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.
BEAM
I have to reply
That is ANCIENT news digested here
Determined by reading source documents
as a sub of fnma and freedie - funded and owned by them - and considered by many a logical first step to make it easier for GOV to modify and keep FNMA and FREDDIE
but thank you for the good news - buried in wrong headlines
rosen
at this moment I have to agree
the gov could put the companies in receivership
the lawsuits would triple in number and damages
I would love to invest in those lawsuits
Gov not only took 10% interest in world of 1%
Gov kept them from having capital - and the same Gov says they are insolvent and put them in receivership
Yes I want a piece of the lawsuit against those GOV actions - now that things have calmed down
ok
common at 7
pfds at par (25 or 50)
other then FNMAT
which win
I think at 1.65 the common do not win
again - its all gambling (with a bankroll for now from lawsuits and hedgefunds to help us GAMBLE)
when did Zandi write this
on what basis would the GOV be able to put FNM and FRE into receivership
if anyone thinks there are solid lawsuits now
wait until the GOV tries to put companies that have earned 100 billion in profit (whatever its called) in the last 30 months or so
receivership - how does that happen in 2013?
yes pfds are capped
25 or 50
but most have 5x to 6x room to grow if one assumes par
common at 1.6
assume new stock is issued by GOV who takes 80%
the simple (after a few steps in logic) is then to understand we as common own 20% of A SHARE (or 20% of the shares - 1B of 5B)
assume share comes out at 50-60 bucks (FNM and FRE to be combined is somewhat dilutive IMO0
we own 20% so equivalent of price of 10-12
that is 6-8 x on common - unless one does not agree the GOV will take AT LEAST 80%
so own both as the speculation - both very speculative - both trading about equal in the market now
e.g. common at 4 (which it hit in those mad 1-3 days before) to me is not a buy if pfds stay at 4x as an example ...as then I see common with an inherent (not on paper) cap of 12 so its 3X and pfds have 4x - in pay out - dividends or conversion to common ratios - all IMO
Mones
Yes taxpayers want off the hook
But how do they get off the hook when the GSEs are shut down and the private banks now paying bilions for fraud get 100% of the market
people are ripped off front end
people are foreclosed back end - wrongly
banks provide simty service - we all know it
and the banks are all too big too fail so the taxpayer is not off the hook
or the banks - with government insurance as back up - sell crap - make a fortune and taxpayers are on the hook even worse
I have yet to see one proposal that does not involve the exact crooked too big to fail banks - or GOV 100% reinsurance which creates an incentive for the banks to sell crap knowing there is an explicit guarantee
All of this will come out when things move forward - and private money is no longer the sentence but BofA and Chase and JPM - all of whom are now famous for too big too fail and cheating and lying and screwing people on mortgages
not being just left wing - but being brutally honest about what private money means
and I am sure people do not want that at all at all
Read the actual PR
this is owned by F and F and a sub to them - for now
male
and I will choose to view this as DeMarco protecting and enriching my 20% ownership
the Gov did bail out F and F
but they did not take 100%
but they did not put F and F in Chapter .... or receivership
the gov took an 80% warrant and dividends and created a conservatorship
indeed the rules of such are to preserve and grow for owners
I simply view owners as us and gov 1:4
but of a monster healthy company that will exit in 12-24 months to be relabeled and take 30-49% market share and be very profitable
Dr
Agree
If this was 3 years ago with this news - maybe an ouch
but now
90% paid back
F and F saving Treasury
F and F viable and profitable
People not mad at them (other then politicians)
again - can not see why GOV will not take their 80% via the warrant - they would be fools not to -
but 20% of this big new company is a lot more then the current price - as in factors larger - 5? 8? 11? x current price -
all IMO
bmp
good guestion
another political question
but the PR itself says its to be built as a subsidiary of F and F
so on paper its us - for now - we fund it we own it - for now
DrMerlott
and indeed the future will not have a separate F and F
but DeMarco has bullied forward to a new company based on F and F and owned by gov 80% and us 20% IMO
banks - private money is banks - who are being sued each day will get 100% of the action
no no way
they are phrasing it against us?
