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.
Mnuchin denies what? Where are you seeing that? Do you mean Mnuchin or a "treasury spokesperson"?
Probably because his behavior is status quo for all members
He should record or forward whatever messages he is receiving. Publish these threats.
I do believe this report. It explains the presidential privilege over so many documents. Also Infowars is claiming over $300 billion from fannie and freddie went to obamacare. That means that the lawsuit money went to fund obamacare as well. Unreal.
Thanks. How do you interpret that? Keep quiet while they work in recap and release, or stop the press exposure of the theft?
Mnuchin clip from Fox business in DC this morning 5/3
http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/5420142826001/?#sp=show-clips
Thanks to Jim Hodges for posting the clips on twitter. I had no idea this discussion was taking place last night. Thanks Jim!
https://twitter.com/ValuInvstrToday
What does that imply?
Not sure if this article on John Paulson released yesterday was posted yet.
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/01/john-paulsons-fall-from-hedge-fund-stardom.html
John Paulson’s fall from hedge fund stardom
Alexandra Stevenson & Matthew Goldstein
20 Hours Ago
The New York Times
6
SHARES
John Paulson
Fred R. Conrad | The New York Times
John Paulson
John A. Paulson is one of the best-known names in the hedge fund industry. But these days, Mr. Paulson is having more success in the political realm than he is managing his business.
Mr. Paulson, 61, was one of the first people on Wall Street to back Donald J. Trump's bid for the presidency. He counseled Mr. Trump on economic matters during the campaign. He gave $250,000 to Mr. Trump's inaugural committee. And he recently visited President Trump at the White House for a "C.E.O. Town Hall."
But his investors are unlikely to be impressed by his political access. His firm, Paulson & Company, has recorded nearly double-digit losses in several of its larger funds as of the end of March.
More from New York Times:
John Paulson's Fall From Hedge Fund Stardom
As Hollywood Writers' Contract Ends, Studios Are More Vulnerable
In Europe's Election Season, Tech Vies to Fight Fake News
That dismal record is a far cry from nearly a decade ago, when Mr. Paulson made nearly $15 billion betting on the collapse of the housing market. Back then, state pension funds and investors around the world rushed to give him their money to manage. Even Mr. Trump became an investor with Mr. Paulson — and eventually lost money.
Mr. Paulson's struggles come after a gut-wrenching 2016, when he recorded even steeper losses in those funds, partly because of several wrong-footed bets on drug makers, including the troubled Valeant Pharmaceuticals. That followed a painful 2015, when investors first balked and began pulling their money from his firm.
A representative of Mr. Paulson declined a request for an interview with him. His funds are said to have performed better in April, said a person with knowledge of the firm who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Despite his mounting losses, there is little indication that Mr. Paulson, who donated $400 million to Harvard University's school of engineering in 2015, is throwing his hands up and walking away.
"It is clear that Paulson has dug in with both heels and committed to steering the firm through this period," said David Black, founder of Quadra Advisors, a recruiting firm for hedge funds and other investment firms.
Nonetheless, his assets under management continue shrinking. Paulson & Company manages just under $10 billion today, down from $36 billion in 2011. Nearly two years ago, some Wall Street banks began to recommend that investors redeem some of their money from the firm.
And while Mr. Paulson is not the only hedge fund manager to see large investors pull their money in recent years, he has become a symbol of what some pension funds have taken issue with for the industry at large: big fees for little reward and little originality.
Mr. Paulson has remained upbeat with investors, according to two people who have seen recent investor letters but spoke on the condition of anonymity.
"While we are disappointed in performance in 2016, we believe we have a path to a recovery," Mr. Paulson told investors in one letter.
But it has not been smooth sailing. In another letter to investors of a merger arbitrage fund that declined by 49 percent last year, Mr. Paulson called 2016 "the most challenging year since inception." In May, Mr. Paulson will address his investors at a meeting in London at Claridge's Hotel in London.
Mr. Paulson's fall from stock-trading stardom underscores a common disclaimer in industry parlance: Past performance is no guarantee of future returns.
In early 2007, Mr. Paulson, who started his firm in 1994, was still a relatively unknown hedge fund manager. A former Bear Stearns investment banker, he had a reputation for running a solid if boring hedge fund that made bets on the outcomes of various mergers and acquisitions.
But as the housing market began to show signs of overheating, Mr. Paulson had a hunch that home loans to borrowers with spotty credit histories — which were ballooning at the time — were about to go sour. He positioned his firm to benefit in the event of a huge failure of the subprime mortgage market.
