G.Bradford continues to write lies in his SA articles. By the way, the compensation for Punitive damages requested yesterday (0.5% rate on half a JPS par value during 15 years), represents an effective 0.254% IRR on a JPS par value, so it's slightly higher, not lower as I wrote, than a 0.25% rate. The articles from Bradford are included, as they aren't simple posts on a blog or on a message board. Bradford has an editor, he gets a monetary compensation and they are echoed by many media outlets. Like others that write books, letters, financial analyses, etc.(formal documents), peddling the Government theft story for stock price manipulation.
Notwithstanding that it's been explained a thousand times that: -Bradford can't claim that FnF are retaining earnings, if these are wiped out with the offset when the SPS LP is increased for free in the same amount, currently concealed when FnF don't post these gifted SPS on their Balance Sheets. A Financial Statement fraud for which we request a compensation in an all-in settlement. -The Warrant was issued for free (like in the previous point, another offset was debited from an account in the core capital, Additional Paid-In Capital account, which is barred in the conservator's Rehab power) to dodge the prerequisites on purchases of securities by UST in the Law, which could only be (iii) to protect the taxpayer (collateral of its investments in SPS). It's also barred in the Charter's Fee Limitation of the United States (The PROHIBITION in capital letters, is an essential part of the Charter dynamics, except a rate on redeemable obligations at a small spread over Treasuries, in exchange for their Public Mission that makes them take on more credit risk and/or not properly compensated. FnF are not AIG). This is why the Warrant is considered an illegal collateral. -A jury's verdict can't be appealed because it's a simple statement by "8 random citizens". Only the judgment is appealable and judge Lamberth hasn't entered a judgment yet for the reason that I explained yesterday: capital distributions are restricted for undercapitalized enteprises, another statutory provision that the Tipp-Ex Gang covers up. -"The Capital Framework says they are undercapitalized". Really? Because it's not just undercapitalized as in the Capital Classification of Undercapitalized enterprises. The thing is that their official Core Capital stands at $-83 billion as of end of June, 2023, and, with the offset (reduction of Retained Earnings) for the $111 billion worth of gifted SPS pointed out before, it's $-194 billion. So, it's deep in the read and no matter how low the capital requirement Bradford wants it to be. FnF would be declared Critically Undercapitalized, had the Critical Capital level been published, because it's missing in the ERCF table, of which I'm going to write in my next comment here. Bradford is one of those that want to meet the capital requirements with their Net Worth, instead of Core Capital and Total Capital, as defined in the FHEFSSA. Definitions that the Mnuchin's Treasury recommended Congress to repeal in his 2019 UST plan. Now, the same gang are after the other capital metrics, like TIER 1 Capital, explained in the next point. -The Request for Input isn't about reviewing the ERCF tables (Capital Rule). It's about the upfront g-fees. Their capital requirements are just fine because they are risk-based and pursuant to International standards, Basel framework. The one that isn't risk-based, the Leverage ratio of TIER 1 Capital greater than 2.5% of Total Assets, is well below the 4% for the U.S. banking sector and 3% in Basel. So, the "bank-like" rhetoric is simply false. The gang now even puts into question the capital metrics like TIER 1 Capital because it has regulatory deductions (Retained Earnings from DTA has a limit in the Capital ratio, etc), based on Basel as well. In this world we need rules, yet the fraudsters cover them up or want to set them aside, for their own rule: No rules, the MOB's playground.
Bradford misses the whole picture because he works for the hedge funds, eager for increasing the capital needs in FnF for stock offerings. Ain't gonna happen: Their Common Equity built during conservatorship is held in escrow according to the law, regulations and basic Finance, and as seen in my signature image below.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
