Joshua 1:9 Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. Do not be afraid; do not be discouraged, for the LORD your God will be with you whereve
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.
In some of the early cases, it was obvious to me that a single judge wanted no part of ruling against the Gov. Although Sweeney has issued a few orders against them so far.
Even the Appellate courts with the 3 judge panels we have only had Willett and Brown so far.
En Banc is different. 16 judges gives a lot of cover for everyone. It's hard to point 9 fingers and hold to account.
My prediction 75%
Verdict 12-4..... Plaintiffs
Thanks. I was one of the ones from Scottrade, who got moved to them. I'll be giving them a call.
Ok thanks. That was probably it, and it's just not possible anymore.
I saw a post a while back, the guy said he found a way around this and was able to buy... Not sure how he did it
I like him. He's very smart and doesn't seem to have an agenda.
He said he likes common and preferred. Nothing wrong with that.
I remember this incident about a year ago maybe. I sure hope you aren't referring to this happening again.
Come on people, you can't be contacting these judges...
I agree, that gap will never fill. And no offense taken. I am a bit of a "gap head" myself... Me, Rick and Ada
Gap filled. Here we go! All aboard
Another great post. I appreciate your contribution.
I agree. I made the "no brainer" post because Skeptic7 had just finished saying that the longer the En Banc takes the more likely we would lose. Which makes no sense.
Thanks for posting this. It has been stickied...
One of my former coworkers had a late 70's model Datsun. It was beige. He drove it into the 2000's. He should have put some FNMA stickers on it and he would still be driving it today.
It was similar to this.
You know, the longer this En Banc decision takes, the more likely we get a favorable decision.
It's a no brainer.
If the decision is in our favor, they will then have to consider the Prayer for relief. Many financial details will have to established.
As I said. It's a no brainer! IMHO
The view from 40,000 feet is quite green.
That's cool. I'm $1.69 avg on commons. It's coming amigo...
Yes, Right now I'm at 55%. I thing we should win, history is what's keeping me a little lower.
Either way win or lose, the NWS will be stopped this year.
Lot's of traffic on Tim Howard's board the last couple of days.
ruleoflawguy
May 10, 2019 at 12:14 pm
Tim
in this article interview https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/fannie-freddie-ipo-could-come-in-2020-fhfa-mark-calabria it seems to me that Calabria is calling for 4.5% risk-weighted capital requirement for GSEs, which as I recall is substantially in excess of what fhfa has already proposed (3.25%0. am I off base here?
rolg
..................................................................
Ron
May 10, 2019 at 1:07 pm
His mistake on capital requirements is so obviously uninformed that I’m tempted to look for some ill motive that favors the banks. However, if he’s willing to saddle the banks with the same 4.5%, then as the old adage goes, let’s not chalk up to malice that which may adequately be attributed to incompetence.
..................................................................
Jim
May 10, 2019 at 2:06 pm
The article does not fully convey what was said regarding capital. Interviewer said 4.5%. He was generally evasive. He even said “3, 4, 5%” at one point. He also never said “bank like”. He said like “other financial institutions”. It’s all part of the same exchange.
?
Liked by 1 person
..................................................................
jtimothyhoward?
May 10, 2019 at 2:48 pm
For ROLG: The difference between the 4.5 percent capital ratio Calabria called for in his recent Fox Business interview and the FHFA proposal isn’t quite that simple. FHFA’s June 2018 capital proposal was for a dynamic, risk-based capital requirement. In that proposal, FHFA calculated Fannie and Freddie’s average capital requirement to have been 3.25 percent based on the companies’ September 31, 2017 books of business. Since that date, though, the companies’ required “conservatorship capital” percentage has fallen substantially. Both Fannie and Freddie reported on that in their first quarter 2019 earnings releases: Fannie said its conservatorship capital was $87 billion, and Freddie said its was $52.4 billion. For both companies, that’s a little over 2.50 percent of their total assets–well below the 3.25 figure produced by the same risk-based methodology in September of 2017.
I am one who believes that this level of volatility in Fannie and Freddie’s capital ratio is not a benefit to the companies; it’s a problem that needs to be fixed, as I discussed in my comment to FHFA on its June 2018 proposal. A required capital ratio that can fall this far this quickly in a good housing market can, and will, rise even further and faster in a bad market. And in a bad market the companies may well need to be raising equity to offset their credit losses. Making them raise even more equity to keep up with a pro-cyclically escalating capital requirement is a horrible idea, and easily could push them right back in to conservatorship if (and more likely when) the market won’t provide that additional equity.
So in my view the problem is even worse than you state. Not only is the director of FHFA proposing a simplistic 4.50 percent capital ratio so that Fannie and Freddie’s capital will be like “other large financial institutions”–which it shouldn’t be, because Fannie and Freddie are single-asset credit guarantors, not multinational banks–but the staff at FHFA seems to have not understood the dynamic implications of the capital standard it proposed for the companies last year. This is all going to have to get straightened out before new investors will put any new money into Fannie or Freddie.
