Replies to post #518655 on Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[kthomp19]

the problem with Moelis lays in the fact they do recognize the lawsuits

That's a problem?!

it is important that in the next crisis not all their funds can be confiscated

That can never be guaranteed, no matter what handouts the government gives to current shareholders.

in the Moelis 1 plan they did not talk about lawsuits

Wrong. The lawsuits are mentioned at least five times, just search for the word "litigation". The updated plan mentions the outstanding litigations twice. In both papers, they acknowledge that the lawsuits must be settled before anything can go forward.

although they meanwhile figured out an IPO is not possible

Okay, technically it's a secondary offering. It still results in dilution because those who provide the money for a recap will want something for it, namely common shares.

So while looking thru above you will notice all are talking about, unjust, irrational, unlawful and when considering The warrant is bought for $0.00001, and not for the then market price ~$0.78, this is probably correct, as the government cannot confiscate something without return, unless they compensate of course.

The Moelis plan, Bill Ackman, the Collins plaintiffs. What do these things have in common? All of them encourage Treasury to exercise the warrants. None of them think the warrants are illegal. In fact, no outstanding litigation seeks to have the warrants struck down.

MC says "Whatever the policy issue, my first question will always be “what does the statute say?”
So that is a slam dunk for us

There is nothing in HERA that invalidates the warrants.

[Guido2]

Great post ano. Bravo!

[trunkmonk]

the problem with Moelis lays in the fact they do recognize the lawsuits

correct, Ps love it because of all their failing efforts in court.

it is important that in the next crisis not all their funds can be confiscated

they didnt fail last time, they just took what was not theirs and shareholders, common, suffered.

in the Moelis 1 plan they did not talk about lawsuits

Maybe, but Moelis is a Ps lovers dreamed up by Ps, they want to reap what they did not sow.

although they meanwhile figured out an IPO is not possible

companies make secondary offers all the time for decades, its how they generate cash for operations or R&D, or whatever.

So while looking thru above you will notice all are talking about, unjust, irrational, unlawful and when considering The warrant is bought for $0.00001, and not for the then market price ~$0.78, this is probably correct, as the government cannot confiscate something without return, unless they compensate of course.

none of them encourage warrants, its just a way to get resolved and keep them all happy, now that en banc and other cases are out there waiting, and Administration can do it without blood sucking congress and a Treasury and FHFA that obey laws, warrants are just one option until they look at legal ramifications later.

MC says "Whatever the policy issue, my first question will always be “what does the statute say?”
So that is a slam dunk for us

there is nothing in HERA that validates the warrants.

[Guido2]

Carpetbaggers promote the exercise of warrants at this ridiculous price to swindle Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac shareholders.