read the PR
that is one grab your attention headline from Reuters
and its another step in the rehab of F and F
so when Congress decides what to do there will be a sleek new solid F and F - with no REAL cash obligation to the GOV - ready to take its place as one of several private companies to do MBS
but it will be the biggest - and thanks to
the need of Treasury to get 40-60B from an IPO for 80% of it
and the lawsuits and hedge fund fellow holders
this will be 20% owned by common stock holders of FNMA
So those who were thinking zero - fools IMO
So those who were thinking 30-40 - greedy IMO
but 20% of a 50 buck share is 10 bucks - nice money (for prior shares and current shares and pfds which should convert to common say one for 2 or be bought out at anywhere from 50 cents to 99 cents on the dollar - all IMO
will be funded by ...
the PR says the new company is a subsidiary of F and F
this headline is so so wrong
The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) announced today that the joint venture between Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that will build and operate a new common securitization platform has reached some important milestones.
The author of the story on new company to replace Fannie ....
should be sent back to seventh grade to learn how to write and then retake journalism school
this is the new FNMA
xxx .... that could replace Fannie and Freddie is the story line
inside the story
The new joint securitization company, CSS, will have its own chief executive officer and chairman, and will be funded by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It will create a single standard for issuing securities that could survive independently if Fannie and Freddie no longer exist.
Funded by FNMA and FREDDIE
Says in one form or another FNMA and FREDDIE survive and thrive
all IMO
but values should be based on owning 20% of a combined new company that is huge (say one third of market) shared pro rata with holders of 20% of Freddie (80% of company will be sold to new investors by FED GOV using its warrant)
20% of a combined new Fannie and Freddie - with Trillions of dollars of mortgages on the books - experienced staff - and the inside track on the software
again - IMO FED GOV will take 80% of new company - but 20% of a share worth say 50-60 bucks - is not chopped liver its 10 bucks
all IMO
Not sure if LTI is divided pre and post
We do know if there is a class action by those pre seizure - then the class is limited
And then what if you sold after that/
You are still in the pre seizure class and suffered the damage so you collect
I think posters here are mixing "the rules" of post CH11 stock and reorg plans - and a class action for holders hurt by the seizure or hurt by any action pre x day -
We know a class action is limited to the class
We simply do not know how it works in a CH11 reorg with an LTI
oops
forgot link to Yahoo article - sorry
but another poster did put it up
so again
Congress does nothing and does more nothing and then some nothing
so
Recently - F and F are putting out MBS paper that invites private money to join them in taking the risk (selling the paper0
Now - FNM and FRE taking strong visible steps to join and be one common platform - company (among many)
And F and F are near paying the GOV as dividends or profit about the money lent to them
all IMO looking like a new world since two years ago
(and today article on how paper at FNMA delinquent 2 or more months is at a low for ten years or something like that - so more profit - with fewer bad loans)
FNMA regulator to create common capacity for FNMA and FREDDIE to do securitization
while congress waist F and F will have SHARED with private money bonds and an effective efficient path to being one company (of a few who will be in this market)
I view the brand new news as very positive -
Still politics ahead
that be 5Billion shares
4B to GOV
1B to current
and assume a market capitalization of a shrunken FNF that is combined with FRE and it is say 10 a share - GREAT or 10 a share but with more dilution as ONE company emerges from FNF and FRE
still that is 5 bucks and for prfds its likely an offer for half face to be paid upfront or renewal of divdends which slowly and slowly will build up to full face
that is what should happen - but should is no promise
OK
Now I understand - thank you Catz
This time Walrath said she did not have jurisdiction and told our lawyers to file this action
I wish she had said she did not have jurdisdiction to award a ton of H - class 16 value to higher debt - and instead punted that to NY - that was mega dollars
With Catz - how much money is the LTI trying to stop - and is there any punitive damages etc ? I read your pacer link - (parts of 100 plus pages) and never saw a dollar number ?
Anyone?
