Where the money goes.

So the way I see it - the government stands to have a huge windfall when / if they get these two out of conservatorship. We could debate how much depending on how this is done and who does or does not get the shaft.

So here we are - big windfall in the making.

Is the Biden administration not going to get their hands on this $$$$ and let it stay frozen once the mid-terms occur and potentially loose control of House & Senate?

OR worse yet - leave the piggy bank in place for a GOP president to come steal the gold? As from most accounts what Trump was going to do?

Maybe wishful thinking but if the DEMs want the money for agenda projects - they may need to act now or at least before the next presidential bid if they feel they will not win.

ANNNNNNND once again the twins are trading at the same price point (even when they are two different companies with different financial numbers) AND have hit the $1 wall. Almost like someone has capped them both as being a $1 stock and that's where it will eventually land in this mess - I certainly hope not.

Agreed - I brought this up a couple of days ago. Both tracking to the same share price and both stopping at $1. They are both stuck in this non-sense conservatorship but clearly have different financials which makes the same share price sort of unrealistic. Makes no sense unless:

1. A situation of pump and dump (short selling/buying up and down cycle) by the same people using the same triggers/algorithms for both - which I don't really care about
OR
2. Someone with power and high up has some plan to set the value of the common at no higher than $1 which would be a complete disaster and a joke in terms of rights for shareholders

I'm hoping/thinking it is just OPTION #1

Sort of strange how both of the twins have zeroed in on $1.
Almost like whatever is happening has deemed the value to be that max number/value.

No inside information - just strange how they keep tracing to $1 when the value for each is not really the same as their financial numbers are not identical.

Hoping whatever is going on does not translate to a common price of $1.
Time will tell.

I mean how is it POSSIBLE that Britney Spears will get out of conservatorship via the courts and we cannot? If you think too hard about the complete joke this decision was it will drive you mad.

SPOT ON - What a complete banana republic we live in now. The SC knows the twins have been taken over - they know the conservator is not working in the best interest of the entity when he/she should be- and the outcome is they can do what they want? The theft just got so large that no one wanted/wants to correct it - aka unscramble the egg.

Questionable Timing - I will find it more than a little strange if the decision comes on Monday the 14th when Judge Lamberth schedules a status meeting 2 days ago for the 15th. Would this not imply that Lamberth has been told at least the release date of the decision at a min and at a max what is coming? If so, so much for no leaking... I mean why would he not wait to schedule this meeting until he is sure the decision has been released?

Scotus - next steps >>>> I do think the decision will be unfavorable for the Government however they may not go the additional step of defining damages $$ but rather push this to the lower courts. The key in my mind is IF they do in fact expose the government as being in the wrong, I don't think we need to worry about the immediate numbers/price - the decision itself will most likely light the fuse for a new wave of Takings Cases to e filed as the door will now be open and there will be way too much money on the table for such new cases not to proceed.

How can the entities raise outside capital with lawsuits in place AND how can there be no new lawsuits filed if the government is found to be in the wrong? I just have a hard time seeing how this ends anytime soon as the government will never hand back the money they took. That's not to say the stock price will not go up or down but a new wave of cases will keep this alive for years to come.

Could be wrong

Not sure I'm following - is this not an attempt by Marc C to help his banking friends grab up these two companies before they are allowed to build capital via retained earnings? Would this not just dilute the shares and leave the commons worth less per share? How about this - Marc C > why not set some realistic capital limits and let this thing recover on its own. It was not a national emergency for over 12 years - why the bums rush now?

According to ScotusBlog - more opinions to potentially occur today.
Not holding my breath as I think maybe May but who knows and we will find out in the next 45 minutes.

2nd out still not ours and this one has R numbers so I "think" that's it for today players!

First one released - not ours...
Still waiting to see if any more come out today

Charlie G - Twitter

I think the "gist" of what was being said in the tweets was that the government can win in respect that they could in-fact remove Calabria at will and without cause if the Supreme Court rules in that manner (Which they should). Of course, this "win" would really mean the government loses its case on the current constitutionality of the organization in the Supreme Court Collins Case (A win for us/shareholders). So a government loss in court - yields a win for Biden I suppose if you believe they want to get rid of Calabria - which I believe they do.

In the famous words by John Belushi >> "Was it over when the Germans Bombed Pearl Harbor" - NO!

Hard to believe that a bunch of people on Robinhood are driving over 80 million in volume just by themselves?

Seems to me larger institutions (either 3rd or 4th wave of shorting OR just plain buying in now on the wave) is driving this... Look at AMC - are we to think that a social network movement is churning over 1 billion in volume? Heck I know a lot of kids are living at home in the basement but that seems unrealistic.

Someone will make huge money by shorting when this does go down but when is the question.
How many times can a firm double down before capital injection bailouts are denied while waiting for the crash - I guess we will see.

It would seem that the less controversial path of the 2 would be the write down - as opposed to refunding monies that would not go over too well in the news. Always easier to say you are not getting something you never had rather than I'm taking what you do have to the taxpayers. [/I] Hence Judge Roberts (I think it was him) commenting >>> So an accounting correction/change to the Plaintiff lawyer?

