Wednesday, February 27, 2019 2:10:15 PM
only the buyers ?
give me a break
And the issuers who "plotted the RS and then issuance" are not part of a conspiracy to …………
Assuming the warrants are not exercised:
1) $100B raised at $20 per share (5B shares), new buyers end up with 5B / (5B + 1.8B) = 73.5% of the companies.
2) $100B raised at $5 per share (20B shares), new buyers end up with 20B / (20B + 1.8B) = 91.7% of the companies.
3) $100B raised at $1 per share (100B shares), new buyers end up with 100B / (100B + 1.8B) = 98.2% of the companies.
The government makes no money from any of these. How is #3 a violation of the Fifth Amendment, or any other law? Especially if #1 isn't? What about #2? Violation or not? Where is the tipping point?
Rules of the market are tough when any one group benefits over another
I don't know what this is supposed to mean.
If it's like another post I read, saying that lawsuits will happen if one group is given preferential treatment, I just ask again: what law (section and paragraph number) is being broken by a secondary offering? And why does it depend on the offering price?
(from another post)
How does that dilute the 19.9%
Issuing shares at $1 after a 1:50 reverse split is similar to #3 above. Even without the warrants, current common shareholders end up with 1.8% of the companies.
Recent FNMA News
- Fannie Mae Announces Credit Score Model Updates to Advance Credit Score Modernization • PR Newswire (US) • 04/22/2026 05:02:00 PM
- Fannie Mae Releases February 2026 Monthly Summary • PR Newswire (US) • 03/26/2026 08:05:00 PM
- Fannie Mae Announces Results of Tender Offer for Any and All of Certain CAS Notes • PR Newswire (US) • 03/02/2026 02:00:00 PM
- Fannie Mae Releases January 2026 Monthly Summary • PR Newswire (US) • 02/26/2026 09:05:00 PM
- Fannie Mae Announces Tender Offer for Any and All of Certain CAS Notes • PR Newswire (US) • 02/23/2026 02:00:00 PM
