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.
really appreciated ... can't find the link ... can u share? tia!
yes, that's exactly what I mean ...
not sure the courts will care either way ... and unless a miracle happens, that's where we are most likely to end up ... and possibly gain the most leverage ... unless, as skeptic7 says, we get remanded back to hell's waiting room ...
shadow think mongo right ... shadow use duct tape and zipper neck ... chicks love belts and suspenders ...
As a precaution, I've duct-taped my head to my body this weekend ... you know, just in case history effectively repeats itself ...
I think its fair to say that Trump will do anything to get re-elected ... so if the 11K docs are not released before Nov 3, we'll really have to wonder if they would be any more damaging to Dems then the fellow traveler exchanges already released ...
BTW, there's been a lot of criticism of the WH pushing the possibility of an approved vaccine before the election ... while incredibly unlikely ... it IS possible ... on rare occasions, ph III clinical trials are ended EARLY IF the data shows OVERWHELMING efficacy and acceptable safety ... short of that, we're most likely looking at year-end or early 2021 ... but that would still finally turn on the light at the end of the tunnel and hopefully avoid the worst case scenario for FnF losses
LOL! yep, probably need a new handle ... persona non grata? ... re Nov, I should have noted it was Nov 2025 ;) ...
my theory on the kaboom or manipulation crowd is that they are traders who, like kids flying a kite on a blustery day, they twitch with every change, versus investors, who like city planners, make decisions for the long haul
btw, re timing, didn't someone mention that in Nov(?) SCOTUS would be ruling on the possible voiding of ACA if the coverage mandate is ruled unconstitutional AND is non-severable ... and that would set a pretty big precedent for voiding HERA with a non-severable, unconstitutional "for cause" provision?
Found the TH post on CRT's ... bottom line ... they MIGHT be needed in worst-case scenarios (like a pandemic), but otherwise they are not cost-effective and must be purchased in advance or they become counter-cyclical (i.e., can't buy home insurance to cover a fire after the fire) ... my layperson's take is that if relied upon too much for capital reserves, they'll be expensive and rarely used
https://howardonmortgagefinance.com/2020/05/05/first-quarter-takeaways/
9 paragraphs in:
I’ve been a persistent critic of Fannie and Freddie’s credit-risk transfer programs, arguing that the companies were greatly overpaying for the right to transfer credit losses they were highly unlikely to incur. Up until late March, when social distancing took effect, that indeed seemed to be the case. For the past three years, the credit loss rate on Fannie’s post-2008 mortgages—which today account for 95 percent of its total book—has averaged a mere 2.0 basis points per year, and in 2019 it was only 1.7 basis points. Last year Fannie paid over $1.6 billion for risk transfers that generally don’t activate until cumulative losses as a percentage of the initial insured pool balance exceed 50 basis points (25 times the 3-year annual average of the post-2008 book), and they cover these pools for more than 400 basis points of cumulative losses (over 200 times the current 2.0 basis point annual loss rate). But now we have the pandemic, and in a worst-case scenario many of these risk transfer arrangements would pay off, to the great shock and dismay of the institutions and investors on the other side of them.
I think UST received a couple of bucks under HERA, so they might be affected (LOL) ... but seriously, I have no idea if any contract executed with the gse's could be challenged ... but in either case, I think voiding HERA would be a colossal win for shareholders and property rights ... at a minimum, I would be satisfied if the NWS is voided ... and the anti-injunction clause (if that is even possible)
yes, for sure, but that still doesn't explain why such a simple provision was omitted ... I feel it almost had to be done on purpose, but can't figure out why ... btw, I think Tim Howard did a piece on why CRT are BAD (too expensive and NOT counter-cyclical) ... I'll see if I can dig it up
any theories on how/why the severability provision was left out? ... it seems inconceivable that was an oversight
couldn't you have found something even a bit surprising?? ... jusssssst kidding!! ... best example I could have imagined ... had totally forgotten about it, but was blown away when I first saw it ... thank you very much, cheers!