If they get what they are asking for > the write down (maybe some overpayment back) with the NWS already ended - I agree it goes to $10 min. Beyond that, it will be based on:

1. How much outside capital is injected to dilute commons (the less the better for commons and the longer runway for retained earnings, the less needed) Still get a kick out of how capital raise is needed urgently but they jammed these two companies up for over 10 years and no one seemed to care about the risk
2. If the capital target they must meet moves in either direction up or down for some reason (moving target)

Although this has soooo many twists and turns I would not be surprised if I was completely wrong...

Agreed and I hope you are right and the SCourt does the right thing - that's where my money has been for years and a just decision would put things right at this point.

It just bothers me that they are soooo fixed on a 3rd party capital raise of some sort.
A big Wall Street cash grab - play if you ask me.

They have jammed up these 2 companies for over 10 years where no one seemed overly concerned with the risk and now all of a sudden they need outside money AS FAST AS POSSIBLE and cannot wait to raise it by earnings. AND by the way, just to make sure, we will raise the retained capital targets so high you have no choice.

We have been swimming up stream for a long time and it would be nice to get a little boost from the courts.

ANNND the theme to Jeopardy plays on - maybe forever

I hear you - I have been with this stock for over 2 years... Just new to the board and >> only one screen name.

I often ask myself why I'm still with it and the same answer comes up - what occurred to the twins was not above board and if you believe in the legal system (all-be-it very slow) things "should" be corrected. How much is hard to say.

I guess I don't have much trust in the ever changing government players and think the true/real/final outcome will be decided only by the courts - one way or another.

NWS - Here's what I see for some options in the pending changes at least for this piece of the puzzle.

Right now the twins are slated to breach the current caps (at least Fannie potentially) in the Feb earnings I believe. I don't think SM wants to go back to sweeping so soon especially with SCourt opinion to come early summer.

So, below are some of the paths that could be put into place from best to worse:

1. BEST - NWS is ended for good - no new cap > also the reserves that the twins are to have on hand is not increased again - like they did the last time

2. MED - Most likely they state a new cap before sweep will happen that pushes the can down the road enough at least until the SCourt can yield an opinion > also the reserves that the twins are to have on hand is not increased again - like they did the last time

3. WORSE - Cap is raised to get to SCourt dates AND they raise the capital reserves the twins will need to hold by the estimate of additional profit from here to there - This would be a COMPLETE JOKE but I would not be surprised at anything at this point

Gasparino - well the article about SM meeting with Dems made it onto his twitter.
So either this happen (he is cutting a deal so he can get another job in peace) or Charles is also having the wool pulled over his eyes... Looking like it's going to come down to SCourt...

Crazy > has anyone else had a post deleted for simply stating information of common knowledge?

Anyway, I am not of the opinion that the SCourt offers a ruling tomorrow but the timing of anything from SM (which I would expect to at least lift the Retained Earnings current cap at a minimum) one must admit is sort of strange. (Same day or day after?) I'll tell you this,, if the SCourt does release an opinion tomorrow that would indicate to me that Treasury was made aware prior as well as what the ruling is. I wonder if the Plaintive's would be given that courtesy.

Raising Capital - I guess I don't see/understand how it would be possible to raise capital via (external means versus retained earnings) while lawsuits are still in play. Even put aside 5th court and Supreme Court cases for a moment, if the commons are not handled properly, are we not just going to see yet another lawsuit? Can you/would you have an IPO if the threat of a massive decision is present? Would not some law firm that sees the value come forward and file another takings claim given all the information that has continualy but slowly leaked out on what the government was doing some years ago?

Wall Street Banks...

The 3 words that still scare me with this whole thing.
These guys/gals are not in it for the consultant fees - I still feel Mnuchin and the banks are going to try to structure this 'release" in some way as to require a massive IPO as opposed to retained earnings. The bigger the IPO the smaller the gain for shareholders. Going to be interesting...

What is the Real Plan Here?

To me, the rub here is that the powers that be > Mnuchin / Big Banks... are trying to do this in a way where they get a piece of some sort of IPO/massive capital raise. (Or what they call "quality" 3rd party capital) This would be a huge money maker for those in the know. Raise the Capital targets so high and then issue some sort of timeline to get released that prohibits any other path than outside funding... One big watering down of the current shareholders.

Being a LONG term holder here, I have no desire to see any new IPO or outside money come in or hard rules forcing such an action. Let them retain earnings and eliminating government percent ownership is the best outcome. From there I could care less if anyone trying to do an IPO is blocked by ongoing legal battles forever. Let it go on for years as if it does - every quarter that passes, we are that much closer to needing zero outside monies via retained earnings making this a non-issue. I mean we have come this far and anything from the Supreme Court $$ would be that much faster we get there by retained capital.

In the famous words of Walter from the Big Lebowski > "Dude, am I wrong here?"