Replies to post #783177 on Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[NeoSunTzu]

DaJester, you have been a very welcome addition to this board. I value your perspective and enjoy reading your posts. The same goes for Imbellish and now, more recently, real777mellon. BUT you are on a fool's errand if you think you can give your perspectives and leave it at that when it comes to who your post is aimed at. The ignore function is of great value once you have read the same basic opinion dozens of times. In fact, the continual responses you receive from the same suspect party, at least for me, bring down the value of your posts, especially since I am somewhat forced to endure that nonsense on an app where I have yet to enforce a blockade of the suspect party. Again, this is just for or from my perspective, and not directed at what anyone else should do. I suspect you and I, and many others as well, know what latest letter agreement entails, how difficult it is to fund a legitimate lawsuit, how difficult it is to have a court recognize one's standing, and on and on and on. The stench and hubris of an intellectually dishonest pedant who feels it necessary to respond in bulk to many who have not even engaged said pedant, as if said pedant is the arbiter of all things c'ship - correct, incorrect, legal, political, financial - seems to me the quintessential reason the ignore function exists.

Some admiminstration will soon be forced to recognize the housing market mechanism will eventually run up against efficiency and economic realities that FHFA and Treasury are not suited to navigate, and this should be LONG before FnF is able meet the captial requirements on their own. Then there WILL be a new letter agreement overriding the current. The new agreement will have to recognize economic, financial, and political realities, and in some ways, long standing shareholder rights - especially given the way they have handled THIS c'ship (forget AIG, Citi, and the other corrupt, self-serving banking interests) or it will be just the beginning of a new, corrupt fiasco - ushering in an era of government overreach. At the very least, the spirit of the Takings clause will have been murdered.

[kthomp19]

If this were true, neither you nor I should be invested in common or JPS.

Those economic rights can be restored if Treasury chooses to allow it. Anyone who owns either juniors or commons is banking on that happening.

It's also why I own the juniors instead of the commons: the juniors only need Treasury to convert or write off the seniors, though a writeoff is better. The commons have to have a writeoff.

The commons and juniors both trade like options. The juniors are a OTM call spread (with a $33B spread, equal to the total junior pref LP), while the commons are a pure call at the higher strike price of the juniors' spread.

This is not true. You would have to show that the agreement violates the implied covenant of the shareholder agreement. There is no criteria to compare it to any other harm.

The shareholder agreement is informed by all changes in law, regulations, and relevant contracts at the time of the alleged breach. That's what Lamberth said. A shareholder just prior to the letter agreement in 2019 or 2021 could only reasonably expect the status quo that existed just before the letter agreement to continue. That includes the 2012 full cash sweep NWS.