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.
1.7 million plus traded today. Is there any good or a game by MMs just to make the retailers buy while they dumping ???
What happened ?? 0.0765 after a long time, as per TDAmeritrade. ???
William P Deans Sr on April 20, 2015 at 12:24 pm
Tim,
Does Senator Grassley’s Office realized what they just said !!
Senator Grassley asked Eric Holder and the Department of Justice to explain why some of the documents requested by the plaintiffs against the government is being kept secret.
So Senator Grassley’s Office said that if they do receive an answer they too will keep it secret. (how dumbs is that).
So if your office is going to keep it quiet, then why do you need it all ?
Did I mention anywhere in here about the “geniuses” we currently have in Washington looking out for us ?? !!
Give me a break !
http://timhoward717.com/2015/04/14/treasury-official-goes-rogue-and-the-shot-heard-around-the-world-gimme-shelter/#comments
Thanks for posting.
A price hike, may be above 0.50 ??
Well explained. Even though I am long, I couldn't strike out this possibility.
Yea I observed the same thing. I think there's 71k in the first one minute.
Like the rhymes. No warrants and $200/ share.
You know what this means ?? No warrants!! And each share is more than $200 worth IMHO. Thanks.
------------------
The Government Doesn't "Own" Fannie & Freddie
April 7, 2015
To the uninitiated, a recent NPR story might have seemed like a primer on how Fannie and Freddie work and a straightforward attempt to explain the facts under the headline, "As Economy Rebounds, Government Still Plays Role In Mortgage Business." But many listeners and Investors Unite members have not been shy about hammering away at what the story didn't say.
To be sure, the piece had some good points. We were encouraged to hear the reporter accurately state that Fannie Mae and Freddie have repaid the taxpayer loans they received as a bailout from the 2008 financial crisis. The comment is also in the appropriate context that the government is reaping a windfall from sweeping up all of the companies' profits:
There is an upside to controlling Fannie and Freddie at least for now. They've paid back the $187 billion bailout and the government gets to keep their profits now – an additional $40 billion so far."
On the other hand, in the discussion about how to move forward on the fates of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the piece touched only lightly on the conservatorship and implications for policy options. The story quoted the publisher of Inside Mortgage Finance, Guy Cecala, claiming that there are just two options for the future of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac: the government retains ownership or they go completely private. And if they transition to solely private-run, there consequences would be grave indeed:
"Cecala says one reason the government has been reluctant to hand Fannie and Freddie over to the private sector is that a privately-run Fannie and Freddie might only be interested in guaranteeing certain loans, like loans to really rich people or people with practically perfect credit."
Well, that is one perspective but not one that reflects the perspective of our members and policy experts we have showcased. The fact is, for decades the GSEs operated as a quasi-government entity – functioning like a private company but backed by a government guarantee in case of market-wide disruptions that would threaten their viability. Both Fannie and Freddie have guaranteed mortgages for every kind of homeowner that exists in the country.
In a comment posted at NPR, one listener took issue with the notion that to honor the terms of the conservatorship would obstruct access to mortgages for average people:
"Third, Ms. Smith says that if the government releases Fannie and Freddie back to their stockholders, they "might" only guarantee loans to wealthy people. Not only is this a totally groundless assumption, it is journalistic fraud to even imply it. Fannie and Freddie have decades of history of guaranteeing loans. There is nothing whatsoever in their history that would lead to the assumption that only the wealthy would be served."
More importantly, it would have been useful to explain why the government won't release its chokehold on Fannie and Freddie. The why, as we all know very well, has everything to do with the $40 billion (and growing) that the U.S. Treasury has swept up from the companies in the illegal Third Amendment Sweep.
Furthermore, it is inaccurate to say that the government "owns" the companies. Through the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement that was drafted as a condition of the bailout in 2008, the federal government took over 79 percent of senior stock in both Fannie and Freddie. That percentage was set precisely to avoid a government takeover. The establishment of a conservatorship under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act was a conscious decision by Congress and the Administration to return the GSEs to private control once they were "sound and solvent."
