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.
Prem ways a actually increased his shares by about 10million shares to 68.65m or slightly over 11% of the shares. A lot of the sites still show him at 57m for Dec 13d filing but his own filing says 68.65m. Maybe buying near year end....prior to it delisting down to otc.
Does anyone know when he bought shares of Fnma? I can't seem to find when. Share ownership in this stock seems less clear because a lot decided to stop reporting. Can't even see Icahns holdings that he bought from Berkowitz a year ago.
Good friday
Markets closed tomorrow
Excellent! Anyone have the ability to copy and past the sf chronicle articl from today?
"In even more plain language, the argument is: This application ain't right. There is no reason to do this, you have no right to to do this, it is unnecessary to do this. Why? Because we says so. We have the legal authority and power on our side and the Plaintiffs do not know what they are talking about. So, don't do it.
"
Great translation Obi...fell of my chair laughing
Sabby prob for tax loss reasoning cause they sold 3rd qtr and back in 4th qtr prob. Agreed on Ridgeback, cohen knows them well.
Plus Ridgeback which could still be over 10%. They haven't reported or filed since June of last year I think.
New holder?
He trimmed valeant shares to 8.5% from 9.9% to book loses for clients to offset gains earlier...don't see anything on Fnma
I think they listed other common stock income as interest and not dividend specifically so it's a toss up.
At that stated value between $500k and $1m in the common, he owns in excess of 300k shares as of July. Wether or not he has owned this recently or a while back...obviously did not sell it to harvest losses like most did if they were earlier investors pre 2008. Nice to know he has a good chunk of it.
Or may not have been working out to well especially when disagreements go home with you. Interesting flow of events...hopefully more positive ones arrive sooner rather than later. Good news is she has left on good terms in a sense..still being consultative as they find a replacement. Pierce occupied that position before becoming CSO. Agree on your Pierce point.
Got it...gltu aswell
Wording sounds like she just put her resignation in recently. She gets to keep her options which are technically good for 90 days i believe after the 31st.
Wasnt she pierce wife?
I meant could be tax swap, could be after mkt trade in both but direct direct institution is what i meant
It could have also been a straight swap from a big institution to another without affecting market conditions. Alot of these went on when berko sold to icahn before, done after hours. Plus this is the otc mkt so extra care needs to be taken i believe so as not to trigger a frenzy either direction
Nope not the same securities, you can swap them. Even fnma to any fnma preferred and back
Folks are swapping to fmcc and vice versa from fmcc to fnma. Vol was also high for fmcc today. Seems to be more of a tax loss swap and reinvest in other to maintain catalyst. Price didnt exactly move that much on a % basis for stocks like these.
Ok thNks
Perry appeal case....anyone have a timing update? Thought it would be around this time?
They distributable capital gains mostly from him exiting aig common and buy aig tarp warrants instead. Most of that distribution is reinvested bCk into fund if investors choose to do so.
Normal every yr for a mutual to do gain distributions
He's written it in his annual letters....even found on company facts on website in the "about"section....saw that a year or so ago...nice to hear him verbally say it though. Also his wordings were carefully selected. He answered a negative outcome question with a look at how much we are different now answer...obviously not to step on anyone shoes...if only they could come and say how it is that would be great.
His tweet:
House leadership: Jumpstart put BACK IN this am. Does NOT get conservative or liberal votes so Senators need to ask for this to be dropped
If it doesn't get the votes then it is removed?
Josh Rosner just tweeted that jumpstart GSE reform bill didn't get enough votes this morning and will likely be removed from Omnibus bill. Anyone confirm this? If so, doesn't this remove overhang of congress further delaying possible resolution with administration? I believe bulk of this legislation would have delayed it further as we would have added "congress" into the decision making tree.
Will probably make it worse being that they are on the OTC...wild west
Gltu too! Agreed
Alot of the pressure we saw recently was probably Sabby sold about half their stake in September which was about 420k shares. Most likely redemptions from investors caused them to sell across their portfolio. They've been a long term holder, now at 2% from over 5%
Think otcbb system (Finra owned) is being phased out and otc stocks are now using otc market (otcqb and otcqx). The new system they are using is for companies who are regularly reporting per qtr and have disclosures.
Agreed!
Thinking same thing...per my post...new thing is warrants lock up for 6 months until April next yr. guess we will know dec who new buyer was.
Agreed...warrant verbiage places a lock up period for 6 months before they new buyer can exercise. Wasn't like other warrants which were immediately exercisable. 6 months puts it to April of 2016. Cash burn probably accelerated faster than expected...being prudent as they are not in control of results or trials?
Agreed....
Need that to increase over time....those that follow these indices will notice the new additions which will hopefully bring more attention to the company.
Ishares micro cap index - 38,699 shares as of 10/16/2015
With more money than all of us put together good Dr.
Index or not, hard to poo poo this one. They have a position without due diligence. Ok thanks. Leave it be. If they included this company it means the index warranted a weighting in Oncs. Good or bad, other index huggers may have to follow eventually...maybe not but some could. More the merrier, less shares to fleece.
A fairly large index fund for that matter with a nice no due diligence chunk of shares...good or not...the company was added.