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.
The overwhelming big problem here is that the plaintiffs are beng asked to thread a needle as to what the wrong doing is as opposed to just saying this is wrong - so fix it.
excercise of warrant unless 100% goes to company or shareholders pro-rata is a taking.
This is such a shet show.
What the heck ...
Why is the government so greedy?
Looks like they are making interest the new tax by owning 100% of the profit / loss its now a tax.
This is such an abortion ... no reason that these things are cratering when there is billions of value here.
Those in government should really be proud of what they've done?
What a farce.
Add interest owed to the GSE's at 10% on money taken and the amount grows.
time for gubberment to stop being greedy and finally do the right thing.
Let gse's go.
....
best interest of the agency and the public it serves...
Well now... here is a thought... what is in the best interest of the agency and the public. Meaning "has to serve both interests" ... well i am the public and they aren't serving me.
Therefore they are in violation of a court ruling...
becuase my interests (as i define them) are not being served.
22 billion of net worth as they state on 800 million shares is 28 per share equity value for a stock trading at $1 ..
only in america.
They obviously reason if the manage them to net neutral or no income or at a loss... they'll be insolvent and they can muck them up... permanently ...
these people are idiots and clowns... they are other things bad too... and most sane people can only hope this situation changes..
but at 0 income the shares are worth zero
its a mess
thanks to the idiots.
fhfa can't be a promoter of housing and a regulator of fannie and freddie the roles are not consistent or aligned.
its wrong.
its like asking the foxes to manage the hen houses... not a wise thing. two non aligned goals.
ouch
It isn't an eminent domain case or nationalization because it lacks the permanent feature required in a Taking case.
Well that is just nonsense.
Because theft is not theft.. becuase you can always, just give it back and its borrowing. So no crime for just borrowing???
So,.. you go to the bank say, give me some money please ... they do... you get arrested for "theft" a taking... and then give it back...
so... is that that theft or not? apparently, it by this definition not be a taking but a borrowing... and so, since, long term, you only borrow things... i mean ... no one gets out of here alive anyway, is there really anything called theft anymore... since nothing is permanent... since you can't really take it with you???
see how easy that is..
You do realize the government appealed the 5th to scotus... thus they gave their blessing to judicial review. The anti-injunction clause therefore was waived.
Odd they didn't think of that...
and the public they serve? I'm not feeling very served... used maybe.. abused and scraped maybe... served up.. possibly... but served in the biblical sense ... no.
I'd think the window of opportunity timewise, unfortunately, extends to 2028 and the expiration of the "warrants". But,really that is arbitrary, because all they have to do is extend them in perpetuity.
More or less these government clowns are waiting people out. The longer they stall the less people will stay interested and give up and go home. Once the crowd thins out, expect the government to; in the dark of night just suck them in or somesuch... quick and painless death.
Imean; how many shareholders in 2008 are gone today or dead? the interest is waning so; it won't matter to anyone, nothing to see here movin along..
so sad.
This has got to be the biggest joke ever...
Doctor said... i removed the heart ... because it was in the best intereest of the the hospital - to sell it to a higher bidder...
no worries that the patient was left on life support.
the greedyment is a joke, the scoutus is a joke and the yes its a circus.
so sad.
80% is a threshold.
however 40% and evidence of "control" also prevails..
they should have consolidated.
but why care they'll do what ever they want.
Here is the crazy thing on this ... warrant.
From an accounting perspective, the govnerment excerices control thru its warrants and by contract.
If this were two private entities at play thru a third the fhfa ... as their auditor I'd require them to consoldiate the fandf into the parent company, ie. government.
Its actually been a total sec reporting farce since the beginning. becuase they exercise control and its greater than 40% ownership interset. remember the warrants are deemed excercised for this purpose since they are in the money...
They've been skirting the rules out the gate. Because they don't play by the same rules as regular companies, ie. their reporting is voluntary and not pursant to sec registrant rules they are getting away withit. but, make no mistake if these were private entities... and did what they did... in an off balance sheet way think enron... heads would have rolled and folks would be jailed.
but hey, its three government companies acting in unison / cohorts.
Have to get the concept of "liquidation pref" removed from the greedyment.
right now what they are doing is retaining the cash from earnings, but adding to the "liquidation pref" meaning its a trick. You, we all think they are retaining earnings, but what they are doing is creating a liability for it and thus in essence merely deferring the hand over to the greedyment.
what needs to occur is to quash that concept of theft.
