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 think the housing speech will be similar to the auto industry speech. He'll take credit for all the good things, mention insurance fee reduction, Harp, etc. When it comes to Fannie, Freddie, maybe the 3% down, and then he'll urge congress to pass reform legislation. They already know congress won't get that done, so it's sending it back to Johnson's words, telling Watt that if congress can't pass something, get with Treasury for release. So, Obama can taking credit for moving it all along from further out, while still being careful with his words.
10:25am MST 2 hours 10 min left :)
@JoshRosner: Expect emails to show that ideology rather than law drove Sperling, Crapo, Stevens to support 3rd Amendment #GSE #Fannie #Freddie
10:25am MST
Excerpt from article below,
"Obama is expected to talk about other housing initiatives today, including efforts to cut lending "red tape" for qualified borrowers, a plan to help more middle-class homeowners with a better mortgage-finance program than the current Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac system and create more financing to develop and renovate 40,000 affordable rental homes across the country."
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/arizona/politics/2015/01/08/obama-speech-phoenix-housing-mortgage/21428209/
They were mistaken. He's long and strong!
10:25am MST
Great find Z! I don't mind paying directors if they do something useful like re/uplisting and/or release!
That's what I see as a biggie. The guidelines are dated Dec 2, 2014 and now include shareholder info.
Air Force One landed in Phoenix.
A silver lining to falling yields: Time to refinance
Kelli B. Grant | @kelligrant
4 Hours Ago
CNBC.com
PLAY VIDEO
Falling bond yields offer a bright spot for homeowners: extended opportunities to refinance.
Mortgage rates have been on the decline. For the week ending Tuesday, the average rate for a conforming 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage was 3.83 percent, down from 3.96 percent a week earlier, according to mortgage data site HSH.com. Rates for a conforming 5/1 adjustable-rate mortgage averaged 3.12 percent, down from 3.17 percent.
"Rates are not only lower than they were expected to be when we closed out 2014, but in recent days have dropped further," said Keith Gumbinger, vice president at HSH.com. The break for homeowners comes from investor concerns about falling oil prices and deflation, he said. That has pushed bond yields lower, allowing mortgage interest rates to slip.
Read MoreOne five-minute fix that could help you save more
On Tuesday, 10-year Treasurys fell below 2 percent for the first time since October, hitting the lowest level since May 2013. That same day, according to Zillow Mortgages, average rates for a 30-year mortgage dropped six basis points, to 3.57 percent. On Wednesday, they reported, the average rates held steady at 3.55 percent, levels last seen in May 2013.
"From a timing standpoint, now's the time to jump on it," said Greg McBride, chief financial analyst for Bankrate.com. "For anyone who has purchased a home in the past year and a half, these are some of the best rates they've ever seen."
Read More5 things to watch in housing in 2015
Many homeowners who wanted to refinance had opportunities to do so in recent years. But plenty still stand to benefit. At least 7.4 million homeowners with 30-year, fixed-rate loans can be refinanced, according to a November report from mortgage analytics firm Black Knight Financial Services. That means they have at least 20 percent equity in their homes, good credit, a non-delinquent loan status and a rate greater than 4.5 percent, high enough to benefit from refinancing.
The pool could be even wider. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac recently announced new programs allowing borrowers to put as little as 3 percent down. That could open the refinance market for homeowners who don't have much equity and wouldn't previously have been able to refinance, said McBride.
The rule of thumb is that refinancing is worth it if you can drop your rate by at least one percent or otherwise cut a deal that lets you recoup the costs in money saved within a year or two. But there's some flexibility in that assessment. The longer you plan to stay in your home, the less of a rate break there needs to be for you to benefit from refinancing, said Gumbinger. "There's really only one direction for rates to go from here," he said.
Read MoreHoliday debt? These cards can help
Even if you plan to sell within a few years, refinancing to an adjustable-rate mortgage may offer some savings at current low rates, said McBride. Those loans offer a fixed rate for a set period—usually five, seven or 10 years—and then adjust annually. ARMs can be a risky choice: Rates will almost certainly be higher at that reset than they are now. "If your timetable is accurate, you'll never see that first adjustment," he said.
