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.
TRCPA - I don't know. I think a consent decree incentivizes a faster raise and more dilution.
I think a slow ascent is actually what commons want. JPS will not be converted while still in conservatorship.
This scenario (PSPA amendment only) is in line with Ackman's $10 per share statement. This could be the best case scenario for commons ...
Interesting times ...
JPS are going to be left twisting in the wind if you don't get that consent decree.
Per Gaby from ACG analytics who you follow, PSPA amendment without Consent Decree is huge for commons.
Good luck!
TRCPA - we don't need a conset order.
PSPA amendment (full not lite) puts commons on a pretty good path to retained earnings for possibly, at least, the next 4 years.
Navy, precisely from Joe Light, trying to set Hackerman some what straight considering they're both ha ...
PSPA amendment is the key. Not PSPA-lite, but full PSPA amendment = by and large PSPA marked as paid (probably a couple ways this is done) and the NWS cancelled.
That is the key. If we get that we get probably at least 4 years of retained earnings. We still have SCOTUS ... just need what would be a considered a full PSPA amendment done.
TRCPA - If PSPA amendment (not PSPA-lite) is done, there isn't much Yellen/Biden can do. It would be like cutting off their nose despite their face.
The PSPA amendment (deemed paid and NWS cancelled) is the genie that needs to be release from the bottle.
If only the NWS is cancelled, then we can continue to retain earnings and we wait for SCOTUS to give us the PSPA deemed paid and the $30 billion overpayment.
Interesting times ...
Rob, PSPA amendment (deemed paid and NWS cancellation) is the key. Staying in conservatorship most likely means more retained earnings = very good for commons.
Take 3 min and watch from 33 min to 36 min in the below. It is worth your while.
https://www.realvision.com/the-ultimate-election-trade-fannie-and-freddie-live-with-gabriella-heffesse
TRCPA, Rick, Navy, Brooge, Fence, Guido, Chaser, Rob, Dax, etc. - check out the 33 min mark onward in ACG's analysis on all election scenarios with FnF. Have you viewed this yet?
A PSPA amendment (PSPA deemed paid & NWS cancelled) with no consent decree is one Gaby highlighted as being huge for commons.
https://www.realvision.com/the-ultimate-election-trade-fannie-and-freddie-live-with-gabriella-heffesse
The longer the time horizon for raising capital, the better for commons as it allows for retained earnings.
Once the PSPA is amended, a Biden administration can't sweep profits, and no new amendment can be made. They also don't want to disrupt the mortgage market, so they won't be doing anything drastic like receivership, or plotting anything like that, especially given the legal backdrop, not wanting to compound any current liability.
A Biden administration will also want to lower the cap rule to help affordable housing.
I feel Calabria just got horribly out maneuvered ...
Gary, not true - PSPA amendment which is what Ackman said and Gaby from ACG Analytics. This is the signal to JPS to jump into commons.
TRCPA, Rick, Navy, Brooge, Fence, Guido, Chaser, Rob, Dax, etc. - check out the 33 min mark onward in ACG's analysis on all election scenarios with FnF.
A PSPA amendment with no consent decree is one Gaby highlighted as being huge for commons.
https://www.realvision.com/the-ultimate-election-trade-fannie-and-freddie-live-with-gabriella-heffesse
Per ACG - PSPA Amendment and no consent decree will be HUGE for commons.
Remember, Ackman said nothing about a consent decree, only PSPA amendment or legal victory.
JPS could get crushed here ...
Watch min 33 to 36 of ACG analysis.
https://www.realvision.com/the-ultimate-election-trade-fannie-and-freddie-live-with-gabriella-heffesse
Per ACG - Watch from 33 to 36 min mark - If only PSPA amendment, commons become huge play with long highway for Fannie & Freddie to raise capital ... JPS gets dinged
https://www.realvision.com/the-ultimate-election-trade-fannie-and-freddie-live-with-gabriella-heffesse
If no consent decree, but PSPA amendment (deemed paid and NWS cancelled), then we are on a 5 year time horizon for retained earnings = very good for common and very bad for JPS = no conversion for a long time.
