Why waste your time responding to my post!!!!
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.
time to short WWE again just like last time it went up to 30. Deff time to buy some puts.
Fannie and Freddie could need $126 billion taxpayer bailout in next crisis, stress test finds!! With the govt taking all the profits, any type of crisis, will make it look like fannie needs the govt for a bail out.
The thing with the whole ceo bounses were hyped up by media. A few banks were forced to take bailouts and even stepped up and bought bad assets like Bank of America bought Merrill lynch which was a nightmare for them. The govt made banks that did not need a bail out so no banks really stood out as bad. Then the govt tried to regulate bounses of CEOs and execs which people do not relaize is 99% of the time all in company stock and not cash. ceo of Bank of America in 2013 made 14million. Though people need to read between the lines he got his base salary of 1.5 million in cash the rest was in stock grants. As a shareholder of BOA stock I feel good he got 12.5 million worth of stock as he will prob work hard to keep the price of the stock as high as possible. I'd be worried of CEOS with high salarys in cash and do not want stock of thier own company, which is the case with small cap pump n dumps.
They put a conservator that was created by the govt, and act like the FHFA in charge is not a conflict of interest. The head of FHFA who has 100% control and is the one that signed off on the profit sweep. One side can argue that it is a smart move as they have the tresury as a piggy bank, on the other hand sharholders are screwed as the company is devalued as they can not stock pile money on thier books. There is a a point in the law of consertivshhip that the conservator must martin the vaule of the asset. The allowing of the profit sweep with no question devaules the company in fact makes it worthless as it techniacally makes zero as they actually literally have to write the number 0 on thier balence sheet even though they brought in billions.
My views on bailouts are much different then what the term and meanings actually mean. I always disagreed with bailouts but our world has changed. This is not the Govt bailing out McDonald's or burgerking even though they might have to if they needed one, as corporations have become so big any one failure puts a lot of people out of work and has a big domino effect. When the Govt bailed out the banks they forced eveybank weather needed or not so no one bank stands out to much. citizens were outraged though they prob did not realize that we need the banks. The govt took over fannie and Freddie instead of an avg bailout so it took he beat off them. This wasn't a bailout to them it was a consertivshhip and the govt will recieve billions in intreast which they call "money back to the tax payers" the billions they make from fannie and Freddie is not putting any kind of dent in the trillions of debt. The govt did it as they can actually say they are getting billions more then anticipated which makes it avg coitizen smile when watching the news even though it has no effect on any persons. The only people it's a bad deal for is shareholders and future shareholders as I recently bought in and did not occur any losses, as the ahareholders pre houseing bubble have. The old shareholders received a lawsuit payout as they were mislead. IMO the reason I bought into fannie is because the govt allowing the stock to be traded in the wild Wild West aka orcbb markets is negligence on thier part. Congress is the only body that can relase fannie!! Right now they do not wanna deal with the issue. IMO we need a strong republican prez. And House for 2016 for them to release control. Which waiting a year or two for return of 1000% is not hat bad. Inthe mean time traders can take thier shot. Long term fannie is a strong buy as long as you can withstand any margin of the stock were to dip on news of a lawsuit.
Will do!
If one of the lawsuits gets thrown out or a ruling to set them back I can see a dip to 1.50 range. Though if you have no margin or can cover it with no problem it's only a loss on paper. There is nothing to justify any price point at the moment. Really only thing is Analyzing Chart Patterns from how investors have reacted to any negative news. When the court case was thrown out last time it took a big dip. Though any of this should not be a big deal for someone who has invested long term ready to wait if needed a couple years.
I addressed that somewhere in my long rant. That sharhilders major case in court is the fact that this deal of the profit sweep devalues the company, when the law states it must do everything necessary to maintain the value of the company, which this profit sweep deal strongly devalues it. Useing the term running it safe is a arbitrary case as anyone can argue handing over the profits for an unlimited acess to cash can be considered a safe move.
