muscleman

So you think as long as the treasury plan exists, it has to be bullish and make preferred to par quickly? Can there be a case where the plan requires 8 years to get preferreds to par? Or can the plan be in such a huge resistance by the big banks that it is not able to raise the equities, and it was forced to be delayed over and over? The IBankers want the IPO fee for sure, but if they could kill it and take over, the longer term profits are much greater. Could they be trying this and delaying it post 2020 to see if they can get a Democratic president in and give them what they wanted?

I am not good at FA so I really have no answers to this. But I know most FA investors build a bull, a bear and a baseline case whenever they invest in anything. Mind sharing your bear case for the treasury plan?

For those who are interested, my TA goes from neutral to negative. I am expecting a break down here once we get a close below the $11 level on FMCKJ. If it holds, then we may get a base here and go up. So the bull case isn't dead yet, but I assign a 30% probability to it. (And you get a 100%-130% gain when you hit the jack pot of this 30% probability winner). I don't short stocks, so I just watch it for fun here until I turn bullish again. Regarding FA, I know little about it. I just read my TA and make up the story for the FA. So my current story is: 1. Treasury plan will be a big disappointment. 2. Collins will fail. (I think the most sensible explanation for Calabria to change his tone on the FHFA constitutionality is that he already knows the judges are writing negative outcomes for Collins, so he thought he had better throw in the constitutionality defense to give himself until 2024 to do the admin reform, which he should expect to get because judges writing negative outcomes = siding with government = agreeing with him that FHFA is constitutional.)

Isn't that like #4 in the series? what do you mean by #4 in the series

OMG. No way. Our cheerleader Glen just wrote a book about this! :o https://www.amazon.com/Adequately-Capitalized-Second-Million-Fanniegate/dp/1089209967/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=first+second+million&qid=1565625663&s=gateway&sr=8-1 "The Treasury Plan that is coming in the next month or so and it is how I plan to make my first second million dollars. Today is 8/8/2019. Most authors write about what's happened. I try to write about what's going to happen before it happens while it still could be relevant to your life." ;D

Open an account in TD AM and use their ThinkOrSwim. I find this to be the best screener I could find. Highly customizable if you learn some thinkscript and code your own rules. Of course it depends on what criteria you want to screen with. ThinkOrSwim doesn’t have much fundamental data to screen with. If you rely heavily on fundamentals, I recommend portfolio123. Not free, but extremely powerful.

Is this Maloni 2.0? :o after all this time I think the law may not. My theory is that Calabria always knows a negative ruling is coming, so he thought, well, in that case, the judges had better rule on the FHFA being constitutional as well, so he could have until 2024 to finish Admin reform, just in case Trump loses in 2020.

Is this Maloni 2.0? :o

What's the track record of blank check companies after they acquire? It seems to me that they have the incentive to make the acquisition happen, which means tendency to over paid and may also raise a lot of debt. Do you know any SPACs that have done very well? How about the statistics in general?

That’s nice. Congrats! I was just trying to point out things that as a trader, I’d be cautious with. Since you are a long term investor, I guess things may work differently, and further discussion will result in nothing more than frustration, so I’ll just stop here.

One theory I read is that someone knows that the Fifth Circuit is going to affirm the panel decision and that the price movement is similar to that before the initial Lamberth decision in 2014 that sent the shares tumbling. I wasn't following FnF at that point, but the chart does bear out the similarity. It is not the same pattern. Back then, preferreds closed Sept 2014 below the 5 month moving average for the 1st time in over 2 years. They solidly broke long term support (before the ruling). In today's monthly close, fmckj and fnmas are trading above long term support. fnmat needs to regain it at $10.68 before eod. Not that it means anything. We could still get some shitty news tomorrow and suffer another Lamberth. Why do you treat the 5 month moving average as the holy grail here? It was broken a few times in the past few years, and you never sold. Isn't the 5 month MA just noise for you? Or is it another way to rationalize holding the stock? And once it is broken, stop talking about it and find another talking point to rationalize holding the stock? I don't mean to offend you. Just some challenging thoughts. ;) And Midas, you kept asking me for names. I kept forgetting who said what. At least I remember now about rros's 5 month MA comments. Again, I want to reiterate that I have no intention to "Hope anyone would lose money". This is just an anonymous internet forum that no one knows who the other guy is.

