Replies to post #729314 on Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[MannSinger]

In 2016, SPS+10% was NOT paid hence use warrant to recouping taxpayer investment was considered.

Now SPS+ 10%+ $26B extra paid. Hence, use of warrants is more than "recouping taxpayer investment."

Even if, Gov use warrants then Gov needs to return partial warrants equivalent to $26B extra paid.

[kthomp19]

So if warrants give govt ownership.
Then mnunchin referred to warrants.

Ownership can come from a senior-to-common conversion too. From page 8 of the filing:

Indeed, for any common shares held by Treasury to have significant value (whether from exercising Treasury’s warrants, converting the senior preferred stock to common, or both)

The filing mentioning the warrants does not at all mean that the warrants are the only way for Treasury to get common shares.

And if selling warrants ( ownership) to recoup investment.
Then calabria was referring to profiting off warrant exercise and sale of common.

Calabria said selling shares but didn't specify that they would come from the warrants.

You get common ownership from warrants.
Mnunchin referring to govt ownership.
You recoup taxpayer investment from selling common stock that you gained from warrant exercise.

Alternate version:

You get common ownership from a senior-to-common conversion.
Mnuchin referring to govt ownership.
You recoup taxpayer investment from selling common stock that you gained from senior-to-common conversion.

See, it's just as valid either way.

[Patswil]

The Fed Govt cannot own a profit making company and you know it. Otherwise everything they do going forward would be under scrutiny for manipulation

"As these statements reflect, Treasury intended to exercise its common stock warrants-- which would result in Treasury owning 79.9% of the Companies' common stock-- and then sell that common stock to private investors."