When I say CEO I mean head of FHFA Mel watt, as he has full control. no one else has any say. He is a puppet for the he govt. Even if he agrees or not he signed the profits away. The govt did not pass a law saying fannie needed to give up profits. To non sharhilders or anyone who can careless it looks like a good deal. The Fed offered basically an unlimtied creit line of cash in return for profits. No need to stock pile cash when you have acess to a bigger piggy bank. The govt spins it through media as the profits they take from fannie they use the term "money going back to tax payers" LoL sounds sweet though people tend to relize it means nothing.
Under the laws or rules of Conservatorship the conservator is sopposed have fannies best intrest in mind. Even though some can argue that giving up all profits to almost unlimited amount of cash if and when needed is a good exchange, it devalues the company as they can not stockpile cash. The conservator is to maintain the vaule of the company, but by agreeing to the profit sweeps it does not do that. IMO that is the biggest argument in court, that he conservator put in place by the govt it a conflict of interest as they are a puppet for the Govt. Fannie and Freddie are posting more and more profits every quarter under stricter regulations, that shows the Conservatorship is not needed, though If fannie can not add cash to thier books the govt can argue that fannie does not have enough cash to with- stand any bad quarters or years. The fact that the stock is still allowed to trade and many people have suffered losses based on the fluctuation on speculative information is negligent by the govt if they never give back the company to shareholders. Sooner or later they will as the govt has no business being in the mortgage business. If they wanna oversee it with stricter regulation laws and even charge a fee for auditing or something fine, but a profit sweep and control of the board is flat out stealing, and our money and big companies would be safer run from China or Russia. main problem is awareness of the citizens letting them know what the Govt is doing, as that NYT article a few days ago caused the stock to spike 20%. We need the people from occupy wallstreet to occupy fannie and protest and give the govt a headache as they only make changes when an issue is a headache to them.
You are correct in away as they just add new things into the consertivship agreement, and add new houseing laws to allow the profit sweeps etc.. Though they did not really change actual laws. Just terms in the bailout agreement. The conservtiveship put in place a CEO who allowed the profit sweeps and made the agreement, no actual new law forced him to do it. Though the CEO who under consertivshhip laws should have the company and shareholders best intrest in mind, but he is just a puppet for the govt. No Ceo or board would agree to a profit sweep for unlimited credit. Fannie and Freddie always raised money when needed. They raised a couple billion with prefered shares a few months before the takeover. The problem is your avg citizen knows nothing about the markets or what a GSE even is. The GSE term people already think it's a govt entity so no big deal. Though the GSE term was meant to boost the credit rating of the business that banks can trust will buy their mortgages to add liquid, and I turn banks would write more mortgages. The Govt had no fincial obligation to fannie or Freddie. Though if fannie and freddie were to go under the impact would ruin the whole economy. The govt saw an opportunity useing the term GSE to take it over hopeing people won't notice the actual intent. if they took over Bank of America or Jp morgan chase people would riot, not cause it actually effects them, but because our citizens wouldn't stand for the govt to take over privite companys. Shareholders need to let others know that this company even though called a GSE was funded by shareholders from day one.
Haven't been posting, but was going to the other day on the huge uptick. I was gonna warn not to go crazy and buy. The uptick was because of a NYT article with old info already known, and the earnings report. This stocks vaule right now has nothing to do with earnings, as the TRESURY takes it all. In my past post i called that the stock will uptick from hype then drop so if you buy on a margin you can not cover its rickey. There is no question or argument this stock is 25-40 stock based on profits. This is a waiting game against the govt. Smart move is to buy with money you do not need for a couple years. It's gonna take time as the Govt has to much other things at the moment to worry about. I'm thinking next president and let's hope it's a Republican!! This stock is for sure is a good buy, buts it's a waiting game for Fed to give up control. I deff belive in 1000% returns, my only warning is margin buyers who can not cover a 50% drop because the stock willuptick imo closer to court decisions on lawsuits and then it will dramitcally drop if cases get thrown out or not in shareholders favor like it did last time.
