hardincap

@cherzeca all that has to be done to present a serious political obstacle for mnuchin & otting is to fuel the evil hedge funds narrative (as stevens well knows). i can easily see politicians bent on knocking down this admin (warren coming foremost to mind) pushing hard on this.. and i can easily see this narrative spreading far and wide in msm.

more on collins, we saw that judges who sided with govnt came to their decision from a textualist interpretation of law, whereas willet & brown believed it must be viewed in wholistic context. there were clear indications that the texan judge leans towards the latter, as she struggled with the ramifications fo a conservator who could do literally anything, but we have no idea how the other judges lean. all the positive reactions ive read by shareholders seem to totally miss this point.. its simply presumptuous to believe judges will interpret legal text the same wa aggrieved and motivated shareholders would

i fear moelis plan underestimates the ability of motivated politicians to stymie administrative reform.. how? i dont know but looking at the news these days im sure they can find some way. this execution risk makes me think even with admin coming out in support of a moelis type plan, prefs will still be a far ways off from par collins win will be cleanest path as it gives much helpful political cover, but i no longer dare to get my hopes up on positive sounding oral arg...

i expect otting to reply with the same vague outlines that he gave at fhfa town hall, and repeat that details are forthcoming. the details are a huge deal, i dont think they will be first released in a letter reply format to a congressperson asking for more info

doubtful otting is at liberty to reveal details of the plan before white house is ready to release it

luke, what is this from please? thank you. I've removed it. Saw it on Twitter and posted before I verified if it was accurate or not. I couldn't verify so I have removed it. My mistake. That was from last year. For such strong words you’d expect him to at least hold

fairholme downsized f&f position http://www.fairholmefundsinc.com/Reports/Funds2017Annual.pdf

Phillips' comments put him closer to mba plan than moelis, according to tim howard. philips said if c+w fails he will give it another chance after aug, and gave zero indication that he would consider administrative action. still want to go all in?

also delaware case. what if trump gets impeached? north korea war breaks out? macro economy shock? let alone we dont even know what mnuchin & co are thinking, other than a few vague statements that people interpret to their liking. theres alot of epistemic arrogance on this thread. the ultimate epistemic arrogance is going all in on any stock.

@cherzeca, yuge for corker to specifically call out shareholders and admit they need to be treated fairly. tide has indeed turned

“If this effort falls apart, in a year we’ll have a conservative FHFA director and Trump administration working as aggressively as they can to reduce the government's role in this market, and anyone who cares about progressive housing policy will regret that we let this moment pass without doing more to help.” im trying to take parrott's comment here at face value but its hard

leaked infrastructure plan says nothing about monetizing fnma warrants

certainly won't be friendly to whom? common holders perhaps but i think c+w tipped their hand w/ tacit admission that prefs need to be respected. the republican convention memo, c+w leak and impracticalities of trampling over pref holders leads me to believe the bill will be positive for prefs, but this is admittedly speculation

@investorG, no reason to think we won't see the c+w bill soon-ish (before midterms). if the sources who leaked that prefs may get "par or close to it" are to be believed, this should be a very positive catalyst

^ agree with this. can will be kicked yet again. this is like waiting for godot

have you considered the possibility that you're just wrong on the law?

@luke, im seeing 2.5m volume nov 16,17,18. iirc, there was similar spike in volume and fall in share price just prior to lamberth

on abnormally high volume, so either someone knows something or a fund is liquidating, or both

Where's the smack my head emoticon... Right next to the "I can't believe I didn't load up in September 2017" emoticon ;D We know how well that would have worked prelamberth, pre dc appeals, which is when a lot of ppl did in fact load up.My point is there's more uncertainty and randomness than our irrational brains lead us to believe

And on that note... I am predicting: the missing piece is Trump. Mnuchin will not change his tone until his boss sends a signals. Mnuchin will not respond to Watt, any congressmen or any of the organizations supporting rebuilding capital simply out of loyalty. Only after Trump endorses a plan, supports shareholder's rights or comes out in favor of Fannie/Freddie then Mnuchin will agree to stop the sweep. Trump does not want to be robbed from this victory. It will be him who seals the deal. Everything is aligned. Including the Obama's set up as the most leftist President ever. And we already know how much Trump loves socialists and communists. So let's wait for one of his tweets. Where's the smack my head emoticon...

Well if history is any indicator longs are missing a lot. Just look at all the confident predictions people have made on this board and look how they've nearly all turned out wrong. It never seizes to amaze me how quickly people forget their mistakes and overrate their abilities, esp when it comes to predictions. I also think ppl are overreacting to positive relative change, coming from a low base, and fooled into conflating that with absolute basis

does anyone have any details on how this document came to be formed? how "official" is this? still taken aback and hoping it is for real, bc agree w/ cherzeca, it marginalizes the anti gse loudmouths (we all know who)

feels surreal to read this from the same party that blamed the gses for all the evils in the world. has the tide shifted for good?

hamish hume addressed this, and said settlement wont come w/o policy decisions on what to do with GSEs, which makes sense. given that there hasnt been any decisions yet on policy, settlement remains a fantasy

also i think its reasonable to assume pershing is in active communication with corker & warner (and probably others) on housing finance reform. how could they not be given their position