It would be more accurate to say that the government nationalized the entities when Treasury decided to pre-empt the law that established a temporary conservatorship and instead set up an illegal sweep of profits that prevented the creation of a capital buffer. The government had already set aggressive terms when it bailed out Fannie and Freddie, giving itself plenty of upside in event of their return to profitability. Besides the money that has been paid back so far, the government would stand to make almost two hundred billion dollars from the sale of its position in the common stock if it were to end the conservatorship, according to some estimates. We think that's appropriate: The taxpayers should profit for the bailout that these companies were given in 2008. But to change the terms of the deal to take 100% of all profits is both illegal and sets a horrible precedent, as former FDIC Chair Bill Isaac recently pointed out.
One listener posted a comment on NPR, offering this stark analogy:
"Instead of requiring a 10% dividend, which was the original agreement, they decided to take ALL of the money! This is no different than loaning a friend $100 and after they pay you back to demand that they keep paying you another $100 every quarter until they say you can stop paying! Al Capone used this tactic when his hustlers did not come through with their debts on time. This is the metaphor for what the gov't has done to shareholders of these "public" equities."
Great to see this attentiveness and spirited engagement as major media turn their attention to the fate of Fannie and Freddie and what is at stake for taxpayers and investors.
To find more Investor Unite blogs click here.
###
About Investors Unite: Formed by Tennessee activist investor and CapWealth Advisors Chairman and CEO, Tim Pagliara, Investors Unite (www.investorsunite.org) is a coalition of private investors from all walks of life, committed to the preservation of shareholder rights for all invested in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The coalition works to educate shareholders and lawmakers on the importance of adopting GSE reform that fully respects the legal rights of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac shareholders and offers full restitution on investments.
P.O. Box 2591
Brentwood, TN 37024
Opt Out
I don't see anything significant here today. Just about 1.2 million volume.
Where you heard from ??
I think Kodak has little bounced before the shares stopped trading and its a complete loss for the investors.
The current volume 1.43 million, is 3 times to the average volume of the last 90 days, which is 483k.
The current volume 143k, is 3 times to the average volume of the last 90 days, which is 483k.
The current volume 483k, is 3 times to the average volume of the last 90 days, which is 483k.
SA, I am not sure. Even though volume is just about 2% of outstanding shares, it's 3 times to the average volume of the last 90 days.
1.4 million plus as per Fidelity. Not crossed yesterday's volume of 1.5 million but almost near.
Crossed the million volume now and pps is 0.062 as per Fidelity. Thanks.
We are near to 1 million volume, about 918k volume traded till now as per Fidelity.
Volume crossed 683k in just one and half hour as per Fidelity. Still long way to go for the end of the day. TD Ameritrade not reflecting proper volume yet ??
SA, almost about 433k volume already traded in 1 Hour 20 Minutes. My guess is we may surpass yesterday's volume by end of the day.
Looks like going up. 0.0662 now.
If it goes above 0.50 cents, then I think it's a clear indication that the commons will survive.
Don't know what's going on. I just holding blindly and don't know whether commons survive. Until we see a volume of at least 10% of outstanding shares, we don't know whether commons survive.
Today about 1.5 million plus volume traded as per TDAmeritrade. Highest in the recent times.
I don't know AAMRQ went as low as a nickel. But I saw it trading in low 0.30s.
kscott462 on Yahoo message board.