It was a bet that few were willing to take, but one that resulted in a major payday for him and his firm, and was later referred to as "The Greatest Trade Ever," in a book by the reporter Gregory Zuckerman.
After the financial crisis, investors flocked to Mr. Paulson's firm, which is in Midtown Manhattan, a stone's throw from Rockefeller Center.
For several years, Paulson & Company continued to make money for some of his investors, but the performance increasingly grew bumpy. This was particularly true for the firm's flagship Advantage fund. It lost 36 percent in 2011 and plunged another 14 percent in 2012, but rallied to post a 26 percent gain in 2013, according to an HSBC industry report and people with knowledge of the firm's performance. The losses were amplified in Advantage Plus, a version of the fund that uses leverage to enhance returns.
Over the last three years, Advantage has consecutively recorded double-digit losses. Some of Mr. Paulson's merger funds, credit funds and gold funds have posted positive returns, but the overall picture has not been pretty.
But Mr. Paulson soldiered on and even began to raise money in 2015 for a private equity fund and one focused on health care stocks.
Health care bets, in particular those on pharmaceutical companies, have proved especially punishing for Mr. Paulson and his investors. Losing wagers on economic recoveries in Greece and Puerto Rico haven't helped.
The Valeant trade resulted in a nearly $2 billion loss for the firm — bad, but not as disastrous as it was for another famed investor, William A. Ackman, whose firm Pershing Square Capital Management lost $4 billion on Valeant.
Some of Mr. Paulson's top talent have moved on. Putnam Coes, his former chief operating officer, left the firm in September. Soon after, John Reade, a senior vice president who was based in London, left.
Despite his losses, Mr. Paulson is still making new and speculative investments. In November, Paulson made an investment in Didi Chuxing, a fast-growing Chinese ride-hailing firm that signed a deal to acquire Uber Technologies' operations in China.
One bright spot could be a bet on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Steven T. Mnuchin, the Treasury secretary, has pledged to return the mortgage finance giants to free-standing publicly traded companies, a development that could make Mr. Paulson's funds big profits. Mr. Paulson and Mr. Mnuchin, a former hedge fund manager, once worked together to pull OneWest Bank out of the wreckage of IndyMac, a lender that the federal government seized in 2008.
Several new funds the firm has started are posting positive returns, too.
"We remain confident in the long-term relationship we have with Paulson," said Christopher Zook of CAZ Investments, a Texas wealth management firm that recently rotated out of the poorly performing Paulson Special Situations fund into a newer Paulson fund.
And Mr. Paulson and other hedge fund managers stand to be big beneficiaries of Mr. Trump's plans to slash taxes.
Yet 2017 is shaping up as another rough one for Mr. Paulson. The Advantage fund was down 9.7 percent as of the end of March and the Partners Enhanced fund continues to sink — falling just over 8 percent after last year's 49 percent plunge.
Even after several years of losing money for his investors, Mr. Paulson remains one of the richest men in the world — with a net worth of about $7.9 billion, according to Forbes.
But, as the financial magazine recently noted, he is now $2 billion poorer.
What does everyone think about Mnuchin admitting that fnma and other government agencies are funding obamacare? Why did mnuchin decide to comment on it? He could have just said "no comment". Is he trying to signal that after the new health care bill is passed , the sweep will end?
Rekcusdo, thanks for pointing out the "CC", at the bottom of Watt's letter. I didn't notice it when I read it. That leads me to believe that Watt already warned Mnuchin of this and the dangers of moving forward with the last sweep, but he was overruled by Mnuchin.
Strong close.....not
"those two companies only exist because there is a giant (credit) line from the treasury that support them". Munchin said that this morning with Maria. Not sure what he is implying there, but it sounds like he wants to do away with the gov guarantee.
Definitely need to send thanks to Maria for her questions re Fannie and Freddie. Actually, she asked very few questions about fannie and freddie. It was more of telling him about what was happening and forcing him to comment on it. Awesome job Maria!!
Awesome. That twitter thread has a video that shows the part of the interview where Mnuchin agrees that Fannie and Freddie have been funding obamacare. Thanks for posting. I missed the interview. I have been waiting for that moment for a long time!!!
I just don't understand the basis which would allow for receivership other than a draw. Then they would have to justify the lack of capital. It creates a political nightmare for Obama administration and trump as well since they also swept. Trump shouldn't have swept.
slowly chipping away at 2.96.
I don't think that Paulson fully disclosed his positions, did he? Does anyone know if he is in both commons and preferred?
No other preferred series is halted. Scottrade is showing only FNMAS is halted.
What about FMCKJ? Any other preferred series halted?
