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.
Are asking Judge Lamberth to ignore the jury verdict and Court grant judgment as a
matter of law for Defendants.
On the eve of the approve the Plan of Allocation, and enter final judgment. The naked shorts may be in trouble, if they have sold more shares than are outstanding, the allocation will bring to light all these shares that do not exist when the shareholders claim their part of the distribution. If the naked shorts are aware of this, it can trigger an explosive share buyback, driving the price much higher.
We all know that Lamberth does not want to give anything to the shareholders, but he must be consistent with the jury's opinion. The agreements are unfair, unreasonable and they must compensate us for it. I don't know how Lamberth can justify the validity of agreements for which a jury has ruled that are unfair, unreasonable and that in the case Fannie PFD's should receive an annual % for the validity of these agreements that FHFA signed with U.S. Treasury.
The most interesting thing is to see if Lambeth continues to accept the agreements between FHFA and US treasury as valid. Otherwise, the agreements must be annulled and all diverted money returned to F&F.
For the government, it is only interesting to keep the GSEs in the conservatorship if Gov can dispose of the funds without the control of Congress for purposes without control. These conditions currently don't exist and I believe that the government is fighting to not be forced to return all the money that they have used without control, in addition to paying interest for it.
On my view, treasury/Fhfa not only nationalizes in a communist way, he sends his lawyers to defend his actions in a communist way, with a stick, a stone and a box of cigarettes.
Each quarter in which the liquidation preference increases for each $ retained, is a loss of value for shareholders because it's an unjustified increase of debt that also eliminates the common's value in the balance sheet.
Is there something legal in this conservatorship? All the changes made border on illegality and are supported by small technicalities that have made the courts rule against the shareholders.
Did anyone read freddie's latest 'form 8-k' where the articles of incorporation or bylaws are changed? are all refered to shareholders...is this a preparation for the recap & release?
The Bylaw amendment changes are summarized below:
•Section 3.3 was revised to no longer require a Notice of Meeting for a shareholder for whom (a) notice of two consecutive annual meetings and all notices of meetings in between, or (b) all notices within a 12-month period, have been returned undeliverable or could not be delivered.
•Section 3.6 was revised to allow for the possibility of holding a fully virtual annual meeting.
•Section 6.1 was revised to increase the number of days prior written notice is required by a shareholder who wishes to inspect corporate records from five to 10.
•Sections 8.1 was revised to bar indemnification for any violation of securities laws.
That is an example of preferred conversion. I don't say this will happen with GSE's...
Preferreds are like a bond(debt) and the contract is clear.
braford expects a conversation like the one that happened in 'citigroup'. in that case, the conversion was voluntary and I think with F&F too. If the deal is not advantageous, no one will convert pfds for commons. either they pay the 'par' value or they pay interest in perpetuity, that is indicated in the preferred contract see 'optional redemption'.
https://www.citigroup.com/citi/news/2009/090227a.htm
Next Christmas, all the retail sales and especially those with nice discounts will be the main winners. vips is poised to double current prices..
From Tim Howard: "However it may have come about, there can be little question that the Court’s ruling on the APA claim in Collins was imposed upon the case rather than deduced from it. And this has implications for both of the major net worth sweep-related cases remaining in the lower courts—the breach of contract claims before Judge Lamberth in the DC Circuit, and the regulatory takings claim in the Court of Federal Claims previously before Judge Sweeney and now before Judge Schwartz. While the case for each has been strengthened by the loss on the APA issue in Collins (if the government has the right to take shareholders’ property, shareholders have the right to compensation for that action), the path to a final judgment favoring plaintiffs still runs through the Supreme Court. The Court’s ruling in Collins ought to reinforce to counsel in these cases the wisdom of anticipating heavy hands on the scales of justice as they prepare and present their legal and factual arguments."
without the black lines pic.twitter.com/LlcRU5QadZ
— Ano (@Ano3020100) June 17, 2021
there are rumors of a new contract for the ebola vaccine for the new outbreak. if it's true, I think MERK will get it.
https://medcitynews.com/2019/12/merck-wins-first-ever-fda-approval-for-vaccine-against-ebola-virus/
That inicates: conservatorship is and was for political reasons. They will not convince to me that was for save the companies at the expense of the taxpayer
if that is true, the trades will be halted before they announce that the pspa amend and they will announce the merger when trades are halted. advice, don't be out when the quote is halted.
That is a rule post-conservatorship. Could we assume that we are in the final stage of conservatorship?
"Currently, the Enterprises would meet or exceed all requirements of the proposed rule"
At some point, they will have to put all that money (retained earnings for example) on the books and then the shareholders will be the big winners.
The truth will be exposed...
http://www.glenbradford.com/2020/12/fnma-fanniegate-1002/
Strange movement on yesterday. jps will not take any dividend until reaching 280bn, commons either, but any capital retention will increase the commons value. make your own conclusions
Do you have any hope that something positive will come out of Mark Calabria's mouth? I have no hope. He has shown that he is not our ally.
tell me when Calabria talks and i'll say you when F&F shares will fall..
No one should comment. the capital requirement is already decided. Although a lower requirement is correctly argued, does anyone believe that MC will accept a requirement similar to the first rule? make a new rule wouldn't make any sense ...
I believe that this capital rule is made to not benefit the hedge funds (as said Calabria). that is why they proposed a high capital buffer without logical criteria they have proposed 99B as could propose 150B who cares.this rule doesnt benefit hedge funds but neither commons nor preferred holders
243B are a huge pile of money and this could take six years as said tim howard: "...and it remains to be seen whether it’s one investors will find sufficiently enticing to put in the capital required to get them out of conservatorship and out from under a consent decree within the next half-dozen years." i can't see any thing positive in this proposed rule
Requirements (in billions) are higher than last proposed rule. Is this a higher dilution for commons?
Some people see Calabria or Mnuchin as our friend, but obviously that is not true!!
I wish you are correct with your forecast...
Next two earnings will be a wild disaster..
I'm going out. if we finish like in Europe and we will finish, this will be a terrible slowdown for the economy
They are talking about IPO because they are talking about a new class of shares, obviously with much less vote rights. Maybe they are thinking in a structure similar to berkshire with BRK.A & BRK.B
You are talking about a possible scenario, but currently there are: 1158M of shares outstanding. In addition, your scenario presents some doubts, how they will convert the jps into common if it's contracts indicates that they are NOT convertible into common?
$12 EPS on 2019 and you are talking about a buyout for $27? What a joke!!! LoL
Warrants are associated with a debt. if the debt disappears, they disappear. and we all know that the debt is overpaid ...talk about execute the warrants currently, is sell smoke .... any judge will give the reason to the shareholders in there clear case of power abuse
the preferred's can thinking whatever they want, but in case of freddie, there are only 4B of shares authorized. i think preferred's will not get crazy conversion...
On Wednesday Freddie will show us a net income of $5-6 eps but we are here...at 2's this explain what is a rigged price per share
My feeling is that we are involved in a rigged game.