And if LTI can sue on this with all the releases offered by H and equity holders - does that in any way open a door for the LTI to sue on some of the issues we did grant waivers or releases on?
This could be 100million or is it 1Billion if its the money involved and maybe a crack in the door to later lawsuits
re the tax form re 16 H
the one I got - I got in 2013 but it was CY or Tax Year 2012 and I had to handle on my taxes
I used some past carryforward losses to offset the non IRA forms and reporting back then in April. Now if I get paid cash I will use a small portion of the cash to pay the cap gain or profit ........if I receive more cash then the prior year report
That is why I am so interested in the Sussman Rosen motion to acclerate payments AROUND the employees
nranger
we all got such tax forms
and none of us got paid
on a call to them the trust and alvarez - both said that based on some claims being denied or negotiated down above 16 - and cash available - they THEN decided it was very likely (not certain) we would get some pay out - and they sent tax forms and tax letters for that amount (which was lower then the 10 or so per share we hope for)
anyone else agree or disagree
my question then is - status on the motion to temp cap the employee claims - for now - so 16 can indeed be paid and not have to wait for at least some money
It was that motion by our lawyers - sussmand AND rosen for the LIT that I thought some one posted the two page yes and today one poster noted it was delayed for a year??????????????
Desperado
I am confused - I thought some one posted the motion to approve the estimation of claims and moving on to distributions to H shares?
Or was that what was delayed until 2014
Can you or ?
note what happened to the motion to sort of temp cap employee claims so LIT could pay out Class 16 - H ?
the suit against GS and ?
Thank you - its so long I have lost my way and run out of gum drops to leave on the trail
georgenips
I assume the various attys have done the road map you have done
but I agree with the last poster
send your roadmap that leads to ILLOGIC to the attornies for the various lawsuits
if they know it - you lost nothing
if they missed what you see - you helped all of us
good luck
about time
JP made a fortune in the so called SAVING of WMI
Indeed
Just saw that on Yahoo
now we know why common reversed and ran up a bunch today
will pfd follow?
DeMarco
On balance good or bad for equity?
Do not know
I do know he - appointed by the Executive Bransh - won a battle with the Executive Branch that wanted a ton of principal reduction done
DeMarco argued - publicly - no can do as I have to conserver FNMA and can not give away money - even if one believes its good for the country
DeMarco argues to raise rates and only do good loans and pushed the rest to FHA
DeMarco backed all the lawsuits to recover from fraud
Someone else can list some negatives - so I believe he sort of went down the middle - with the mind of a technocrat in a political position
feral
I cut the baby in half (80%)
I do believe the gov stepped in and save FNM
If at that time they did a GM - bye bye equity
But the GOV infused a HUGE amount of NEEDED cash NO ONE else would at the time - and AT THE TIME took for that infusion - in exchange - 79.9%
I think that is a given
but i think that 79.9% is the ceiling of the WE SAVED them argument to not have equity get its current 20%
i.e. had the GOV taken all of the equity (see GM) and gone 11 etc - then the fight would have been then - and frankly equity would have lost as they did with GM
but - as the needed (quasi debtor in possesssion) infusion was done in return for 79.9% so the GOV did not have to absorb 5 trillion of debt on its books - the GOV at that invasion time left equity with 20.1%
It would NOW be a taking for the GOV to say - oops we really meant to take 100% the first time --- nope - that will IMO IMO IMO as an optimist - not fly
rosen
I believe it is foolish to think with most (95%) of TARP banks and AIG paying back in full (other then GM and Chrsysler) that with haters of a privat FNMA
that any current equity holder - jr pfds or common will see a penny before the full infusion is paid back 100% and say 15% profit
to me the first issue is do dividends and current payments of profit count as payback = and I argue yes yes yes. That is just a PR from the WH that says we put in x and got out 1.15X .... and no one cares if divvys or all profits or whatever
to me the second issue is an IPO - I assume the gov would do an IPO when the balance left - using the above math and logic + 15% overall profit - can be reached by selling 80% of the new FNMA
Thus the gov would get paid back at say 115% by
divvys
the current all profit payments
the tax credits being voided or counted as capital and not moved to FEDS
the proceeds from the IPO
Again - the gov does the IPO and owns the shares -80% - and slowly sells them back into the market over say two - three years
Joe
the takings argument - if it gets to that is based on equity not exchanged for sr pfds (view that 79% and warrrant and 160B or whatever as quasi - but not legal - debtor in possession financing that NO NO one else would have put up)
so IMO the GOV gets 79.9% of any remaining equity in a new or same company - even after it is paid back - that is the reward for stepping in when they did so FNMA and FRE would not go under and take the economy with them (as us TARP supporters believe is true of all the GOV "loans" or "investments" as IV cash)
now we have 20% left
The gov could set up a conversion from pfd to common ratio based on face --- say 15 common shares for the 25 face - and say 30 for the 50 face ....