Where does this quote come from? Or are you simply making baseless statements?

:) That must have been hard to admit. I am open to changing my mind as always, just like I can be very bullish and a few weeks later be very bearish. BTW, I still have some concerns regarding IB's tauted execution quality. I see this: https://www.fidelity.com/trading/execution-quality/overview and this: https://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/index.php?f=1340 There seems to be some discrepancies among these numbers. Interestingly, both reports were done by IHS Markit. I asked IB about this and asked in second half of 2018, where did Fidelity stand. They refused to disclose. Fidelity provides an easier to read format in FIF: https://www.fidelity.com/bin-public/060_www_fidelity_com/documents/FIF-FBS-retail-execution-quality-stats.pdf While IB argued that IB's report was for Q3, Q4 of 2018 and Fidelity's report included Q1 this year, I don't see any material difference between these quaters in the Citadel securities report. https://s3.amazonaws.com/citadel-wordpress-prd102/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2016/09/06202722/FIF-Rule-605-606-WG-CitadelSecurities_Retail-Execution-Quality-Stats_Q4_2018.pdf https://s3.amazonaws.com/citadel-wordpress-prd102/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2016/09/09175131/FIF-Rule-605-606-WG-CitadelSecurities_Retail-Execution-Quality-Stats_Q1_2019.pdf Keep in mind that IHS Markit was paid by IB to do the report, so they have to come up with some good statistics even though the numbers may be massaged.

how, specifically, will it disappoint in your view? and how confident are you in this: 50%? 80%? lets talk in probabilistic terms Good question. I am only 50% confident in this. I think the bull case is not died yet.

Well..... What part of his tweet do you think is suspicious? He only said one thing: "Treasury plan has been in white house for weeks". Do you think this statement is not credible? It seems inline with when Craig Philips left.

Sunrider, my intention is to help contribute to this thread, instead of messing up with people for fun. I am pretty sure showing you output from a blackbox will not help you at all. No strategy can be correct 100% of the time, and when it is wrong, you will start to doubt it. It will only let you second guess your own decisions. I've seen a psychological study about this. For a black box that's right 50% of the time, traders following it will soon start to take the signals 50% of the time. For a black box that's right 80% of the time, traders following it will soon start to take the signals 80% of the time. The % of time traders taking the signal is in line with the % of it being right. That's how human brains are constructed. I think maybe the other way I could contribute is to share my FA, which some of you think may be helpful because it offers a different view from your main stream view. I am not as good as doing FA but I use my TA to guide what my FA should be, so it could offer you a different alternative view that may help. Notice this tweet: "The Treasury plan to reform FanFred is at the White House, has been for weeks. Will it see the light of day? Yes. but who gets to see it first? And will it be set in motion?" My current view on FA since this tweet is that the treasury plan will be a disappointment. Jul 15 2019 minus "weeks" probably implies early June. Stock started declining around then. What a coincidence. Later we saw Calabria's maneuver in the Collins' case for FHFA constitutionality, and his 2024 statement. Those probably give some hints on the treasury plan too.

I agree. Well said. I guess this is why I should stop talking about TA. Still..... Just for fundamental investors, I still think it is important to be open minded, and constantly look for ways to improve the process, and be disciplined. When I was a fundamental investor from 2009 to 2018, I was doing lazy and lousy work, eager to put my cash to work, and once I buy a stock, I would rationalize it as hard as I could to hold on to the position, because, hey, selling at a loss means "lack of conviction", which is not supposed to happen for great investors. Eventually, I took big losses on certain names. I already realized the problem with TA so I stopped talking about it, but I wanted to share with you my own pain and hope it helps with some of you. I don't see how my comment on "If you don't learn, you get slapped by Mr. market" upset people. I got slapped several times by Mr. market by taking big losses on some names in those 9 years, and vowed to not to let it happen again. Maybe it was because Midas kept thinking I was referring to him when I was not. Getting back to the GSEs..... I think the probability is high that the treasury plan is a disappointment, which propped Calabria to file in Collins for FHFA constitutionality position to buy himself time. Collins ruling itself is not something I could speak of though.

Are you ever not bullish on GSEs? ;)

BTW, I went back to IB in January this year. I find it too much trouble to place multiple orders in various accounts, and it is far easier to use a friend and family account to manage multiple accounts at once. Individual account, IRA account, family member accounts. Also they pay good cash interest, while a lot of other brokers pay nothing. I learned the lesson and would not buy any foreign bonds any more. So that's fine to stick with them.

