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.
Can you explain why? TIA
Everyone can load up in 2 years around .40-.50.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=144263955
Stop this ridiculousness. The sweep is alive and well.
"PS: there was NO net worth sweep reported sept 30 that I can find. "
Wow, just when I thought the embarrassment reached its peak, this gem was posted last night. Like a few others mentioned, I am really starting to question this secret letter now. First, you do not understand that paying less means they are earning less and second you did not even go to the FHFA website to look before stating there was no NWS.
With your recent track record of completely missing things, it sure would boost the board's moral if you posted your secret letter from the SEC that even Ackman is not privy to.
Wow. That is embarrassing. Do you understand what is going on?
You have posted this at least three times now.
Charters revoked= more participants = less eps= + dilution for recap= $8-10 imo. Still nice upside but not as safe as the pfd with similar upside.
You must have missed back in 2010 when Morningstar named him the hedge fund manager of the decade. It is great to have such a strong voice at the negotiation table fighting on your behalf.
Here the article is so you can educate yourself a little.
https://amp.businessinsider.com/the-obsessive-habits-of-bruce-berkowitz-morningstars-manager-of-the-decade-2012-2
It turned from green to red though?Very strange action given the dialogue at MBA today.
Technically he is just pointing out facts which people don’t like.
Because Mnuchin has stated that he will tackle the issue after midterms?
Yank,
Why would he argue for 100% of par?
By arguing for 150% of par, with a 2/3 settlement they get par, which would be perfectly fine with them and is what is expected.
This is the exact same tactic Trump would use.
You don’t try to settle for what you are legally entitled to especially in light of all the gimmicks and lies used by the government.
You are linking a private google group. Why don't you share the contents?
Yer right. Let’s focus our energy on the government.
If Bright becomes director, as Maloni says, that spells almost certain death to common shares. A few highlights from that piece.
"Maloni says the prevailing GOP opinion in DC is to do away with the GSEs replacing them with something else."
"the plan with the most support is one that Bright has been pushing to largely substitute Ginnie Mae--moving into the conventional market, for Fannie and Freddie."
"If Bright were to head up the FHFA, he could still pump that proposal while strangling Fannie and Freddie with regulation."
It is all starting to make sense as to why Ackman opened a position of 21% of his GSE holdings in preferreds. His nomination would almost certainly send commons sub .75 while holders rotate to preferred.
I do not know who that spam account "nsfraudbuster" is but they have 0 financial knowledge. They should stick to being a spam MAGA bot. I doubt a random twitter bot has ever heard of any GSE reform talk.
Stick to people like Rosner, Bradford, Ackman, Berkowitz etc.
Speaking of Ackman, is anyone opening a pfd position to hedge against the risky common bet like he did?
you must have missed this hilarious post yesterday which a few people called embarrassing.
"Bill Ackman did not buy a 21% Preferred stake as your post suggests. Ackman is 79% C and 21% P so for every 10 shares he owns 7.9 are C and 2.1 are P.
Must have been the koolaid could have been the gin me oh my.
Bartender - buy a round of koolaid for the house. "
Wow, expecting $100 after the tax payers bailed FNMA out and then giving them the shaft on the warrants? Sounds pretty greedy. I’m sure tax payers would not be happy if these vulture common investors demanded 100 a share.
Will you please provide some information on where it says it is illegal? I am having a hard time finding it and besides random posters on here saying it is illegal, I have never seen anything concrete as to saying the warrants are illegal. TIA
Directly from his mouth "it hedges our risk of a restructuring that disproportionately benefits the preferred shares versus the common shares"
From Pershing Square
"In recent months, we purchased preferred stock of both companies. Our preferred stock represents approximately 21% of our total investment in Fannie and Freddie, or about 1% of net assets. While the substantial majority of our investment historically has been in Fannie/Freddie common stock, we acquired preferred stock recently because (1) we believe that the timing of a favorable outcome for the two companies is more proximate (timing is an important consideration for the preferred shares as they are noncumulative and perpetual), (2) it hedges our risk of a restructuring that disproportionately benefits the preferred versus the common shares, and (3) we found the trading prices of the preferred securities attractive at current levels. We still prefer our investment in the common shares because the government and taxpayers’ interests, as owners of 79.9% of the common stock of both companies, are aligned with the interests of common shareholders. If housing reform is successful, we believe that both FNMA and FMCC common and preferred stock will likely be worth multiples of their current share prices.
We discussed this back in August. Not sure why you are playing dumb now? Maybe to influence naive investors in to not following how the biggest common holder is hedging his risky common bet with preferred shares.
This has been known for some time now. I guess if you have a super secret letter from the SEC, you don’t have to follow the biggest common shareholder. While he is hedging, people are posting about a secret letter from the SEC stating the warrants are illegal. Who you you think knows more, Ackman or a random IHUB poster?
In terms of what is best for the tax payer.
This is by far the best. The gov exercises it’s warrants they agreed to in the original contract, 100b+ is raised for infrastructure and less is needed from every tax paying citizen.
It is about protecting the tax payer as said over and over by anyone of importance.
Exactly. They get paid either way. Where as common shares only get paid in one way.
You should have added the next sentence.
“Bruce Berkowitz, Bill Ackman, John Paulson, Richard Perry, Steve Eisman, and Blackrock all have positions in Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac. Most of these positions are in the preferred’s and not the common”.
Just because they have shares, doesn’t mean they are betting on the companies to be around. Remember, commons are last in liquidation preference and the big holders own majority of preferred.
That is one of the beautiful things about the jr pfd. You can’t just “cancel” them like you can the common shares. Instead of a letter from the SEC about warrants, you should ask them if common shares can be cancelled.
It would be pretty awesome if whoever the one person who has the letter from the SEC stating the warrants are illegal actually posted it.
By not sharing it with anyone, it sounds fake to me. I wonder if Ackman would have opened a pfd position, to hedge against recap that favors pfds, if the SEC would have written him a letter also.
Wow. Whoever Nsfrausbuster is has also seen your mysterious letter?
https://twitter.com/nsfraudbuster/status/1049006118628777984
I would tell them to be careful about manipulation. Making purely false claims like that on a public forum is a dangerous road to take.
How is capital raised under this dream of yours?
“ou don't hear Common holders crying for back dividends do you? Why you ask - because they are a little sharper than the average joe.”
That is because they are not guaranteed a dividend. It is up to the companies discretion. Feel free to PM be and we can discuss the difference between the shares.
They were a part of the original bailout. There is no fake letter from the SEC. If there was, Ackman wouldn’t have opened a pfd position to hedge his risky common bet.
The lawsuits will go no where.
Why? Wasn’t it a part of the original bailout? TIA
That is not Epstein’s account. Just because an account has a profile picture doesn’t mean that person is behind the account.
The three month chart is a witches hat.
Or they are selling at break even and rotating to pfd? I think stockprofitter did that exact thing today. He is pumping the fnmas board.
Probably half are 1/5 of par. You are looking at the high yield ones which go at a premium in case of a ruling granting past dividends and an 8%+ return in this market is very attractive.
Not only that but common still have to worry about warrants, pfd conversion and more dilution in order to be capitalized since this needs to be done by the end of Trumps first term.
Based on today’s price action with FMCKJ up 9% and FNMAS up 6% and both fmcc and fnma in the red, do you think the settlement would favor the pfd shares over the common? TIA.
Waiting for a little lower than 1.40 and then I will begin to build a small position.
Blue is back. Time for a quick pump and dump.
Are you worried that pfds are flying and common is red since you are asking about a settlement? Seems like the smart money knows where to buy. Will retail investors follow them?