But be cautious refinancing into a shorter mortgage term, said Mark La Spisa, a certified financial planner and the president of Vermillion Financial Advisors in South Barrington, Ill. "I have never found that that decision is a financial decision," he said. Yes, you'll pay off the loan faster and pay less interest overall, but the advantage of a longer mortgage term is that as inflation goes up, that payment represents a smaller portion of income. With mortgage rates as low as they are, homeowners would get a better return investing that extra cash instead of using it to pay off a sub-4 percent mortgage faster, he said.
Read MoreShould you own actively managed funds?
If you do refinance, be smart about how you use those savings. "Refinancing is not something you do in a vacuum," said La Spisa. "What else can you do with that money?" Before splurging, explore how you might be able to use it to improve your finances—for example, by maxing out your 401(k), paying off high-rate credit card debt or putting aside cash for college.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/102318061
10:25 am MST
Why do we need to pay a Board of Directors while still under cship?
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/raphael-w-bostic-elected-freddie-210500675.html?.tsrc=applewf
Nitwit sounds happy, That's a good sign!
Made my contribution! go!! go Fannie!
Thanks! I guess I better get off the board and put in my trade. There goes another spike! C'mon Fannie!
Interesting about Stevens!
Anybody here still buying today? I have plenty already, but am tempted to add some more.
Mysteriously, cnbc won't provide link to Fannie, Freddie part or provide any written quotes. :)
He already filed 2 lawsuits before Lamberth ruled.
He raised $3 billion at the IPO. Has about $18 billion now. He said Fnma, fmcc was 3%. That's the beauty of it. At just $10, he'd have $3 billion in fnma, fmcc, dividends, controlling share. At $20, $6 bil, $40, $12 billion?
Ackman will be on cnbc in 8 hours. tweet cnbc, squawk box to make sure and ask him about Fannie, Freddie.
Which is why you bought at $4+and sold at what? Ackman bought in the $2's. He has over 11% exposure in common shares of 2 trillion dollar US companies.
Ackman's swaps expire In April, hmm, what else happens then? Ha! It'll at least be back to $4 by then.
so 10:25am MST, mountain time zone.
Set our Fannie free!!!
If it's good, I'll wear diapers. Please be good! C'mon Fannie!
What's up? Fidelity only shows 2.27. Don't leave me behind!! Lol!! I'd expect screwy stuff before relisting, but I wouldn't expect it now?!!!
Hey Travel, what does your Schwab show now?
Exactly, but then in the 10q's the Fannie execs seem to try and state some of the difficulties, material weaknesses as a result of continued conservatorship.
I've been going back to that too. Also Freddie Mac, CEO Layton's remarks. He seems to wince at the word conservatorship. :) and about his "You'll see something every month or so", like a 12month roll out for release? Mayapoulus states that the last 3-4 months (from video), feels there has been enormous progress, everyone working together. They're both confident in the current state of the companies. IMO
Key Soros Herbalife architect out
Lawrence Delevingne | Kate Kelly
29 Mins Ago
CNBC.com
Jevayona Delita | Anadolu Agency | Getty Images
George Soros in Jakarta, Indonesia, December, 30, 2014.
The chief architect of Soros Fund Management's bullish bet on Herbalife has quietly departed.
Paul Sohn, a portfolio manager at billionaire George Soros' influential personal investing shop, left the firm late last year, according to people familiar with the situation.
Sohn did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
"Paul Sohn's departure is unrelated to any position the firm may have or has had in Herbalife," Michael Vachon, a spokesman for Soros said in an email to CNBC.
PLAY VIDEO
Sohn is known as the man who got Soros into its position on Herbalife, the controversial nutritional supplements company that Bill Ackman and his Pershing Square Capital Management have famously bet against as a "pyramid scheme." The company strongly denies the charge.
In 2013, the New York Post reported that Sohn was gunning for Ackman. "George Soros broke the Bank of England," Sohn reportedly said at an investment ideas dinner, "George Soros can break the back of Ackman."
Read MoreHerbalife stockspikes as Soros said to be betting big
Soros has been cutting its Herbalife stake as the stock has taken a beating.
