Replies to post #15048 on Fannie Mae Preferred S (FNMAS)

[JosephS]

I agree, rosen. To expect to take the entire company for support(that was charged 10% interest with a 79.9% warrant) is laughable.

It would be like Warren Buffett saying that he deserves Goldman Sachs, GE and BAC for giving them support in '08. That without his support, they would have been bankrupt.

While it may be true, it cannot be done in hindsight. Also.... No shareholders would have taken the deal to be wiped for support for the business. They would have done like Lehman and said: "screw you, I would rather go bankrupt(as a shareholder) and take my chances of getting something then give you the company for zero compensation."(AKA nothing) That is why the lawsuits have merit. No shareholder is going to willingly give up ownership rights for zero dollars. For Geitner or anyone else to say that it is so, doesn't make it so.

For them to say that the board/DeMarco/whoever agreed to it for the bondholders is also laughable. Just wait until one of the staffers tells the gov't that they won't lie under oath. That always seems to put pressure on the situation.

There is no way they didn't talk about the DTA and loan loss reserves in August, 2012. Somebody is going to sing eventually.....

Are we giving up our shares "for the good of the country"? No Comrade!!! I am not.

Doc Emmett Brown is not getting into the delorean and taking us September 1, 2008. The deal was not for the whole company. Paulson publicly stated that shareholders were still "alive". It was on paper and publicly stated. They need to give just compensayion if they are taking the property. Otherwise, releasing them is the legal, moral and ethical thing to do.