Then - and does anyone have the numbers - my assumption is the 1-1.1B outstanding common would go to say 1.3-1.4B
The gov would issue 4x that number of shares - say at 6-10 bucks a share in a healthy but smaller scope FNMA and each common share would be worth 20% of the IPO price
So common is then - HYPO - worth 20% of 8 or 1.60
So the 25 preferred is worth 15 x 1.60 or about 24 (and gov could set up the IPO price and pfd conversion to common so that indeed the number of shares of common per prfd x IPO price x 20.1% = face of the pfds
The assumption is all of equity would get their money back - so pfds and common do not have to fight. And pfds would be GONE and no more cash flow dividend payment obligations on FNMA new
tainted
excellent
that is a case for the pfds over the common - as we all speculate on some private equity in the reformatted in some fashion FNMA
loobey
there should be a premium to pfds in that this is semi 11 court
(although these pfds are not trust pfds)
there IMO should be a 10-20-30% premium to pfds as pensions and banks own a TON of them and pfds being REFLATED will help banks and pension obligations - big big time (and as another poster posted - some have so lobied for the pfds to be reflated - or bought out at say 75 cents on the dollar)
Thoughts
1. Glad BO did not (to our knowledge) propose any policy - tactics (near term and specific) for FNMA or FRE
2. Glad to see the WH sees FNMA and FRE paying all of that huge infusion back - v the horror stories of 100-300B lost of just 12 months or 18 months ago
3. Re the amount the "budget" predicts will be paid back to the GOV - I assume that is profit payments. I suggest the gov will accelerate the payment to flat or up a few Billion by doing an IPO of say 40B on FNMA - on 4B shares
4. One reason to prefer preferreds over common (pun intended) is that the small community banks would add capital overnight if these went back to NYSE trading at say 15-25 - WOW - and they own a ton and another ton. That to me is a real advantage to pfds
5. If there is an IPO at FNMA - think 4B shares by FED GOV so that the approx current 1B common is 20%. If its for 40B on the 4B shares that is 10 bucks a share. That would mean todays share under this hypothetical is 20% of 10 or 2 dollars (and pfds are at 50-75-100% of par with 50% being the absolute minimum)
6. FNMAT may be high as it is also the pfd that buyers can sue a bunch of people on as it came out while the lies were getting known
7. Meanwhile the smile is wide
8. And at least in a few cases the bargain of the 50 v 25 pfds (not 2x) is narrowing today
why the slow to down day
I suggest for consideration concern over what might be in the budget blueprint from BO
while dems will be final better friends - that suspense had me sell one third of holdings (to buy back after I see that POTUS did not mess with FNMA in the budget proposal)
oh and Jackson I agree as I do not agree with the position of BOP on NOL
I see NOL as first mentioned at the 20B level as NOL or other such - see motion 155 docket - paragraph 8
Thus - following the lead of others - I suggest an NOL of 5B and an investment loss of 15B (valued at corporate tax of 30-35% not cap gains rate - but limited to be used against an investment gain)
From the above a myriad of confusing possibilties emerge - some better some worse for that split vs all NOL - but first one needs to know how much was operating loss and how much of the 20B number used by attys was other tax valuable losses
check it out yourselves
Agree
the one added feature or attribute to a pre seizure share is that in a normal case - a class action for damage would apply only to those who owned or bought till the event
Otherwise - post damage event - post change event - the original owners by selling stock sell away the future for present gain
But in a class action - for damages - only those damaged are in the class
This is not a normal case - as the place sued would not be another company or a crooked broker or a wrongful lie by management but the FDIC and OTS etc
Thus here it could be - could be - that some sorts of actions against the FDIC or OTS for ""damage"" (I purposefully avoid the legal language being used now) - might only include pre damage holders (or those who bought at a price pre the news - day of damage + 3settlement)
Again - buy out by JPM shares bought post works
Again - find more money in RE shares bought post works
Again - feds decide to give money to WMI with no lawsuit - I would argue shares bought post works
An actual lawsuit against the FDIC for actions taken that Th evening - not sure post would join in the rewards of that suit as it would be for damages not incurred by latter buyers
all IMO
I will disagree in part with the levels of payment
While bonds first and H cap trust second and pfd third and common fourth ............