Its such an unamerican thing.
There is a bigger problem...
How can the greedyment... put entities valued at 90Billion underwater and kill them.. it means that fandf live they are alive...
Which means... yes our stock should be between $8 and $16 a share or an average of $12.
48/6 (warrants for 6B shares) = $8
98/6 (warrants for 6B Shares) = $16
So
2 billion private shares @ $8 = $16B
2 Billion private shares @ $16 = $32B
Average.... $12...
The live!
That is ominous... why would they tinkle 48-98B away... they won't.
lol!
Its pretty obvious that rights are rights.
apparently, all is no longer all.
Thus... they've brought back other cases from the dead.
Thanks scotus...
This guy
Brent Nyitray, CFA
(TMFBrentNyitray)
is obviously uninformed.
He has no clue of which he writes.
To be completely honest here...
I am fully shocked by the scotus redefining the concept of conservator and the appointment of one; wherein the very plain language is a conservator would act in the best interest of that being "conserved" and not as an Agentor or for the best interest of the Agency.. which is beyond bizarre and completely nuts.
No where ever, except here can the conservator rape / pillage that which would be protected; solely because they've redefined what it means.
HOWEVER
Its also good to know that shareholders have standing to bring suit.
This means that, in fact all their rights were not taken from them and thus the lawsuits dismissed by fhfa should now be relitigated because now fhfa can't step into all the shoes of shareholders so, this is going to be interesting.
But, yes, how crazy these scotus nutsos are. really.... how stupid.
From tim howard...
All six of the conservative justices (Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett) are members of the Federalist Society, for which “reining in” or eliminating Fannie and Freddie has been a crusade for more than two decades.
Very interesting, does this mean the fix was in from the outset?
Looks like maybe an investigation is in order?
“Shareholders no longer have any ground for prospective relief” because the January letter agreement between Treasury and FHFA “eliminated the variable dividend formula that caused the shareholders’ injury” (I believe this is an erroneous ruling, since the letter agreement did not eliminate Treasury’s liquidation preference, and only temporarily suspended the sweep)
If this is as wrtitten is true, then scotus has ruled that there is no longer a sweep and thus the liquidation pref has to go, since a liquiation pref is a round about sweep. Further, a sweep of net worth is now uniformly outlawed. Since if they did that then they'd be no longer free of it.
Thus some joy in mudville. Greedy guberment has struck out.
interestingly,
the scotus recognizes shareholder rights.
this recognition of shareholder rights is contrary to Hera and the taking of all the rights of shareholders.
Thus, all the other cases dismissed for lack of standing, or dismissed by fhfa by or on behalf of shareholders, should be automatically reversed or set aside.
why...
because apparently scotus has said shareholders have rights.
Should rule that fhfa is a chameleon ..
it can shape shift and change its colors when it suits them.
they can do all and be responsible to none.
You know...
I am in that "public they serve group"...
i don't feel very served.
interestingly,every investor is in that group too....
seemingly, its not really the public they serve then as a criteria..
its just simple government greed.
Actually..
No.
I made a decision to hold.. i really believed in the government doing the right thing. i am dissapointed in them.
My investment in these are now less than 3% of my net worth; so while it would suck to lose it all... its not end of the day, and while there is likely 0 chance of the right thing happening.. i have to believe that eventually, something positive must happen.
So, no.. i've not sold.
Just very pissed off and recognize the moronic reasoning of these supreme clowns.
So stupid.
It should make people uncomfy doing any business with guberment.
i'd imagine..
its just too dangerous to do business with them.
These entities have 0 chance of raising any capital without being free.
Furhter... if these entities are sucked under and new ones formed sponsored by the govnerment... there will be 0 interest in any private money owning any shares.
Basically, the courts have sealed the fate. There is no reason anyone puts any new money in a capital structure that will or could be stolen by the government. 0 chance.
which means.. they will forever be where they are or the government will have to suck them in.
unless...
the government makes good.
chances of them doing that?
0.
They've effectively, cooked their own self.
Why would cat man be out?