Has Calabria been out maneuvered? If still in conservatorship, the cap rule being amended down is in play.
Per ACG - a PSPA amendment without a consent order could be huge for commons. Watch ACG’s video just before the election. A PSPA amendment without consent decree starts the long path to retained earnings.
The PSPA along with the courts is big.
https://www.realvision.com/the-ultimate-election-trade-fannie-and-freddie-live-with-gabriella-heffesse
Geez, I though klass with a k was self-effacing - u just had to flat out call me a donkey!
I think u mean klass with a k ...
When you have lived abroad for extended periods of time, you see it time and time again ...
Better than the limeys ...
Real news - Biz Insider posted it first in probably several languages. Then some hack ran it through a translator, say Malaysian to Convict English (Aussie, Kiwi, Tazmani) and voila... u have a hacked article on webiybitcoin .. and of course u do ... why wuldnt u ...
Or they changed it and posted it so copyright AI wouldnt pick it up ... who knows ...
Mnuchin, JPM, MS, Calabria know they must get FnF off of the OTC and must make them attractive enough for investors.
Just get us to the NYSE and everything will take care of itself.
Sortman - can you reconcile that viewpoint with the likes of kthomp who say JPS will have to receive optimal terms or they won't convert?
The theory being they won't drop "their" lawsuits? Those lawsuits represent both jps and common shareholders.
Commons have representation and will not settle litigation if anything is predatory.
Also, please reconcile your drive bye with the ACG. ACG Analytics says the conversion will be negotiated between JPM/MS and jps shareholders. When do those negotiations happen? Have you received any communication from JPM or MS?
Please stop the marry-go-round ... I want to get off!
Please provide concrete answers, not drive byes ...
Have any JPS received a special proxy vote form to vote on a jps conversion?
kthomp - yet you believe WaFed was dismissed because it is materially different from Fairholme. This is a false understanding.
Per Sweeney, WaFed and Fairholme are materially identical in terms of remedy.
So with your logic, better hope both commmons and jps accept the terms.
Per ACG Analytics - any JPS conversion is a separate issue compared to the PSPA amendment (deemed paid and NWS cancelled). ACG, who have been right this far, say JPS can negotiate with Morgan Stanley and JPMorgan.
So, having any JPS received any special proxy vote ballot to vote on converting your shares? When do you expect to receive the special proxy vote material for shareholders of record as of ????. What will be the date for shareholders of record?
I’m pretty sure all JPS need to vote, right?
Rob, thanks ... I think KGTBA want to do something for shareholders. I think they’ll do the minimum ... will they do more?
Rob, I too looked up justices and the unitary executive. I focused more on Alito, who backs the unitary executive, but per the review I read, probably not to the extent of Scalia, the modern day founder of the unitary principle.
For some reason I think Kagan and Sotomayor were trying to sway Alito away from Kav, Gor, Tho, and Bar. I’d be curious to get your thoughts. The acting vs confirmed is an interesting question but I don’t think it sways Kav, Gor, Tho, and Bar. Where Gor goes on this so does Tho, and Gor tipped his hand. Bar, and I believe Gor and possibly Kav all brought up a confirmed director in 2014 vs the 3rd amendment acting director in 2012, meaning once a confirmed director is approved, the quarterly NWS payments still need to be approved and sent to Treasury. So even a newly confirmed director who didn’t initiate the NWS is still a non-terminable director by POTUS of an independent agency, therefore all actions going forward from 2014 re the 3rd amendment must be vacated and remedy most likely ensues.
It felt that that core - Kav, Gor, Tho, and Bar were looking to give shareholders something. Alito for me was less obvious. His questions, I thought, seemed to align with KGTB on acting vs. confirmed, among other questions. I also felt it strange that Kagan and Sotomayor followed Alito everywhere, referencing his questions to counsel to draw out more liberal thought on the acting director issue.
