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.
Everybody keeps talking about it because we would be so much better off. If we were ok with owning FnF otc stocks we wouldn't be talking about uplisting so much. Is that not obvious?
Go FnF!
Has anybody read the full article and does it specify that the sweep is suspended immediately?
Go FnF!
Obi does not play any guessing games. He/she is a wealth of information but rarely if ever speculates. In a straight up factual discussion/debate he/she is frustratingly rational.
Go FnF!
Bankers.
How many zeros can be placed to the right of the decimal of a stock price?
Altria, Fannie Mae, Nike: Stocks That Defined the Week (WSJ article requires subscription)
While major benchmarks fell, these seven stocks moved on news
https://www.wsj.com/articles/altria-fannie-mae-nike-stocks-that-defined-the-week-11569620344
Moloch[a] is the biblical name of a Canaanite godassociated with child sacrifice. The name of this deity is also sometimes spelled Molech, Milcom, or Malcam.
Obviously I also looked this up.
Go Moloch!
Ok, I read a couple of articles about FnF buying up these riskier mortgages without being compensated for the additional risk. I have not read if the board of directors are f***king up or if FnF are being handcuffed by the FHFA.
The floor is open.
Go FnF!
I admit, I had to Google btfo. But I like it.
Looks like he is clear till Thursday. He has two day to recover from withdrawls. I hear sweeping all net worth from companies is highly addictive.
Spoken like a true D.C. attorney. Paulson council perhaps?
Go FnF!
Way to go Navy but maybe now that will be scrubbed. Maybe even our posts will be scrubbed. It is a conspiracy I tell you!
Go FnF!
In fun, sort of
I wish Kudlow would say things like that now on a few different shows. It looks like that was 2015 or 2016. I can barely make it out on my phone.
RUMPLE RUMPLE RUMPLE What about the accounting fraud?
If I were a supreme court justice I absolutely would have to see what the big fuss is about and why the U.S. government refuses to release 11,000 documents. I would have to see them so that I could confirm the level of integrity of our highest leaders.
Go FnF!
Don't get me wrong. I am holding. The wheels of justice turn slower when assholes keep throwing wrenches in the gears. It's frustrating and those assholes are working for bigger assholes who are responsible and probably will not pay for their criminal misconduct.
I want to see this show on the road already!
Go FnF!
This concludes my weekly rant
Fannie-Freddie Regulator Settles With Woman Over Sex Harassment
By Elizabeth Dexheimer
September 27, 2019, 2:19 PM EDT
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s regulator said that it has resolved sexual harassment allegations brought by an employee who claimed the former head of the agency made “quid pro quo” offers to advance her career.
The Federal Housing Finance Agency announced the agreement with Simone Grimes, who made the complaint last year against then-FHFA director Mel Watt, in a Friday statement that didn’t specify the terms of the settlement.
“Ms. Grimes brought forward serious issues and the agency is pleased to have resolved these matter,” the FHFA said in its statement.
Grimes, a senior FHFA adviser, accused Watt of repeatedly making unwanted advances and said that he denied her a promotion after she refused. Her claims were investigated by the FHFA’s inspector general and the U.S. Postal Service, and both she and Watt testified in Congress on the matter. Watt, whose term as FHFA director ended in January, has denied wrongdoing.
Diane Seltzer Torre, Grimes’s lawyer, said she couldn’t discuss the settlement terms but is pleased with the outcome. She said Grimes is still at the FHFA and plans to continue working there for the foreseeable future.
Seltzer Torre said she was pleased that the new leadership of the agency moved swiftly to resolve the matter.
“This new administration took a much different view of what had happened,” she said.
https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2019-09-27/fannie-freddie-regulator-settles-with-woman-over-sex-harassment
Fratricide for dummies! Perfect
Go FnF!
That is a tall order. I may die before all of that happens. I am not suggesting that you are incorrect but it's my money and I want it now, last week, last year but next week will be a fine time to start! Know what I mean?
Go FnF!
Please request some assistance on behalf of all of us. I do it.
Go FnF!
The petition’s more interesting argument, in my view, is that the FHFA case offers the justices the opportunity not just to opine on the constitutionality of the structure of agencies with a lone director removable only for good cause, but also on the constitutionally-required remedy for actions taken by an agency headed by an unconstitutionally appointed director. That question alone, Cooper & Kirk said, deserves the attention of the Supreme Court – and it’s sharply presented in the FHFA case, in which Fannie and Freddie shareholders contend that invalidation of the entire Treasury “net worth sweep” is the requisite fix for FHFA’s unconstitutionality.