The federal government and nearly every state have passed tort claims acts allowing them to be sued for the negligence, but not intentional wrongs[. The fact that the govt, claims they have the resposabity to make sure fannie/Freddie to make sure they run good and are structured well. Which they always had, through regulation. The govt loseend regulation, to allow people to get mortgages easier. They did not see a problem till the market crash???? Or did they turn their heads? Also through there take over the caused great loss to shareholders, which fannie paid 170 million to shareholders. 123.8 mill to common and 46.2 mill to prefered shares. The govt approved this risky subprime mortgages, but claim no wrongdoing. << that is not the point, those facts can be used against them. The negligence was the conservatorship. Did they mislead and act to early on acting. Was fannie in need of any funds at that moment ?? Well by their records no. Their stockpile was well of. Though big losses did occur starting in 2008, fannie had the money, they just had to dip into the pile which wasn't good, but they had it. Well ubove regulation laws on liquid cash. Of course the Govt can argue they couldn't take the chance on the future. Though they could have started with a small bailout in return for bonds or preferd shares with higher then avg interest rates. They rushed in to a conservatorship, because they were taking to much heat from the bank bail outs. The govt also knew that the term GSE helped them. this company was only the idea of congress, as it was needed to get banks to write more mortgages, as they will be able selll them for liquid. GSE was basically a backing in name only, saying we will keep check on them and gave them a good credit rating. This company was funded by so called taxpayers, as investors are taxpayers. Also the biggest negligence was a by creating a federal agency (FHFA) which says it's an idependent fed agency, priv for liabilty purposes. There is such of conflict of interest. It falls under. "amici curiae" which translates, "friend of the court". This FHFA head is just a puppet. Put in place by the govt creating a separate entity, so it wouldn't be that the government took over. By allowing the tresury to do a profit, sweep, I. Return for a open line of credit they do not need. Fannie raised money through issues prefered shares, and we're generous with divi. By allowing the profit sweep, it did not preserve assets, or market share. Prices plummted by the action of the FHFA, the sign off on the profit sweep was wrist of all. If this stock is worth 40 and it's at 2, I want the difference in damages, as they are indering my right to make a profit in a free economey, and profitable public company. I can retire if the stock hits 40. Also the fact I know it's worth that causes me mental stress and depression, I want them to pay my xanax bills.< sarcasm, I do not promote that.
I have been long since my first post. Iv only bashed the govt. My words were flipped. As I do not just post positives, I include the downsides as well. Downside not of fannie, but becaue the govt has 1mill senior shares which get first cut of divi at 10% at a par vaule of 100million, and the 20 year warrent. Even though the warrent very unlikey will be warranted, it's stupid not to mention it, and try to pretend it does not exist. As down the road after this stock hits 40 and, you think your in the clear. You might wanna sell at any bad news knowing the govt might warrent to come back in. the warrent and stock is fact, it's my opinion its a downside to take in to factor. Though I always say right after this common stocks vaule is not dependent on a divi, thats for the prefered shares. The common stock gets the left overs. It's nice, very nice, but not need for the vaule to increase to 40 a share.
When did I bash?????? What's the point. Read my first posts from my profile. Lol. I bashed the govt.
I'm a young guy, under 30. My whole life I heard storys about opportunitys like this, but those days are over, and you just get scammed. This is not your avg OTC, it's only on here because price falls under regulation to trade anywhere else. The govt is hindering my opportunity to make a profit in what is sopposed to be a free economy. I have many investments in all blue chip companys. Now I have to worry about govt taken control when they feel, by passing a law, tahat allows them. They are no better the Putin who recently took over many private company's. Fannie is safer running from China!!!!
Did anybody on this board own fannie in early 2000? Did you recieve part of the lawsuit? Also ackman found three regular citzens who have owned this stock for 15 years to sweeten the pot. We need the middle class to show they been robbed. Anyone with no clue about this which is 99% of people, can care less a billionaire is fighting the govt for stock/money. Also he govt uses the term that the sweeping of profits, is mkney going back to shareholders. Lol sounds very good, until you give that thought!!!
"Further, the lawsuit alleges that the FHFA, as conservator, should have preserved the assets and properties of Fannie and Freddie. However, armed by the above-mentioned amendment, the government extracted all the profit without paying any compensation to the common shareholders, thereby violating the Constitution’s Fifth Amendment. Also, the lawsuit accuses the government of violating federal statutes and its fiduciary duties toward the shareholders of Fannie and Freddie" This is the part of ackmans case which is the strongest. The FHFA agreed to profit sweeps, so as of now they are legal. Though did the conservators act help preserve the assets and properties of fannie. The lawsuit is on behalf of common shareholders, and seeks damages, as the stocks/assets were runies, by this move. So I assume and hope that if any money is won it goes only and straight to common shareholders. This is why ackman should be looked at more as he has the the biggest shareholder of common stock, actually after the govt
But that 80% is a warrent.
