I have read the reports.. and the "report" that you attached which is one sided view of what happened IMO. Were the GSE's leveraged..yes..that's their business. Did they have 44 billion at the end of 07 as capital buffer? yes according to 10K's. Did they need that much to weather the storm? No..they only had 2 bad years that didn't amount to 44 billion UNLESS you took into account the accounting practices forced on them. I am not arguing that they had a couple bad years..may not argue the original deal of conservatorship ( still out on that and hoping more releases shines more light ). I definitely don't believe that the 3rd amendment was either necessary or right! I own a lot of commons (6 figure) as I believe that is the best return. I have read and understand your thesis on the prfd's and that works for you. Your take on the profitability makes me wonder what you are trying to accomplish as the GSE's have been profitable even after the DTA's..the hedging, which is pretty std, has mostly hurt as interest rates have declined and yet they still show a profit albeit not as large. I fully agree that they are not capitalized enough but whose FAULT is that?? Release them and let them capitalize! Your comment about the taxpayer not being a sugar daddy again has me confounded as the GSE's are a PRIVATE company no different than any whose shareholders, both large and small, should profit and hold the company accountable. I believe the taxpayers understand that to have a 30 year mortgage there are some trade offs and if the gov't didn't want them to be private MAYBE they shouldn't have sold them to finance a war! Further, the taxpayers HAVE been paid back had this been treated like any or ALL the other bailed out companies. But again...if you feel that way WHY ARE YOU INVESTED IN THESE?!? You still need a similar action that would raise the common to raise the preferred unless you are hoping for liquidation???