I am a US user so probably not very applicable, but I've seen other Canadian users saying that they support buying US stocks in these accounts but not stocks from other countries.

Midas, I made a mistake and should not have said these words, ok? Does that calm you down and make you feel better? I was lucky to be trained by a great trader and this is the way he communicates with me all the time, and I never felt his words were "passive-agressive" or "condescending" a tiny bit. If you feel it differently, then I apologize. I never thought I needed to "name names", and "refer to specific posts", because I thought people need to ask themselves what they need to improve. By asking me to "name names", and "refer to specific posts", it is just another way to defend themselves and say, no, you are wrong, I am not doing anything wrong. Then another round of rationalization. There is no point of doing that. Perhaps a nicer way to say this, and more acceptable to most people is this: Do you think your current strategy and process has any shortcomings that you could improve after the recent GSE down turn? Can we have an honest discussion about this? To those really long term investors, maybe there are none. Maybe they are already doing well, and they are confident that they can continue to do well. But are there anyone who think they found some shortcomings in their existing process who wants to list it here for an honest discussion?

You should not need view point diversity. All you need to do is to find out what best works for you, and keep improving on that. What I see from some folks here are the short comings: 1. Do a small amount of research, and instead of working out various scenarios, just focus on the optimal scenario (Par value, Par value, Par value!) 2. When things go against him, rationalize on why it is still a buy, and possible even a better buy here. 3. Tell himself to never sell, because that means lack of conviction. The greatest traders do really hard work, and be open minded about the various outcomes, while amateurs do small amount of lousy work, and be rigid about the outcome. When other people mention different alternative outcomes, he immediately treat these people as threatening, and use hostile languages against them, which is a reflection of his fear against these possible outcomes. I've been learning investing since 2009. The above is exactly what I was doing myself for the first 9 years. I am no longer making these mistakes. My previous posts only served one purpose. I wanted to use this real time example to show people what mistakes they could be making, and how to fix those, and also use this live example to remind myself never to repeat these mistakes again. A few people got pissed. That's fine. Mr. Market will teach them.

I will message you. I am not gonna talk about TA here anymore.

Sure. I was trying to help people. It didn't work. That's ok. I guess there is still one thing that I think is really important to point out. Ego is the least important thing in this game. I'd rather get slapped by any random person online than by Mr. market. I know I can't avoid being slapped by Mr. market 100% of the time, but I want to minimize it. I am surprised to see people getting upset when they got criticized. For me, I welcome any criticism, and I question my own process everyday, which is what eventually made me abandon the pure FA approach. I wanted to make the point that making money in the stock market is a serious game. When Mr. market slaps you, he will not gently pat your head and say, it's ok baby, let's start again. Ego driven investors are so eager to be right that they would stick to their original view to death, and whenever things came against their view, they would just keep rationalizing those. I used to be one of those folks, but I am not anymore. I was ultra bullish on FNMAS and even told my mundane friends and my boss at work to buy it, until early June when I switched to bearish and sold out. I recommend people here read the book "what i learned losing a million dollars" and see if you can benefit from it.

We could see a trading bottom today. there's no urgency to buy and plenty of people urgently want out. It looks like it was the bottom, as per this weekly close. Which topped the 34 weekly ma. Likely, we will regain the 5 monthly ma for the Jrs. FNMAS sits at $11.27 and FMCKJ at $ 11.16 and continue the bullish run started on October last year. Hopefully, nobody has sold their shares. Recent comments by Gasparino on Calabria (thank you, Luke) may indicate the administration is still on the side of shareholders trying to put together the fact that c-ship is hard to terminate (or cannot) while shareholders must be made right. I can totally see the FHFA trying to achieve some kind of co-existence between Treasury (taxpayers) and us, with Treasury agreeing on sharing profits. This looks like a "second attempt". A new twist to throw us a bone. it may be premature for confidence that this week was the bottom as actual events / quotes carry more weight than speculative tweets. Yes, premature, you are correct. Eyes on the monthly close and more definite news. Now that I have decided not to talk about TA anymore here, you are suddenly a TA expert and advise people what to look for now? ;) You are just using TA to rationalize holding your positions. That's the reality.