Almost as if KGTB were setting up for something relatively big that require Alito’s sign on, and Kag and Sot were trying to sway him back from KGTB. KGTB might be leaning towards something from gutting HERA, to providing full $124 billion relief, to providing only what Thompson specifically asked for. Thompson said he would be fine with gutting the entire agency “ab initio” and Alito, I believe, used the term (need to go back and look it up). Thompson also said the gross overpayment of $124 billion is out there several times. He also said he’d only ask for the PSPA amendment and injunction, plus the net overpayment of $124 billion = ~$30 B in response to Barrett. I think the last request is a humble request the court will grant at a minimum.
Alito is the unknown for me and I wonder if he is the “fulcrum.” Couldn’t resist ...
That’s about the gist of it ...
Interesting they met with Paulson and Geitner ...
Guido, from your lips to the power’s ears ...
SCOTUS can invalidate HERA if they wanted to. Of course they can. They can throw the whole law out as being unconstitutional ... this is not layman black and white ...
HoldenWalker - that works in a vacuum, we live in a practical and realistic world. If SCOTUS rules overwhelmingly in favor of shareholders, everything else becomes academic ... It’s called understanding the big picture ...
Rob, finished rereading Collins oral arguments (not skimming this time). I really do agree exactly with ROLG. I don’t know if Kavanaugh is lead or Thomas/Gorsuch. I do believe Kavanaugh, Thomas, Gorsuch, Barret and Alito will provide Shareholders with something. Who knows, Breyer and Roberts may join us.
Kagan and Sotomayor kept harping on Alito questions. Alito was searching for answers that were eventually answered by Thompson via Gorusch, Barrett, and Kavanaugh questions.
Gorsuch, Thomas, Kavanaugh, and Barrett seemed to have sympathetic ears to Thompson. Alito was harder to read but there was a distinct correlation of Thompson questioning and requestions from those justices.
ROLG is right about Kavanaugh’s softball lob questions to Thompson. I’ll call them super soft ball questions from K.
Thomas, Gorsuch, and Barrett had some pretty easy lobs in there also. Alito not as much, but was first to ask questions that were eventually better answered by Thompson via other justices’ questions. Roberts, who knows? Breyer could possibly side with the conservatives.
Kagan and Sotomayor seemed to continually follow-up on Alito as if to get Alito to their side but that’s my complete speculation.
Kagan and Sotomayor are probaby against.
Holden - again incorrect.
If SCOTUS provides an injunction on the 3rd amendment, and deems all payments per the 10% dividend applied to the PSPA “principal,” plus the 30 billion overpayment returned, for all intents and purposes, the companies will be de facto released once the CRP is done.
Everyone sees you here and on Twitter ...
Holden - SCOTUS can invalidate HERA, deem all actions null and void, and can provide an astonishingly high remedy to FnF. Will that happen? No, but it is fully within their rights to do so and to dismiss it outright is again uninformed.
Jeddie - scotus can do whatever they want ...
Holden, please... You don’t argue shareprice of commons to any judge for this case. You argue earnings lost, lost dividends because it is more easily defined at div yields. You could also add missed dividends for common shareholders as well. There are missed dividends on JPS shares.
You argue shareprice it introduces a whole slew of issues like price movement if the “concrete” lifeline wasn’t thrown.
Anything derivative helps everyone, including jps ... add direct claims and so be it, now there is the best of both worlds for everyone, and the specific plaintiffs injured. Couldn’t that lead to a class action if they allow direct claims? Even gov said if anything the companies were harmed and not direct shareholders - Justice Roberts may not have bought that.
The mere fact you would make such a statement shows a) you do not understand the movng parts here or b) you’re simply trolling since it’s your past-time ...
Which is it? And at least I gave you the benefit of the or ...
We must be getting close to the end - old faithful aliases are starting to go up in smoke aka becoming transparent...
So that’s the next talking point? Ackman says $10 per share. I guess you should be on your way ... bye
Brooge - didn’t appear they discussed the corporate law portion, only the constitutional portion
Disappointing nytimes piece - they’re typically more thorough. They got the constitutional question correct, but didn’t at all get into why the suit was brought.
Rick - see post im replyng to