Surprise twist in CFPB Supreme Court drama: FHFA plaintiffs want starring role
Alison Frankel
(Reuters) - Late Wednesday, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac shareholders who won a ruling earlier this month from the en banc 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that the Federal Housing Finance Agency is unconstitutionally structured filed a surprise petition for U.S. Supreme Court review.
The shareholders, who are ultimately trying to undo a 2012 deal between FHFA and the Treasury Department that directed all of Fannie and Freddie profits to the government, are asking the Supreme Court to take up the issue of the FHFA’s constitutionality – even though they won on that point at the 5th Circuit. Their explanation for the “admittedly unusual request”: They didn’t really win the case at the 5th Circuit because the appeals court refused to invalidate the FHFA “net worth sweep,” as the deal is known, despite holding that the FHFA’s director was improperly appointed. So, according to the shareholders’ lawyers at Cooper & Kirk, even though the Supreme Court generally does not hear cases at the request of the prevailing side, the shareholders “are … not ‘prevailing parties’ in any meaningful sense.”
But there’s another reason Cooper & Kirk is urging the Supreme Court to take its case. As you surely know, the constitutionality of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is also before the Supreme Court, in a petition by Seila Law, a California debt resolution firm protecting a CFPB civil investigatory demand. The CFPB and the FHFA have quite similar structures. Both are headed by a lone director who, by statutory design, can only be fired for good cause. Both have faced challenges asserting that their directors were appointed in violation of separation of powers doctrine because they can’t be removed by the president. The D.C. Circuit, in a case known as PHH v. CFPB, and the 9th Circuit in the Seila Law case, concluded the CFPB’s structure is constitutional. The 5th Circuit looked at basically the same facts and Supreme Court precedent to hold FHFA’s structure to violate the Constitution.
Cooper & Kirk contends in Wednesday’s petition that its case is a better vehicle than Seila’s for the Supreme Court to resolve what is, for all intents and purposes, a circuit split on the constitutionality of an agency headed by an omnipotent director insulated from presidential accountability. One of the key factors favoring the FHFA case, the petition said, is the CFPB’s concession of its own unconstitutionality.
You may remember that earlier this month, after years of defending its structure in courts across the country, CFPB reversed course and joined the Justice Department in a brief to the Supreme Court in response to the Seila Law petition. DOJ and the CFPB urged the justices to grant review and hold the agency’s director to have been appointed under an unconstitutional provision. Since the government would no longer argue that CFPB’s structure is constitutionally viable, DOJ and the agency said, the Supreme Court could appoint an amicus to present that position.
The FHFA, by contrast, seems to be sticking by its position that its director was constitutionally appointed, according to a Sept. 23 letter to the 5th Circuit from FHFA’s counsel at Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer in another case challenging the net worth sweep deal. Cooper & Kirk told the Supreme Court that FHFA will probably file its own petition challenging the 5th Circuit’s ruling on its structure. (Neither the agency nor the Justice Department responded to my query for comment.) But even if it doesn’t, the petition said, the justices will be better off if they grant review in the FHFA case and hear a government agency defend itself instead of relying on an amicus in the CFPB case.
“While the Solicitor General says (in the CFPB case) that the court can assure an adversary presentation by appointing an amicus to defend the statute in Seila Law, there is a simpler solution for guaranteeing an adversary presentation of the issues: grant certiorari in this case and let FHFA defend the constitutionality of its organic statute,” the brief said.
The new petition also argues, not very convincingly, that the order enforcing the civil investigative demand at the heart of the Seila Law case is not appealable, even though the district court entered a final order enforcing the demand and none of the parties has contested its appealability throughout the appellate litigation that followed – including the CFPB, which presumably has a strong interest in blocking any appeal of an order to enforce its demand for information.
The petition’s more interesting argument, in my view, is that the FHFA case offers the justices the opportunity not just to opine on the constitutionality of the structure of agencies with a lone director removable only for good cause, but also on the constitutionally-required remedy for actions taken by an agency headed by an unconstitutionally appointed director. That question alone, Cooper & Kirk said, deserves the attention of the Supreme Court – and it’s sharply presented in the FHFA case, in which Fannie and Freddie shareholders contend that invalidation of the entire Treasury “net worth sweep” is the requisite fix for FHFA’s unconstitutionality.