The need to pay off creditor bonds 100% and face value on H and or pfds before the money reaches the commons does not exist IMO in CH 11
In CH 11 - vs a liquidation or 7 - the ranking order is there - and that holds - but there is NO requirement that says each tier gets 100% before the next tier gets a dime
I imagine in a long court case each tier could so aruge - but in reality with the massive power of the Judge in an 11 case and the desire by the top tiers to get paid - "haircuts" are most often accepted in 11 to push a deal and get the cash paid
Again - if it winds up in 7 liquidation - then I do think 100% of each tier obligation needs to be paid in full
In a CH 11 deal the dealers deal (ttess on behalf of preferreds) -- so maybe bonds take 95 cents and H takes 85 cents and pfds take 65 cents and common gets 75 cents to 1.50 a share
For anyone digging in their heals at a tier level - causes very long and painful delays
And - IMO - in an 11 - where reorg and the death of pfds and common by bondholders is possilbe - so are lots of other options
Like a deal - where a company buys WMI by paying common shareholders say 2 bucks each - and then ASSUMES on old schedules all of the debt H and pfds (they would fly up in value but would not day one be paid)
So I agree in power of each tier - bond - H - pfd - common
but no way does my memory of 11 cases say it works exactly like a liquidation -- indeed its purpose is to deal and find a solution - find some compromises everyone can live with and get the hell out of the court - with a new company (seldom) or with everyone smiling to some degree if enough money is there - or with several tiers saying good enough
Z
account of 4 Bb is critical
many believe only after it is 100% certain ours no strings can we sue or push for suit on FC
and getting interest on money that may not be 100% certain is ours (but deserves interest no matter whos) is NOT the same
keep secret the bids on some investment holdings
that is OLD news
WMI put in a court motion a week ago to this effect
It fears that divulging prices recieved for X should it be low will influence down prices on other investments it sells
logical
Key point is -- NO One to my Knowledge has counted penny one of those type of weird holdings in venture funds etc in the A=L math
That - whatever the number 50MM or 150MM is gravy - and needs to be kept in that context
We longs are counting CASH and marketabale securities and 750 million tax refund and 2 Billion Tax refund and push forward NOL and Investment Stock loss on WMB
No one is counting on the subs for any money - that is small change and any money is just gravy to common shares if or when there is a buy out
sometimes right - this is do not understand
I do not understand why people think debt holders near payment in full will swap for stock
Do you - for example - not to pick on you - think debt holders keep their notes and the new stock?? I am pretty sure it is a swap - debt in and stock out when it happens at other companies and new owners are created
Why on Gods green earth would these debt holders - near assured of near par payment swap debt for equity in a holding company that has nothing to hold but cash and no operating units?
Anyone?
The point being - even if debt could replace current stock - why would they do it?? (Again - I assume based on past deals and reports on other companies that the debt is SWAPPED for equity -- only in rare cases where there is NO cash (relative to size of debt) and there is a reason to come back alive - SGI and KMART come to mind
But here there is cash and only cash