Given that the cship fiasco under FHFA has gone on for almost 12 years ... and the hundreds of billions at stake ... not to mention 12 years of FHFA decisions ... does anyone really think SCOTUS will void HERA? ... are there any examples of prior SCOTUS decisions with such momentous RETROSPECTIVE economic impact? ... unless lots of precedence, seems so totally unlikely because one little severability clause is missing? ... again, the thieves that drafted HERA were wicked devious (anti-injunction, "may" conserve, etc.) ... how ... or WHY ... did they overlook such a standard provision?
Concrete life preservers thrown to FnF from the USS Litigious (with ports of call at every court!)
1st "conservator"ship
2nd SPSA at 10%
3rd 80% warrants
4th NWS
5th new cap requirement (aka "just doing his job" MC ...)
Is it too soon to start taking HQC to improve our outcome from this nearly fatal infection? ...
yes, and sadly the same kind of authors that started this epic tragic tale are still writing ....
ok, so if A affects B ... and B affects C ... then A does NOT affect C ... got it! ... too many years in the sarcophagus?
what in the heck are you saying?? ... people model things with unknown outcomes a zillion times a day ... i've got a basic and advanced model ... the basic one is copied below (sorry, formatting is a mess) ... the whole point of modeling is to look at possibilities when variables are unknown ... sure, the range of outcomes may be incredibly large based on assumptions, but that isn't lying ... but I suspect you know this, so, again, what the heck are you really trying to say? ... that the range of outcomes is so large that modeling is pointless? ... or maybe that too many (in your opinion) represent THEIR models as the only game in town?
Warrants + IPO Warrants + R.E. No Warrants + IPO No Warrants + R.E.
Current shares 1,800,000,000 1,800,000,000 1,800,000,000 1,800,000,000
Capital requirement $240,000,000,000 240,000,000,000 $240,000,000,000 $240,000,000,000
Sources of capital
Existing $20,000,000,000 $20,000,000,000 $20,000,000,000 $20,000,000,000
NWS Settlement $30,000,000,000 $30,000,000,000 $30,000,000,000 $30,000,000,000
New (shortfall) $190,000,000,000 $190,000,000,000 $190,000,000,000 $190,000,000,000
Annual Earnings $20,000,000,000 $20,000,000,000 $20,000,000,000 $20,000,000,000
Current PPS $2.20 $2.20 $2.20 $2.20
Avg. pps new shs. $7.50 N/A $7.50 N/A
Warrants 80% 80% 0% 0%
New shares needed
Warrants 7,200,000,000 21% 7,200,000,000 80% - 0% - 0%
Capital requirement 25,333,333,333 74% N/A N/A 25,333,333,333 93% N/A N/A
32,533,333,333 95% 7,200,000,000 80% 25,333,333,333 93% - 0%
Plus current shares 1,800,000,000 5% 1,800,000,000 20% 1,800,000,000 7% 1,800,000,000 100%
34,333,333,333 100% 9,000,000,000 100% 27,133,333,333 100% 1,800,000,000 100%
EPS $0.58 $2.22 $0.74 $11.11
P/E 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00
Suggested pps $9 $33 $11 $167
Yrs. to raise capital unknown - multiple 9.5 unknown - multiple 9.5
public offerings? (new cap/ann. inc.) public offerings? (new cap/ann. inc.)
almost every ranking puts the US around 15th in the world ... guess what form of government all most all of the ones above us have? keeping an open mind is the key to prosperity and progress for everyone ... some may not like the rankings ... some may think they are fake ... and that would be like saying that what has happened to FnF didn't happen ... and could NEVER happen in the world's undisputed bastion of capitalism and property rights ... but here we are ... so if NO big docs reveal before the election ... and if the cap rule is NOT lowered meaningfully ... and if the warrants ARE exercised ... what will folks think then? ... I hold 100K common and am deeply in search of any FACTS that support a good outcome other than a miracle in the courts ...
the last paragraph wasn't a prediction, just modeling the math of certain outcomes ... which, btw, the most optimistic (no warrant and recap via earnings ... over 9 years (gulp)) kept ownership at 100% and produced pps of $167 ($11.11 EPS and 15 PE) ... patswill, your ears ringing?!?! ; )
There may be only one important question at this point - does the administration want the outcome to favor WS or current shareholders? ... if you look at who put us in the mess in the first place - and WHY, the revolving door between WS and top gov't officials, the continued, full-on legal fight, the absurdly high cap requirement, the complete absence of any rrr actions FAVORABLE to shareholders and the open disdain (contempt?) for social safety net programs (e.g., affordable housing), what conclusion can you reach?
