First, IF IF IF the NWS gets stopped or reversed (possible, if unlikely) wouldn't that put the warrants in full play under your rationale? Also, even if the NWS is not stopped, that is a takings issue, not an ownership issue. So the gov't could stop the NWS when they decide to exercise/sell the warrants. That way they still manage to take the excess dividends during the NWS, then end it when they are ready to boost the value of the enterprises as they cash in on the warrants. I agree that all sounds pretty convoluted, but my point is that if the gov't wants it all, they have shown they can do it under the essentially unlimited powers granted by HERA. Again, there may be a takings claim buried in the whole mess, but who knows what if any real compensation that will provide current shareholders.
MOST IMPORTANTLY ... For everyone who continues to think "well, the gov't can't or won't do that", just ask yourself - who would have EVER thought the gov't could do what they have ALREADY done? Declare cship, force out the board (and brag about how they did it), sign PSPA with 10% rate and 80% warrants, pass HERA with the (hopefully) unconstitutional anti-injunction clause and the infamous use of "may" to redefine conservator duties, sign the NWS because of the death spiral, declare 11,000 docs as privileged, etc, etc., etc. Honestly, the gov't WILL do whatever they want ... and the courts MIGHT enforce the rule of law. Yes, FnF might survive and even prosper, but that doesn't ensure anything for current shareholder. Just look at the last 4+ years. So I still hold my 50K $6/sh. pre-cship shares as I learn a very costly civics lesson about the power of wall street, the corruption of our own elected officials and the razor thin line between the rule of law and a banana republic. If nothing else, my kids will not have to learn this the hard way. shadow