For Ron: Applying a 4.50 percent capital requirement equally to Fannie, Freddie and the large banks would not be a “level playing field.” Banks hold their mortgages on balance sheet, where they are funded with short-term consumer deposits and purchased funds, and thus have considerable interest rate risk. Today, Fannie and Freddie are required to hold an extra 2.00 percent, above their capital requirement for credit risk-taking, for any mortgage or MBS they have in portfolio, and they match-fund those mortgages and rebalance their funding as interest rates change. The supporters of banks consistently, and erroneously, ignore this huge differential in interest rate risk-taking when they insist that Fannie and Freddie should have the same capital ratio applied to their mortgage credit guarantees (which have credit risk only) as applies to bank holdings of mortgages (which have interest rate as well as credit risk).
For Jim: You’re correct. We’re getting much of this third hand. These are comments coming from an individual who doesn’t yet have a detailed understanding of what he’s talking about (Calabria), being transcribed by reporters with little understanding of it either. We should all recognize that Calabria has a learning curve ahead of him, and not get too spun up about reports like the one from Fox Business.
?
Liked by 1 person
Reply
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
yaquino
May 10, 2019 at 3:57 pm
Tim,
Do you think Adolfo, who worked for you before and was just appointed as a deputy at FHFA, can be able to explain to the rest of the FHFA staff what you are saying, given his background and knowledge?
?
Liked by 1 person
..................................................................
jtimothyhoward?
May 10, 2019 at 5:31 pm
Yes. Adolfo Marzol–who was appointed Principal Deputy Director of FHFA, reporting to Mark Calabria, in the middle of last month–will be in an excellent position to explain the nuances of the risk-based capital standard both to the staff and to the director. (And, to anticipate a possible follow-up question, I have a policy not to comment on any of my private interactions with people involved in the reform dialogue.)
?
Liked by 1 person
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Ron
May 10, 2019 at 4:55 pm
Ok, so it’s worse than I thought. When the FHFA echo chamber talks about a level playing field for GSEs and artificially creating Bank competition, they are not breaking out the existing bank mortgage business, let alone any future business they might be able to secure if charters are revoked, and comparing apples to apples.
The amount of high risk business the banks currently have (relative to GSE type business) will enable them to absorb into a blob stew portfolio GSE type business and actually allow them reduce capital reserves in the housing space below that which GSEs could be required to hold, gaining a competitive advantage?
?
Like
..................................................................
jtimothyhoward?
May 10, 2019 at 5:36 pm
No, I don’t think the large banks want to get into the mortgage credit guaranty business themselves–it’s too low-margin relative to the business they can get elsewhere. I think their motive for (unreasonably) insisting on “bank-like” capital for Fannie and Freddie is to make their credit guaranty business less efficient, drive up mortgage rates (and thus the spreads on the mortgages banks hold in portfolio), increase the popularity of adjustable-rate mortgages relative to fixed-rate mortgages, and generally shift business from the secondary to the primary market, which the banks control.
?
Like
..................................................................
John Carey
May 10, 2019 at 3:34 pm
Jim is right, the printed article and the taped interview are very different, the taped interview is important to watch so you can see him speak his own words. He acknowledges he isn’t into the details on things to comment yet. He is also deferential to Treasury on certain matters. He wants to give Congress their chance while retaining capital. They best take notice. Stakeholders have been paying for Congressional dysfunction long enough.
?
Liked by 1 person
Reply
..................................................................
ruleoflawguy
May 10, 2019 at 2:41 pm
there is one aspect to Calabria’s musings out loud that I liked….saying that he felt obligated by HERA to proceed with administrative reform if congress doesn’t act…meaning he interprets the conservator’s role as a mandate to restore soundness…so how can the litigation proceed with fhfa counsel claiming the exact opposite?
?
Liked by 3 people
Reply
..................................................................
Jim
May 10, 2019 at 3:57 pm
Calabria also said (at 14:45): “They [Treasury] wanna look out and make sure we maximize the taxpayers investment”. First time I recall hearing it from anyone in government.
?
Liked by 1 person
Reply
..................................................................[color=blue][/color]
bwadden
May 11, 2019 at 7:12 pm
Does 4.5% of risk-weighted assets for an asset category that gets a 50% risk-weighting actually amount to 2.25% of total assets? If so that would be in line with a reasonable capital standard.
?
Like
Reply
This is a very significant comment. The NWS end will come very soon.
They are probably going to keep us in conservatorship until the capitol raise is largely completed through retained earnings...
My comment on Congressman French Hill's FB page.
The GSE's should be able to pay their CEO a competitive salary. More big government trying to control everything. The GSE's represent 20% of the US economy, they should be able compete for the brightest in this critical market. Don't give me any of this protect the taxpayer BS. Fannie and Freddie have overpaid the loan they didn't need to begin with, by about 20 billion dollars. You just need to zip it and start supporting our President.
