Replies to post #727772 on Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[M I A]

Artificially suppressed prices based on lies should not be used by any reasonable person to come up with a fair value estimation for a takings. Plus, I don't fully believe it should be possible to not only use an artificial number that is influenced easily. Especially on an OTC exchange, but go back in time and choose any low number that makes it costs them the least to pay off.

What about this nonsense of going back in time and picking some really low number and waiting until courts force them into it and Fannie and Freddie are effin huge and then saying, "well, oh alright, we took them okay. When they were worth $1Billion MarketCap for both companies and NOW they are worth $360Billion." "Oh well, you can't punish us for the money WE made since taking, ONLY for the money WE took when we decide when we took it. And according to OUR calculations and "accountants" we only owe you $2Billion." "Cool. Next."

Supreme C then answers with "glad this worked out for all parties." and then thanks the govt for all their cooperation.


What a stretch.

If they take it now, then it should be what they are Fairly worth now. Not what it prints.
Just like JP should not be paid what they are printing. Bunch of rubbish. Full par and full value if you take it. And they have not done a secondary offering and have not used the warrants. So Common holders, 1.8Billion shares (est), own 100%. And JP are entitled to full par about $34B (est) plus any damages. That's right folks. You take it now, you pay what it's worth now. Not what OTC prints. What a joke.


Just a thought. MO

[FFFacts]

Yes I will give it to you because that is the remedy for a nationalization takings claim under the law. You can yap you gums about how unfair everything was the courts don't give a shit they will follow the letter of the law.

[clarencebeaks21]

Robert I respect your view as always. But IMO FFacts is stating the most likely remedy. So again all this is my opinion and I am not practicing law here or giving advice here. Just sharing ‘one mans couch view.’

[kthomp19]

Don't give me your JPS/KT answer of 20cents/share or WHATEVER the price was at the time of the Takings!

I don't appreciate the attempt to disqualify the number via an implicit accusation of bias on the part of who said it.

In a takings case, the government is only liable for that the property owner lost. What the government gains is 100% irrelevant. See the quote in the middle of this post I just wrote showing four Supreme Court opinions that say so.

The last open-market traded price of a share of stock is the ONLY objective measure of that share's worth.

These things are true no matter who says them.

Why? Because if you think that the artificial loan loss reserves and a multitude of other FHFA regulator induced accounting shenanigans like the write down and subsequent write up of the $50B tax credits won't come into play, I've got a bridge for sale for you in Brooklyn.

If you're referring to current takings cases, only two (Washington Federal and Kelly) are about anything other than just the NWS, and all of them are on life support: if the Supreme Court denies cert then all those cases will be dead.

Washington Federal only seeks the drop in share price from the day before to the day of conservatorship as damages, and only for whoever held the shares that day before (September 5 2008).

Kelly is a derivative case, and the things you mention could matter there because it's about damage to the companies rather than the shareholders.

If you're referring to potential future takings claims over Treasury exercising the warrants or converting the seniors to commons, what you brought up won't matter.