If nothing else, the Cooper & Kirk petition will surely add to the urgency of Supreme Court review of the peculiar structure of the CFPB and the FHFA. As I’ve reported, and as the new petition highlights, these agencies can’t function robustly under a specter of uncertainty about their constitutionality and the appropriate remedy for it.
The Seila Law petition is scheduled for consideration at the Supreme Court’s first conference of the term on Oct. 1. We’ll find out sometime after that if Cooper & Kirk has managed to throw a wrench into the proceedings.
https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1WB2QS
Fannie oh won't you please come home
Ten years after the subprime mortgage crisis, Fannie Mae posted an impressive 2018, with profits up an outstanding 548%, to just under $16 billion. Fannie provided roughly $512 billion in liquidity to the U.S. mortgage market last year and represented nearly 40% of all new single-family mortgage-related securities issuances. It also financed $65.4 billion to the multifamily housing sector, helping to create 777,000 new apartments in the process. Meanwhile, the government-sponsored enterprise could soon shed one of its last vestiges of the financial crisis, with the Trump administration pushing for an end to the federal conservatorship of both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
https://fortune.com/fortune500/2019/fannie-mae
I have said many times that there is a fine line between courage and stupidity. Fannie will determine if I am a courageous genius or a stupid fool.
Go FnF!
SWEET. I like Tim Howard today!
Yes Rick I know that you have big balls too as I am reminded of frequently!
Go FnF!
P.S. Mine are also impressive. They go well with my big fannie....stash.
You have the balls to be all in so you have thick skin. Thanks for being a good spirt!
Go FnF!
Troy Aikman has a hedge fund?
Sorry I forgot to mention it is a paid subscription
Bove backs off Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac preferred shares after latest drama
The drama involving Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac continues to develop in what has been a fast-moving chain of events over the last couple of weeks. The news has generally been good as progress was finally being made on an issue that spans the last 10 years. However, a [...]
https://valuewalkpremium.com/2019/09/bove-backs-off-fannie-mae-freddie-mac-preferred-shares-after-latest-drama/
When they sweep less it is still a NWS.
Net Worth Swiffer.
Go FnF!
I was able to get 620 shares today at $3.80. I am tapped out temporarily unless I sell something else. It seems like great deals every day, damn it! I already have more shares than I ever thought I would. Ramen noodles next week. It is ok. We are getting close, I think
Go FnF!
So I looked it up. more more money?
It sounds like everything that has been discussed ad nauseam for over the years on this board. Now the courts see it. In the past they have been our opinions. Now they are the opinions of the courts with more court opinions in our favor seemingly around the corner. It does instill a feeling of satisfaction. Sleep well longs. It is happening.
Go FnF!
Fitch: End of QM Patch could drive RMBS losses
High loan-to-value loans likely to increase loss
September 25, 2019
Kelsey Ramírez
https://www.housingwire.com/articles/50224-fitch-end-of-qm-patch-could-drive-rmbs-losses
It looks like somebody cracked and couldn't take the pressure. They expected yesterday's gains to continue and dumped eod. It must have been quite a sell.
Go FnF!
The good news is today I picked up 600 more shares at $3.93. Thanks Ackerman or whatever evil menace is holding down share price.
Go FnF!
Understanding The Various Classes Of Fannie & Freddie Shares
POSTED BY: MICHELLE JONES 3 HOURS AGO
There has been plenty of talk about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the government’s proposal to recapitalize them and release them from conservatorship. However, not everyone may be familiar with the history of these two government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) and the issues that face them. Bank analyst Dick Bove of Odeon Capital released a primer on Fannie and Freddie this week to help investors understand them and everything that’s happening with them.
Q2 hedge fund letters, conference, scoops etc
?
Image source: Fannie Mae
Fannie and Freddie: the basics
According to Bove, Fannie Mae has 1.158 billion outstanding common shares owned by the public, and another 131 million shares could be issued related to a convertible preferred stock, which also trades publicly. He estimates that 4.6 billion additional shares could be issued if the U.S. government converts the warrants it holds. The warrants do not trade because they are owned only by the federal government.
Freddie Mac has 650 million outstanding common shares. He estimates that another 2.6 billion shares could be issued if the government converts the warrants it holds.
