News Focus
News Focus
icon url

The Man With No Name

01/12/23 1:30 PM

#744339 RE: The Man With No Name #744335

Just to clarify, outside of receivership or bankruptcy.
icon url

JOoa0ky

01/12/23 2:20 PM

#744343 RE: The Man With No Name #744335

Since you've already closed out of the position, mind me asking where do you currently see a better opportunity?

Or rather, where are you allocating all of the money that was in FnF.

There is no way to wipe out juniors outside of receivership. None, nadda.

Juniors could agree to a haircut, though, as you know. The problem with a voluntary haircut is what to do with those who don't agree....more litigation or a pre-packed receivership with those remaining claims who want 100% of face value.

Commons can be wiped out 6 ways to Sunday. They can still retain their 100% interest and be worth sub-penny.

Ultimately who gets what will be determined by the Enterprise Value of the GSEs as valued by the market in a re-IPO.

icon url

bradford86

01/12/23 2:58 PM

#744355 RE: The Man With No Name #744335

Biden admin musical chairs inside wh and treasury still happening and you have given up on admin reform. Right as it is about ready to show its face
icon url

kthomp19

01/13/23 10:29 AM

#744491 RE: The Man With No Name #744335

There is no way to wipe out juniors outside of receivership. None, nadda.


Just to clarify, outside of receivership or bankruptcy.



How would a bankruptcy work? Since FnF have positive net worth I would imagine that bondholders would not be part of the process at all. They will be 100% money good no matter what happens.

My main questions are: can the juniors' contracts be bypassed if FnF continue in their current corporate forms (i.e. no newcos)? And can newcos be formed that inherit FnF's charters without running them through receivership?

Juniors could agree to a haircut, though, as you know. The problem with a voluntary haircut is what to do with those who don't agree....more litigation or a pre-packed receivership with those remaining claims who want 100% of face value.



I have been assuming that the juniors might be convinced to take a small to moderate haircut in order to actually unlock the value of their shares, but cannot be forced to take a large haircut. It's that assumption that I am trying to justify with these questions.