Edit or delete this
Like
<iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FRepFrenchHill%2Fposts%2F2131194020309217&width=500" width="500" height="633" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowTransparency="true" allow="encrypted-media"></iframe>
The overwhelming majority of shareholders are now hunkered down. Dug in. As I am.
I'm waiting on En banc for starters and the administrative plan. As long as it looks positive, I will continue to hold anyway.
I'm looking for the big payday. And/Or dividends.
Don't worry Dax1. Bush appointed quite a few liberal leaning Judges. Haynes is just one in the 5th circuit. The 5th circuit is stacked now with R's. 11-5 R's
We have Judge Willet leading the charge along with several key appointees from President Trump.
Here is a post from before the original ruling.
This is the 3 Judge panel on the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals:
https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/clerk/calendar/1803/27.cthse.htm
Chief Judge Carl Stewart
Carl E. Stewart is the Chief United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, based in New Orleans, Louisiana. Wikipedia
Born: January 2, 1950 (age 68), Shreveport, LA
Appointed by: Bill Clinton
Education: Loyola University New Orleans College of Law, Dillard University, Loyola University New Orleans
Political party: Democratic Party
Judge Catharina Haynes
Catharina Haynes is a United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Wikipedia
Born: November 9, 1963 (age 54), Melbourne, FL
Education: Florida Institute of Technology, Emory University School of Law
Appointed by: George W Bush
Judge Don R Willett
Donny Ray Willett is a United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Wikipedia
Born: July 16, 1966 (age 51), Talty, TX
Spouse: Tiffany Willett (m. 2000)
Party: Republican Party
Succeeded by: Jimmy Blacklock
Children: 3
Education: Duke University School of Law, Baylor University, Duke University
Appointed by: Donald Trump
Judge Willett is an interesting guy. He has been pretty active on Twitter and recently possibly saved a guys life at a Chick-fil-A.
I hope he can help save us....
https://www.dallasnews.com/news/courts/2017/11/29/don-willett-texas-supreme-court-justice-helped-save-choking-man-atchick-fil
I believe that FHFA in cooperation with Treasury will wait until it is time for the sweep to go through June 30th to take action.
If an announcement were to be made this long before that action, it would give Crapo and congress too much time to mount an effort to block. As well as the pressure from media reports.
I believe Otting was truthful in everything he said during his meeting with the FHFA employees back in Jan. Trump, Mnuchin and Calabria are all on the same page. Unfortunately someone recorded him and leaked it to the media and you saw the outrage by Crapo and TBTF media.
By waiting until then, they will be able to complete the action and the money will be in F&F coffers and their heads will be spinning.
WILD CARD if favorable 5th circuit decision comes in before then. That will be all the cover they need. IMHO 5th circuit could come at any time between now and then. We are inside that window now as day 100 will occur this week.
Good luck to all FNMA and FMCC
Very well said... I agree, great post!
I'm still confident this administration is going to take steps to recap this year. It will happen over time. Calabria will stop the sweep, but he's not going to just do it to achieve that one goal.
There will be other steps taken at the same time to work in conjunction with each other as a recap plan. I believe everyone will like it.
Just going to have to be patience for a few months.
This is all my opinion only. If you don't like it, keep on scrolling....
Going out to mow the lawn. It's a beautiful day in NC
We're going to be saying it a lot. And soon we will know also!!
I hate to say it, but it must be said.
It looks like somebody knows something!!!
I retired early. Not rich, just had good company benefits. Hoping this stock will make both our lives better. SWM... Good luck
Thanks. These pics in my signature are a few of our shareholders. Some most likely post on this board. #NotAHedgeFund
This is American as apple pie
See below
Thanks, I believe they have a plan and FHFA, Treasury and the WH are all on board. They are going to start rolling things out sometime soon. Probably by this summer.
We just need to stay patient for now.
We're gonna Make America Great Again!
If this merger were to happen, how would it affect us? Good or bad?
Memo Hey Guys do me a favor. Make me a list of goals we wish to achieve in making the housing finance system better.
Also, identify which goals can be accomplished administratively, with a timeline for implementation.
Your cooperation is appreciated and expected,
President Donald J Trump
https://www.scotsmanguide.com/News/2019/03/Trump-memo-calls-for-additional-GSE-reform-plans/
This is happening...
I couldn't agree more. Not cool at all. However, I'm sure MC knows this guy doesn't represent the majority.
OMG. You can do what you want and I hope you're kidding. Even if I lose everything on this (which ain't happening). I put the future of my children and grandchildren and love of my country above any gains or losses on this stock.
I with you. This is going to be one of those stocks that we're going to be kickin ourselves that we didn't buy more.
Today the squid is learning his way around the building. He parks his car in the best parking space.
He's probably having a meeting with everyone to introduce himself. He will be watching for the one who likes to video private meetings and leak it.
He will get rid of that person.
Stop feeding the trolls!!
Feeding= responding to
It's coming. Life is good...
That's going to be all for Otting, because Steve Mnuchin is on his way to the mound. He points down to the bullpen and it looks like he is going to the closer... Yes here comes Mark Calabria to close it out.