There will be no charitable contributions to commons.
There will be no winning lottery tickets.
Conservatorship is nothing more than an administrative bankruptcy reorganization and those with priority call the shots.
But Bryndon is a chick, didn't you read?
It's quite the wish list. I am reminded of the saying "s**t in one hand and wish in the other....see which one fills up first".
1. The government isn't going to all-of-a-sudden become charitable.
2. There will be no exist in the next couple of decades unless seniors convert.
COMMONS TO THE MOON!!!!
whats it like becoming DONKEY #1?
That's a laugh
George Will? Conservative? Bright?
That's hilarious.
George doesn't give a flip about the GSE's status.
Why is the cram down is being pushed so hard, wiping out the existing common shares. What happens if the shareholders were to find out their shares possibly do not exist? If the shareholders are wiped out will never know.
14 years has got you 47 cents. Nothing needs to be said. Would you like me to throw in a "commons to the moon" just for good measure?
It's like an echo chamber in here. The pay down was only optional if certain conditions were met, which they weren't. This has been explained already. It's done, over, kaput.
And we appreciate the layups you give us.
Kthomp - you are entitled to your opinions with are well reasoned but many have opposing opinions. The issue will be decided by the 5th Circuit and SCOTUS if it wants to review the decision coming out of Collins.
You may be right that the SPSA is not voidable but it is just void - not sure what the right determination is for a Constitutional defect. It could be enforceable if the 5th allows it to stand
It would not be considered a contract outside of the Conservatorship because there was not consideration outside of the original liquidation preference of $ 1 bn each. If this was in Delaware Chancery Ct and US District Court there would be a class action for fraud and the SPSA would definitely be void.
Ano - is a great advocate for fairness and reasonableness. You are a great advocate for your position.
Oh jeez, here we go again.
Fat chance. With the nonsensical hysteria surrounding "commons to the moon", the commons will likely go up a little before they come right on back down to reality. No damages, no takings. All just dreams.
Your votes are worth as much as your shares
Oh yeah, definitely. Must be his votes that keep this in conservatorship
She's doing a great job. Ackman should be able to buy a couple dozen donuts with all his commons.
Ackman has lost close to $1 billion on Herbalife
Only in first lien secured claims. Otherwise they dont care and are incompetent. The SPSA is a voidable contract.
Of course. The USG files claims and expects to get paid before anyone with junior claims. Happens in every case. No different than this 'conservatorship'.
The 1 paragraph opinion in Bhatti is not controlling precedent in the other federal Circuits.
I just dont understand why the UST would want to take all this execution risk to get greater than 89 % ownership when they can easily monetize the 80 pct with certainty and speed.