Replies to post #40729 on Freddie Mac-No Politics (FMCC)

[Blushing green]

Thanks Obit.

[Blushing green]

This does not relate to the post I replied to but a new question.

Preferred's are non-cumulative so any dividends that were not paid in the past cannot be paid in the future. Dividends were paid to senior pref stock (treasury), so technically dividends were paid - just not to the jr pref stock. If the courts rule in favour of plaintiffs (and reverse NWS) could the period where treasury collected 100% of dividends be considered as dividends being paid (just to the wrong parties) and then the jr pref receive the dividends from the period where treasury took it all? I imagine it wouldn't be 100% of the income but enough to pay off the quarterly amount to the jr pref. and then keep the remaining.

I've read a lot about how the preferreds dividends are non-cumulative and since they were paid nothing in the past they will get nothing in the future based off those old dividends. What I don't understand is that dividends were paid, so the preferreds should get prior dividends if ruled upon.

Above is assuming a settlement between... say Fairholme and the gov't.