Soros held 1.89 million shares of the stock as of Sept. 30, down from 2.85 million the previous quarter, according to public filings. Herbalife is now Soros' 56th largest holding. Shares fell more than 50 percent in 2014 and the stock has fallen again in 2015 on high buying and selling.
Also recently departed from Soros are portfolio manager Randy Yuen and analyst Nils Tristan, according to people familiar with the situation.
Both men did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Soros' chief investment office is Scott Bessent. Soros, a former hedge fund manager, is worth an estimated $24 billion, according to Forbes.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/102314791
community banker...
Obama to nominate former Bank of Hawaii CEO Allan Landon to Fed: DJ, citing source
20 Mins Ago
Reuters
Bank of Hawaii | AP
Allan Landon, fmr Bank of Hawaii CEO.
President Barack Obama plans to nominate community banker Allan Landon for a seat on the U.S. Federal Reserve's Board of Governors, a source familiar with the matter said on Tuesday.
Landon, a partner with private investment fund Community BanCapital, served as chief executive of the Bank of Hawaii until 2010. The source said the White House would announce the nomination later on Tuesday.
Landon, reached by telephone, declined to comment and referred calls to the White House press office.
Here's what he had to say in 2010....
I was just going to ask if anyone had an opinion on the latest Basel requirements, revisions going into effect 2015, etc, and I ran across this old article from Carney, ha!
(to clarify again, it's dated 2010)
New Capital Requirements Threaten To Stick Us With Fannie Mae Forever
John Carney | @carney
Fri, 3 Sep '10 | 2:52 PM ET
CNBC.com
Global banking regulators may be close to reaching a deal on bank liquidity requirements that could saddle the U.S. taxpayer with supporting Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for eternity.
The committee drafting the new Basel III rules will meet in Switzerland next Tuesday. A final set of rules is expected to be agreed on September 12. The leaders of the Group of 20 nations are expected to endorse the rules when they meet in November.
A little noticed change in the proposed rules, however, could throw a monkey wrench into plans to reform Fannie and Freddie, the two mortgage giants that have spent the last two years on government life-support. So far, U.S. taxpayers have been forced to pony up around $150 billion for Fannie and Freddie, and the Congressional Budget Office says that the total cost could amount to three times that much.
Policy makers who hoped to eventually remove the costly government subsidies and guarantees for Fannie and Freddie will run into a stumbling block, however, if the Basel III rules are implemented. That’s because Basel III includes a liquidity requirement for banks that will encourage them to buy the debt of the Fannie and Freddie as well as the mortgage-backed securities they back.
The new liquidity regulation—sometimes known as “The Bear Stearns Rule”—is intended to make sure that banks have enough “high-quality liquid assets” to survive a temporary credit crunch. Specifically, the banks will be required to have enough high-quality liquid assets to fund 30 days of capital outflows under a stress scenario.
Right from the start, the way the Basel Committee defined “high-quality liquid assets” was problematic. It included cash and central bank reserves, relatively non-controversial highly liquid assets. But it also included sovereign debt, a move that would inevitably encourage banks to hold more sovereign debt than they otherwise would. This is problematic for two reasons—it created an implicit subsidy for spend-thrift governments and it created the danger of over-exposing banks to sovereign defaults.
Recent amendments to the Bear Stearns Rule have extended this subsidy to Fannie and Freddie. The Basel Committee decided to include the debt of “Government Sponsored Entitites”—bureaucratic code for Fannie and Freddie—in the definition of “high quality liquid assets.” What’s more, it also included mortgage-backed securities guaranteed by Fannie and Freddie in the definition.
Up to 40% of a bank’s liquidity reserve can be made up of GSE obligations, under the rules likely to be approved in the next few weeks. And while it is true that these obligations get a 15% haircut under the rules because they are considered “Level 2” liquidity assets, compared with the cash, central bank reserves and sovereign debt that will now be considered Level 1 assets.