100% Google bill ackman freddie and Fannie. Freddie is just as good. I'm just not gonna go back and fourth on fourms. Freddie is smaller, but at this price the returns will be just as big,
It would, I never claimed he was our lawyer. Any smart investor knows you can't trust anyone. As its Everyman for themselves. When you claim lawyer, a lawyer, that lawyers by law is fighr for your best interest. That's all I claimed. I support not managers. But will not say they are on my team. As they do not care about me or know me!
Since when did he buy more? I thought his is share is 9.7%, I just write 10%. Are you sure you didn't had freddie in that as he owns that as well?
You can own 99% of common shares and you have no power. The courts do not care if he has 10% or 1 share, that's irrelevant.
With in the company!! I was telling someone his 10% doesn't have any factor or give him power. He has the resources to sue. you know you can go file he same lawsuit as him right? Usually when ackman buys 10% it comes with a board seat and influence inside the company.
the goverment tried to keep the appeal from happening, and ackman filed a suit to help the other suit. My points were made a couple post before. As I said bill ackman's lawsuits are the ones to look at, as he owns 10% common stock .
Go to FannieMae.com and see all the prefered shares. The ones with rates are Non-Cumulative, meaning that if fannie doesn't pay it won't be made up on next dividend. They also can choose not to pay a dividend any period, they feel they did not make enough profit. The rates are why those shares trade way higher for the divi.
The govt allowing the shares to still trade, which I do not even think they have power over?? Instead of doing a buyback of all shares, shows very good signs, control will be realeased, matter of time. they have to allow teadeing as the company is still running. They can never liquidate as they had trillions in liabiltys. They can down size it, but even cut in half stock is worth 20-25. That's why they are keeping fannie and Freddie from building a cash pile too big.
Preferred Stock
Investors view preferred stock as a hybrid of common stock and long-term bonds. Preferred stock always pays a dividend that the corporation must distribute before paying dividends to holders of common stock. Preferred stock dividends compete with long-term bond interest to attract income-oriented investors. Unlike common stock, preferred stock does not participate in the growth of a company -- preferred stock dividends remain fixed even as the corporation’s earnings grow. A corporation pays all stock dividends from retained earnings -- the accumulated profits of the firm. <<Copy and pasted from smallbusiness.chron.com. You do not have to say sorry, but acknowledge, you now know what I meant.
“The Government seeks an indefinite stay of all proceedings in Fairholme—and, by extension, Amici’s case—based on a preclusion argument against the Fairholme Plaintiffs that, even if correct, would not apply to Amici. The Government’s motion thus affects Amici’s interests while ignoring the broader context of these related cases. Amici’s proposed amicus brief brings this context into proper focus,” says Pershing Square’s motion.
"In other words, dropping the DC District Court case not only strengthened Pershing Square’s other lawsuit, it may have strengthened Fairholme’s case as well because it shows that the stay, if granted, would have a broader impact." <<> copy pasted both from article. ackman helped faithholmes, as the govt was trying to get a stay on judgment. Ackman claims based on "Amicus Curiae" the govt is a friend of the court, which is a conflict of interest.
"Yesterday, Judge Sweeney at the Court of Federal Claims approved Pershing Square’s request to file an amicus brief in the Fairholme case, and the reason for the decision is revealing"
the government filed for an indefinite stay on the Fairholme’s other case currently in front of Judge Sweeney.
Bill ackman lawsuit IMO more important. As he is much more know to risk a lot when he thinks he is right. He was in the red 500mill shorting herbalife, and would let out, though smartly, reduced his postion 30% and put it in to options as his clients were prob nervous. Also he only 10% of common shares. Meaning he is gonna go full swing.