I'm not showing any trades yet on scottrade. Bid/ask for FMCC is showing $2.77 / 2.79
Thanks for posting that Navy. Does anyone have a subscription on here? That sounds interesting.
That's what I thought, but it was House Res 280 that passed. They are voting on 1694 (FNMA) now. Cant watch though.
I watched CSPAN for the last hour and didn't hear a single word about FNMA or FMCC. Those idiots used all of their time to talk about the healthcare bill. Dems complained about healthcare bill and Republicans talked about bipartisanship. What a joke. No wonder why these people hate each other. Imagine showing up to vote on a FNMA bill and you have to sit through a bunch of gibberish that is completely unrelated. What a waste of my time.
One of the worst Joe Light articles yet. It seems like these guys know that they can get more clicks and attention if they throw in phrases like F&F are the "biggest disasters of the financial crisis".
He also mentioned that-"Republican Jeb Hensarling, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, wants to wind down Fannie and Freddie completely, while some Democrats think they should be strengthened rather than killed."
I thought Jeb Hensarling significantly softened his stance after trump won the election. Is that not the case?
Looks like the vote is on Friday. I can't imagine that people would vote it down. It will be interesting to see who will vote against it. That "no" vote list will be our list of enemies.
We are up for 5 days straight. Can it continue tomorrow?
Volume is picking up nicely. Could this be due to the tax plan announcement that the Trump admin is supposed to release tomorrow?
what I don't understand is how previous similar bills could have failed. What is the harm in opening their books while they are in conservatorship? Who is opposed to that?
Here is the link I was referring to: https://www.mba.org/issues/residential-issues/gse-reform?_zs=iS2FG1&_zl=KdDk3
The website contains a summary.. I found this portion interesting:
"At outset: Congress enacts legislation that specifies end state and outlines transition process.
Phase 1: Preparation planning, regulations, creation of Mortgage Insurance Fund, Common Securitization Platform transition, Single MBS for Single Family, formation of new entity structures, technology readiness, acceptance of new entrant applications.
Phase 2: Implementation transfer of GSE assets; regulatory chartering of Guarantors; wind down of GSEs; start-up and operation of SF and MF Guarantors, including issuance of MBS backed by MIF; build-up of Guarantors' capital base; action on new entrant applications.
Phase 3: Divestiture: Government sale of its interests in the Guarantors to private investors, and continued regulation and operation of Guarantors under new framework."
They basically want to transfer the GSE assets, wind them down, and start them back up as new entities. Why wind them down in the first place unless they are trying to cash in on their short positions?
Check out the video and let us know your perspective.
Agreed. Steven's response to the question about hedge funds profiting and "taking advantage of the low prices during conservatorship" was basically that their focus is removing tax payer liability, ensuring that the 30 year mortgage is secure and the mortgage market is not negatively impacted is their focus.
I take that to mean that they aren't really concerned if people profit from the release. They care about making sure the housing market is not impacted. Very positive!
Wow. Excellent interview and information. It sounds like Stevens did a complete 180 here. Didn't he used to lobby for shutting them down? Thanks for posting that Navy!!
Yes we are all contributing. As soon as I heard this I decided to stop my charitable contributions this year because I am already giving away enough by owning 20k + shares
"may lack legal authority". Now that is interesting. "Lack...authority". That sounds great.
"Rolling production of documents" doesn't sound like a bad thing to me. The government has reviewed 40-50% of the documents and must provide what has been reviewed starting on 4/17. Not bad.
500k volume on FNMAT so far today. Leading volume so far.
Strong start today.......................Not
short interest is trending up
Date Close High Low Volume Short Volume % of Vol Shorted
Apr 04 2.35 2.51 2.25 11,810,851 2,891,107 24.48%
Apr 03 2.51 2.61 2.50 2,754,418 803,002 29.15%
Mar 31 2.60 2.62 2.55 1,953,047 550,607 28.19%
Mar 30 2.62 2.65 2.47 3,654,448 763,681 20.90%
Mar 29 2.65 2.68 2.62 1,681,220 170,415 10.14%
Mar 28 2.64 2.69 2.58 2,016,122 171,793 8.52%
Mar 27 2.64 2.72 2.55 3,168,649 367,989 11.61%
Mar 24 2.60 2.66 2.50 4,338,866 575,143 13.26%
Mar 23 2.65 2.70 2.62 3,345,512 202,251 6.05%
Mar 22 2.70 2.77 2.65 3,968,476 334,044 8.42%
Mar 21 2.80 2.96 2.76 4,413,633 346,079 7.84%