This creates a huge subsidy for Fannie and Freddie. Banks will load up on GSE obligations, especially in an era where central bank reserves and Treasury bond yields are being depressed by policy-makers seeking to keep sputtering economies afloat. This artificial demand will scramble market signals about the risk taken on by Fannie and Freddie—all but ensuring that Fannie and Freddie will once again unwittingly take on more risk than they can handle. In short, the very same toxic situation created by the once implicit government subsidy of Fannie and Freddie is being baked right into Basel III.
Perhaps even more troubling, this will create a vicious cycle that will make reform of Fannie and Freddie next to impossible. Once banks have loaded up on Fannie and Freddie obligations, there will be no way for the U.S. government to remove government guarantees without triggering a liquidity crisis in banks around the world.
Imagine a bank that is estimated to require $10 billion in liquidity assets to survive a 30-day credit crunch. Under Basel III, some $6 billion of those assets would be Level 1. Some $4 billion would be Level 2, which includes highly rated non-financial corporate debt and GSE obligations. Let’s say the Level 2 assets are split between corporate and GSE obligations.
If lawmakers on Capitol Hill passed reforms taking Fannie and Freddie out from under the government umbrella, that bank would immediately find itself with a 20% shortfall in its liquidity assets. It would have to sell the GSE debt or other assets worth $2 billion in exchange for cash to make up for the shortfall. But it would be doing this at precisely the moment that every other bank was trying to sell its GSE debt and raise cash.
The domino effect of this would be devastating. It has all the makings of another banking crisis.
Which is why it wouldn’t happen. Any attempt to reform the GSE’s would be met with the certain knowledge that the reform would precipitate a crisis. And so the reform would be put on the back burner.
This is what Basel III threatens—Fannie and Freddie forever out of reach of financial reforms, forever subsidized, and forever unable to manage their own risk because of their immunity to market discipline.
John Carney
Senior Editor, CNBC.com
Carney says "shocking" development. :)
https://twitter.com/carney/status/552525004353843200
Nice update, thank you, Rocco.
President to speak on Fannie, Freddie on Thursday
Unwinding GSEs unlikely; investors see possibilities for recovery
Trey Garrison
January 6, 2015
Email
inShare
President Obama will be talking housing this week when he travels to Phoenix on Thursday, in the run up to his State of the Union.
Whether GSE reform features in his speech is still up in the air – the White House press office tells HousingWire there’s no preview of the speech available yet – but housing will be the primary focus of the Obama’s remarks.
A client note from Keefe, Bruyette & Woods suggests, in fact, that Obama may be giving up on his push to unwind conservatorship for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
“We believe the absence of the topic in his Phoenix speech may be seen as a sign that the administration is giving up on its goal of unwinding the [government sponsored enterprises],” the KBR note says.
Congress and the White House have both called for an unwinding, but the devil is in the details. The Senate run at the problem, the Johnson-Crapo bill, is dead in the water, and the House version – the PATH Act – may get a hearing in the new Republican Congress, but it isn’t likely to make it past the White House.
Groups like Investors Unite, which saw shareholder rights swept away with the Third Amendment sweep by the Treasury Department, are hoping that the stall out will actually better their chances for a resolution that ends with them getting their stake back.
A client note from Goldman Sachs says the new Congress brings a lot of uncertainty.
The source of political uncertainty is likely to shift from the House to the Senate and, in some cases, from Congress to the White House.
“Since Republicans took control of Congress in 2011, most major legislative agreements have followed a similar path: the House passes legislation with only Republican votes, the Senate passes compromise legislation with some support from both parties, and that Senate legislation then passes the House, often by a very narrow margin and often at the last minute,” Goldman analysts write.
“The wider margin of control in the House is likely to provide Republican leaders in that chamber a bit more flexibility in passing legislation with Republican votes without having to reach across the aisle for Democratic support as they have often had to do on major fiscal matters.”
With 54 seats in the Senate, Republican leaders will still need to compromise with Democrats on most issues to reach the 60 votes usually needed to pass most legislation.
Nevertheless, Republicans will control the legislative calendar, which will lead to some legislation that the White House opposes reaching the President's desk. The upshot will be a greater focus on the Senate, and a greater focus on whether the President will sign or veto various measures, Goldman writes.