Fannie has 16 outstanding preferred issues. The government owns the senior preferred shares, which do not trade. Ten of the junior preferred shares have rates between 4.75% and 8.375%. The Preferred S shares yield 8.375% and trade more than all of the other preferreds put together. The Preferred S shares have ranged in price from $5.23 to $14.30 per share over the last 52 weeks. Four of Fannie’s preferred shares are variable rate, while one is a convertible preferred. Par value for nine of the junior preferreds is $50, while five have a par value of $25. The par value of the Preferred S shares is $25.
Freddie has 26 outstanding preferred issues, including a non-trading senior preferred issue owned only by the federal government. Twenty of Freddie’s junior preferred issues have rates between 5% and 8.375%. Like Fannie’s 8.375% issue, Freddie’s also trades more than all the other preferred issues put together. The 8.375% issue has been trading between $5.23 and $14.30 per share over the last 52 weeks. Five junior preferred issues are variable rate. The par value of six of Freddie’s junior preferreds is $25, while 18 of them have par values of $50 per share. There is no available data on one of the junior preferred issues, and the 8.375% issue has a $25 par value.
The U.S. Treasury’s role in Fannie and Freddie
Bove said Fannie Mae borrowed $119.8 billion from the Treasury and has paid $181.4 billion in dividends. The GSE has a $113.9 billion open line of credit with the Treasury. Freddie Mac has borrowed $75.6 billion and paid $119.7 billion in dividends. Freddie’s open credit line with the Treasury is $140.2 billion.
Both Fannie and Freddie guarantee mortgages originated by other firms. They both own mortgages, some of which are secured by the government, and they both own investment securities. Fannie reported $4.321 billion in pretax earnings for the second quarter, while Freddie reported $1.898 billion.
The U.S. Treasury recently released a list of its proposals to bring both GSEs out of conservatorship. The proposals include ending the collection of the current dividend based on sweeping earnings and establishing a plan to recapitalize and release them. The plan also includes guarantees on debt service payments on mortgage-backed securities they issue and some type of ETguarantee on payments for the 30-year fixed rate mortgages. The Treasury must also receive payment for the services it provided.
The Federal Housing Finance Agency agreed to end the profit sweep into the Treasury and wants to establish capital requirements for the GSEs which are well above current levels. The agency also wants to authorize more firms like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Congress could become involved at some point, but for now, the House of Representatives has no pending bills. While the Senate does have one outline for recapitalizing and releasing the GSEs, it doesn’t have any legislation in the works.
Court rulings on the GSEs
Complicating everything with the GSEs is some court cases filed over the net worth sweep of Fannie’s and Freddie’s profits into the Treasury. The Fifth Circuit Court in New Orleans ordered a lower court to reconfigure the basis of the Treasury dividends and declared the FHFA to be unconstitutional. The Supreme Court may step into this case.
The Federal District Court in Washington, D. C. has requested 70,000 documents from the government to be used in discovery. The court also requires a new trial on whether the FHFA and Treasury acted illegally by commandeering the GSEs’ profits. If so, then penalties should be established in this case.
The Federal Claims Court has scheduled a hearing for Nov. 19 to hear the case about the government taking private property without just compensation.
Bove has said in other reports that he recommends buying Fannie’s and Freddie’s junior preferred shares because he believes the courts will side with shareholders. Because of his expectations, he believes buying the preferred shares now will be like getting a discount on common shares because they will likely be converted as part of the recapitalization process. Several hedge funds have benefitted from the steady increase in Fannie’s and/ or Freddie’s preferred shares, including the top-performing hedge fund of last week.
https://www.valuewalk.com/2019/09/fannie-freddie-preferred-s-shares/
Hubris is excessive pride (or "overweening" pride), and is often called "the pride that comes before the fall." It had serious consequences in Greek tragedy and law.
The protagonist Ajax in Sophocles' Ajax tragedy exhibits hubris by thinking he does not need the help of Zeus. Sophocles' Oedipus exhibits hubris when he refuses to accept his fate. In Greek tragedy, hubris leads to conflict, if not punishment or death, although when Orestes,? with hubris, took it upon himself to revenge his father -- by killing his mother, Athena exonerated him.
Aristotle discusses hubris in Rhetoric 1378b. Editor J. H. Freese notes about this passage:
In Attic law hubris (insulting, degrading treatment) was a more serious offence than aikia (bodily ill-treatment). It was the subject of a State criminal prosecution ( graphê), aikia of a private action ( dikê) for damages. The penalty was assessed in court, and might even be death. It had to be proven that the defendant struck the first blow.
Also Known As: Excessive pride