All he has to do is appoint himself to a life time term as director - while acting as conservator - for the benefit of the agency and ... he can never be removed. EVER EVER
The court just said so.
okay,
What a farce.. the justices are idiots. OMG they had 6 months to get it right and they totally screwed the pooch. What a flipping joke. I too feel like the government sucks, i think they are greedy bucards; that have failed to do the people's business.
love the country... disgusted about government.
fha .. yep..
but do they care?
Do they really care about doing the right thing?
i can't say they do... as its been 13 years of not caring 1 iota.
why now? why this time?
i want it so bad... i am so ready for 35-50-65-85-150 a share and i can be ... out...
so ready to move on. and on.
so ready...
But does anyone of the many judges really care about doing what is right... can they ?
i challenge them to do the right thing. i dare them.
The amount of money involved here probably scares the SCOTUS. Also, the limiting fact of congress to enact laws that take rights from people. Further the "win" for hedgefunds is so enormous that it tilts the playing field.
Yes congress screwed up.
Yes the smart money figured it out and stands to profit.
is that how america works? Yes.
Can they allow it to happen>>>>
That will be the driver here.. and what concerns me that
somehow we'll get a garbage decision trying that won't give use average common shareholders the crumbs... sure... most here don't have 250,000 shares... or 1,000,000 or more. only the hedges have 20,000,000 shares,etc. and they can allow them to be worth 500,000,000 ... whereas for the average person owning 20,000 shares is a BFD... at 20,000 shares x $150 = $3M... ... which would be enough for most people to retire on. So, how can SCOTUS reward the little guy, and not the hedgee? It, can't... so i honestly expect us to lose here.
Its just the way it is... the little guy can't get the breaks. Because we are held down.
Just once ... i'd like to be wrong. I'd like to take my 50,000 shares or whatever.. and they be worth $150 a share... $7.5M would be a nice way to launch my retirement.
Heck, 1/2 of that would get the job done!
Just really concerns me that SCOTUS will again... screw the little guy. Cause they can.
Question or fear here is just like in several other high profile cases that ought to go one way, the courts comes out and says...
lacks standing... punt.
or makes up som other rule of some kind to screw the public and protect the goberment..
$200 a share... would give me around $8M in assets.
Not the 32M some would have, and mostly because early on ... in 08 while i was stunned at the government did and knew the importance of fandf but there were so many nay sayers and debbie downers.. the Cramers of the world so talking zoombie companies, etc. that i didn not buy 100,000 shares for $20K. Instead i bought some and sold them only to rebuy later... anyway... just not committing too much here, still have enough that at $35 I am largely done (having other assets).
But, $200... $8M does it.
$1.6 a share divi at 2.5% yield is a 64 dollar stock.
Annual divi of $1.6 = payout ratio under 20% ...
I'd figure higher all the way around.
$1.00 a share dividend at 2.5% yield (about what financials pay) Puts the share price at $40.
At $40 a share on 1.1B shares is a market cap of $45Billion for Fannie.
Annual earnings is around 12B so your PE ratio of under 4.
....
EPS of around $11 a share maybe more at a PE of 13 or so has a share price closer to $140 a yield of 2.5% would be around $3.50 a share dividend or 88c a quarter.
Yeah...
That would do it.
lol...
That's not how courts work.
Damages are what is calculated and relief is what is granted.
Damages are what "constitutes" just compensation, and that would have to be determined. What that could be is well over 350 Billion.
or
it could mean to put the folks in the position they were prior to the act. That would mean repurchasing open market shares or a tender; it could be imaginably expensive.
But hey, its avoidable. Do the crime... pay the fine.
Wrong...
That's when the taking will have occurred and when suits will be filed.
Essentially, asking for compensation on one hand or rescission on the other.
Compensation would be very high... probably 150-350+ Billion. Whereas, rescission, could be mind blowing; because that would entail repurchase of shares on the open market by the government to be turned over and canceled by the entities; if the government were stupid enough to have sold them.
Frankly, this is NOT a path any sane person would select. Sometimes, its just better to walk away and not poke the bear. This is one of them.
The plaintiffs are asking the judges to allow them to be screwed even further.
The kicker is if they are used the warrants will be immediately challenged....
So, its really a nothing burger.
Rosner - has lost it if he thinks the gov't is owed anything other than a black eye!
no more taking.
return the ill gotten gains.
let my people go!
pay back to Treasury ??????????????????
What that you say???? pay back to who and for what ;
for stealing money that did not belong to them.