I was not trying to look, to point out technicals. Of course they benfit shareholders. Though you can not hold them responsible, if they pull some trick and dump shares thinking they will lose. I do not know if that's insider info or can be consider minipulation , as they do not know what the judge will do. Likely of that happening very slim. That's why I understand saying "our" legal team, though could lead to some misunderstandings. Anytime someone wins a lawsuit or favorable ruling against the Gov, benfits citizens in a way.
Did you mean he files timely? As he doesn't get to choose, when a ruleing will be made.
I can understand why you would say "our legal team. Though he is not on fannie maes shareholders stock team. His represents himself as a shareholder, with his own lawyers. Fairholme said in a statement last year that it filed a lawsuit “to protect its rights as an owner of preferred stock in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, including the right to receive dividends from the profitable companies.” like I said I can understand, but can be misleading, as letting shareholders belive, they have a law team fighting for their interest. Conflict of interest for common shareholders, as most of his holdings are prefered, and will stand to benfit much more from, and refunds from the Gov. It's like rooting for another team to win in a game,
So your team can make the playoffs.
True: [AGREE] at least I am aware, as others really are in their own world.this is just fun.
As I would never invest on the opinion of a ihub poster. Deff not the ones with 20,000 post.
Good for you, feel proud. I acknowledge when I notice that I was wrong. As I have changed my words after realizing I misinterpreted something. I do not intentionally make up this things.I do not reread my post after I post them. I will only correct, a something I stated as a fact, i.e wrong earnings. My view on weather fannie prefered (not prefered shares period, Im only posting about Fannie Mae)stock is considered almost like a bond, but different. Different means different, I don't need to explain how different, just as an option/warrent, as options are my specialty, but I do not buy warrents. a bond is not guranteed payment. My post are rambling, activist talk. I do not conduct or express those views in a way in person, as that is not proper social skills. This is an online fourm, where you are not forced to read my post. The funny thing is we both are on the long side, though you attack me? You read my post, and are prob the type who take it literal and really think I'm trying to rally people to rise up. example the tea party. They take conservative views to an extreme,Even conservatives/republicans think they"re crazy. You can respond as your right to my opinions, but they are not solicited. when I want a response, I post a question. Other then the fact that you, do not stop yourself from reading my crazy opinions, is your problem. I turn off CNN when I can't stand what they are saying!!!!!
Long and strong is the only way to play this stock. Although I do advise people to understand and watch margin, if you can not cover. IMO there is a good possibility of 20to50% dip if bad news with these laws suits come out, as people will panic. If you do not have margin or can cover its only a loss on papper and will recover, as it did from the last big drop a few months ago.
These little down swings are most likey have gotten tired of waiting and closeing their postion, or there are prob a lot of shareholders who made a killing buying in at 20cents, and gave up and will take the profits.
I never said Gse prefered shares, I said Fannie Mae shares, as the way they set them up. It's also means nothing. As it was a way to explain fannie maes stock to people who have no idea about them, or that they exist. They have a are sold on a fixed rate on a par vaule but trade different. I know what fannie maes prefered shares are, so I don't need to think there sorta like bonds. fannie Maes prefered shares are really one of a kind as they have about 10 different classes, with fixed and variable rates on dividends, with big par vaules. It is like me saying a grapefruit is like and orange. or more like lemon like a orange. Both citrus, same texture though complety different.
I was talking about fannies preferd shares and not prefered shares in general! As I might have wrote in a. Way that made it seem I was talking about what a prefered share was. As this is a Fannie Mae board I was talking about fannie maes prefered shares and the 10 different ones u can choose from, or look up the ones that no longer exist. Fannie needs more capital then any other company on earth, as that is there only bussiness his to provide liquid. They last sold 2billion dollars worths of prefered share series T with a 8% divi on either a par vaule of 25 or 50. I forget ! They sold these shares in 2008 a few months before the gov stepped in,
Maybe you thjnk I meant a prefered share in detention is like a bond, and I maybe typed it that way, but I was referring to fannie maes types of prefered shares. As many company's have different types of shares. Mark zuck owns 20% of facebook, but has the majority of the prefered series A shares which holds all the voteing rights and had 3of5 board seats. So even if every share holder got together they could not get rid of zuck.