BTW, if the 11K hidden docs are soooooo damaging to Dems - and especially to Biden who was VP when the NWS scandal occurred - how come they haven't been released? Only two answers in my mind ... they are bad for too many on both sides ... or they are going to drop a bombshell just before election to expose Biden's corruption (though still not sure how they do that without risking exposing Hank and the cship take down)
Finally, I modeled a number of different scenarios and if cap requirement isn't lowered, you assume $20B/yr earnings (FnF), $30B in NWS over payment "value", the warrants are exercised as is and the SPO(s) are conducted at an AVERAGE price below $7.50, then we would easily get diluted below 5% ... all in broad day light ... do we live in a great country or what!?!?!
I just scanned fannie's comments twice and didn't notice any proposed cap levels ... did I miss it? ... looks like they outline all of the elements that need to be considered without proposing a specific cap level ... though they did say the g-fees might have to increase 20 bps with FHFA's proposed levels ... not peanuts, but not market crashing altering either
I don't think MC will lower the capital requirement. The administration has the cover of the pandemic and clearly wants more competition that will benefit WS/TBTF banks ... and they could care less about affordable housing (or health care for that matter) ... this is solidly a "1%" admin that know exactly how to play on abortion, guns, jobs vs environment, white supremacy and gay rights to expand well beyond the 1% folks ... so no risk in rewarding Wall Street while economically harming Main Street ... basically same Rep playbook for years, just on steroids right now ...
true dat!
agreed, its a form 3 ... probably required because she became an officer ... notice there is no acquisition price or date as shown on form 4
DNU, I totally agree with you ... MC is a train wreck for shareholders
ummm, a competent, professional leader who has the gravitas to run an agency that affects 20% of the economy?
ok, maybe fair enough ... but if essentially all the passengers are criticizing the pilot, what then? ... are there enough extended-reach oxygen masks for all of them? ;)
So if one criticizes a pilot for reckless flying, its ok for the pilot to move them to a wing seat and let you watch "Gone With The Wind"? ;)
Yes, MC has been a gift to the RRR of FnF ... everyone is applauding his proposed 4% reserve requirement ... and the pps has already progressed nicely along its upwards trajectory ... and let's not forget the .5% refi fee ... a clear boost as well ... me thinks he is another stable genius and a shoe-in for the next POTY honor!
worrying about what the gov't will do to harm their "victim du jour" ... oh man, don't get me started ; )
Yanks, I personally agree that it seemed odd at best and very poorly timed at worst to hit refi's with the fee, but it shouldn't collapse the refi market ... however, given the chaos in this admin and the apparent disconnect with reality and the rule of law, I'm not surprised ... cheers
yes, the one time .5% fee could be added to the financed amount like points ... so .5% x $300,000 refi = $1,500 fee financed at 3% over 30 years = $6.32 increase in the monthly payment, correct? ... if not, what am I missing? tia
Yanks, I think FFF and others are correct:
simply and concisely put
Haven't seen any data, but I wonder if that's because the workers who have been the most hurt by layoffs (and covid) are renters, not home owners/buyers
Agree ... I should have clarified that the ACA narrative has never been proven ... but even if it was true, I wanted to point out that regardless of what ever public good FnF were used for, they should have been compensated ... cheers and thanks for all of your posts
So using FnF to bail out WS is god's work, but to expand access to health care for millions is corrupt? ... and in either case, they were BOTH takings under the 5th amendment, so FnF should have been compensated, not f'ing punished
you don't mean the banana republic that put two of the world's most stable and profitable companies in cship, then "lent" them $ at 10% ... and stole 80% ... that banana republic?