InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 0
Posts 5082
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 08/26/2012

Re: ZZ Fannie post# 354497

Friday, 09/30/2016 5:34:51 AM

Friday, September 30, 2016 5:34:51 AM

Post# of 795256
I actually agree with your post 100%. It would be disingenuous for me to claim some moral superiority when I bought depressed shares in Fannie preferred at heavily devalued costs and, likewise to others, expect a nice eventual payoff, over time. When the tech bubble burst I bought tons of Amazon.com shares at $10.15 and held until they breached $250, so sure those big wins like AAL are worth a celebration. Nothing wrong with buy-low/sell-high.

What I have a huge issue with is the mob mentality that has gripped speculative investors and emboldened ludicrous conspiracy theories, charges of criminal behavior against public officials that, for the most part, were just trying to do their jobs and a veritable circus of litigation. Much of that litigation was 95% fluff and 5% fact, largely seeking some huge damage award because their bet on an investment didn't work out for them. They made the choice to buy or hold the stock. They own that decision. But they choose to sue the government for $ billions.

When I make a bad investment, and I have made plenty of them, I write it off as a bad choice and move on to the next investment. If my FNMAS shares become worthless, I will only blame myself. Foaming at the mouth and ranting about or threatening Federal officials, bad banks, lousy regulators, sloppy accounting, ineffective audits, ad nauseum only blame shifts the bad decisions off the backs of investors. The TRUTH is that all that bad stuff has been around forever, and small investors have always run the risk of victimization and losses or unattained profits at the hands of government, banks and so forth.

Read the Berkowitz article Navy just posted. He says he just wants the dividends restored. Read Ackman's analysis that commons should be worth around $20. These are reasonable expectations. These do not require $ billions upon $ billions in judgements to attain. When Berko says he wants to be treated like AIG, compare that case to the GSEs. The only consequential litigation in AIG was the Starr suit, not two dozen GSE suits, many of them seeking class action status. After Benmosche paid back their bailout and a healthy surplus, the government rescinded their warrants. That might have happened here, too, without the uncertainties from all that litigation. Then AIG did a 1/10 reverse split to regain NYSE listing eligibility. Shares trade, today, at healthier share prices and even a small, restored dividend. That's what Berko says he wants here, too. But that is NOT some enormous gainer like the eponymous $179.00 Fannie Mae S/P expectation that keeps getting stickied, hereabouts.

That's my epistle for today. Thanks for the conversation. This kind of discussion on Fannie Mae is actually helpful, especially to new players in the game.

JMHO.