Yes, you are 100 percent correct with your analysis. If you are serious about exposing this fraud Then you must listen to what i am going to tell you. The proper action you must take is the following. You MUST hire a bankruptcy attorney from Delaware and request they file a Section 220 demand with the Chancery court in Delaware. The Chancery court is the only way you can successfully challenge the bankruptcy as it is not a part of all the back room deals being done in the bankruptcy court. I have been thru exactly the same situation as you guys with another company in which I cannot disclose for legal reasons, but I feel your pain and I want to help you. DO NOT waste your time writing the bankruptcy judge or trustee as you will get nowhere. The 220 Demand will force Exide to turn over every financial document they have to your Delaware attorneys and they will have their own forensic accountants find the evidence you are looking for. You will send shockwaves thru Exide and their cronies as they know the Chancery court in Delaware is independent of the bankruptcy court in Delaware and can invalidate the confirmation hearing. I hope you listen to me as it took me a year of stress to find this info as it is a mostly hidden path to challenge a fraudulent bankruptcy.
http://finance.yahoo.com/mb/forumview/?&v=m&bn=212348b0-3aac-3ef6-9101-8e3769dfdc09
By Jamie Santo
Law360, Wilmington (March 27, 2015, 9:43 PM ET) -- A Delaware bankruptcy judge blessed Exide Technologies Inc.'s reorganization plan on Friday, clearing the way for the battery maker to emerge from a lengthy stint in Chapter 11 with its debt load lightened by $600 million.
U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Kevin J. Carey signed off on Exide's plan at hearing in Wilmington, overruling objections from two senior noteholders who claimed it offered an inferior return than other options and improperly favored other investors.
Judge Carey cited numerous reasons in favor of confirmation, including widespread creditor support for the...
http://www.law360.com/bankruptcy/articles/636452/exide-wins-nod-for-ch-11-plan-to-slash-debt-by-600m
When will be the sealed docks be unsealed ???
AAMRQ plummeted from around $7.50 to low $2s in a single day.
AAMRQ never dropped below 0.25 but XIDEQ dropped below 0.05.
I think there was a court case filed regarding merging of AAMRQ and US Airways, at that time many sold AAMRQ in fear thinking that it will become zero. So the stock price plummeted from around $7.50 to low $2. No one knows what it's worth then when it was $2s. And no one knows what's the worth of AAMRQ when it stopped trading at about $11.30. Because it's said that it would be given only 0.06 of AAL, $25 IPO, for every AAMRQ. So people thought AAMRQ is worth only $1.5 and thought that they lost as they didn't sell at $11.30 before it stopped trading. But it took about one year for commons to realize 1 AAMRQ = 1 AAL. Which means one AAMRQ was around $25 at that time and around $55 now. So we don't know what's stored here in XIDEQ for commons. We never know what's in it till the end. Just IMO.
I think there was a court case filed regarding merging of AAMRQ and US Airways, at that time many sold AAMRQ in fear thinking that it will become zero. So the stock price plummeted from around $7.50 to low $2. No one knows what it's worth then when it was $2s. And no one knows what's the worth of AAMRQ when it stopped trading at about $11.30. Because it's said that it would be given only 0.06 of AAL for every AAMRQ. But it took about one year for commons to realize 1 AAMRQ = 1 AAL. We don't know what's stored here in XIDEQ for commons. We never know what's in it till the end. Just IMO.
I think there was a court case filed regarding merging of AAMRQ and US Airways, at that time many sold AAMRQ in fear thinking that it will become zero. No one knows what's the worth of AAMRQ when it stopped trading at about $11.30. Because it's said that it would be given only 0.06 of AAL for every AAMRQ. But it took about one year for commons to realize 1 AAMRQ = 1 AAL. We don't know what's stored here in XIDEQ for commons. We never know what's in it till the end. Just IMO.
Is there anywhere mentioned commons get wiped out or cancelled ??
Hi SA, is it mentioned anywhere in the WSJ that the commons would be cancelled ??
Docket 3350 Everyone will get more if liquidated #Exidegate
Docket 3350 $925 million in book value in foreign assets has been hidden from public #Exidegate
Docket 3350 Discloses that high level of potential purchaser interest among 4 entities but creditors want to grab the company free#Exidegate
Docket 3350 Implied value is much less than real value #Exidegate
Docket 3350 Implied value is much less than real value #Exidegate
— Shelley Johnson (@Shelley10009) March 25, 2015