orthopa

cherzeca You may have already answered this and its lost in this thread and my head but what do you think is delaying an inevitable settlement? There are well known steps that have to occur. Milbank as you suggest will put in their $.02. HL is going to say the lawsuits must be settled, and all parties involved have same end goal. What is holding Treasury up in your opinion from throwing in the towel? Selia ruling? Political cover? Easily accessible foot dragging just because? I guess my specific question is what forces treasury's hand in your opinion? Lawsuits? Combined incentive? Politics? Calendar? Im no where near a lawyer but I believe you also said once in law things drag forever and then happen all at once. Is this what you see in Q3-Q4? Thanks

True, whats going on in NYS if not shelter in place is a close cousin as people do seem to actually be listening.

Perfect bully move here..Fair enough, I will revisit Third Grade - what will you revisit? Here is a tweet from your Governor. "People will die if we get cocky about reopening. To those who are upset about our careful approach — don't blame your local official. Blame me." Things were moving quickly back in March and still are to some degree but Cuomo didnt think a shelter in place would work on 3/20/2020. A couple days later he did and now says it can't be lifted unless certain measures are taken even though now it seems the shelter in place may responsible for the majority of all continued infections in NYC. In reality all involved have blame. https://www.ksla.com/2020/03/20/california-becomes-first-state-order-lockdown/ In New York, where coronavirus has killed 32 people, Gov. Andrew Cuomo said he has no plans to impose a statewide mandate. “My job is to make sure that the state has a coordinated plan and it works everywhere,” he said this week. “I don’t think shelter-in-place really works.” I am sure information changed and he recalculated. Also the CA decisions were bold at that time and that might have helped change the response. Would you say that the guy is atleast trying his best to manage the damn curveball that this disease is? I think everyone involved is trying to. But since everyone alive in the US is dealing with a pandemic like this for the first time, all involved have been wrong and right at the same time. Trump, Fauci, Cuomo, pick anyone here. Everyone is guessing and the guesses change daily. Its impossible to be in charge in any position and have perfect record in managing this. We all have horrible predictive capabilities, we are human. No different then investing, ha! ;D

You blame the lack of trust developing on scientists and media when everyday your boy gets on his own soapboax and starts lying and yelling. Has no medical experience yet does not take medical community seriously. What is his record here as an executive. He may be winning but in the end the con game helps no one, not even his own supporters. So the community is getting obliterated because peoples lives were saved at a huge inconvenience? Wow you talk about admission. How about the Big Daddy admits he fked up on this royally! Playing the Cohen book, he will never admit to anything. How he thought the geometric progression will work in the reverse direction as long as he is blustering. Not saying Trump is smart or has added value. The political side of this isn’t super interesting. The trust thing is real. When it it widely declared that we are flattening the curve to keep hospitals from being overrun, and the hospitals are empty and firing people.... how do you not at that point update the model to relax social distancing. You can change the narrative (“actually we aren’t worried about hospitals we just want to minimize total death count”) but then you have a trust issue because people can remember what the argument was from a couple months ago, the argument used to garner compliance and convince people to sacrifice their economic livelihood. Maybe making that sacrifice for a demographic they aren’t part of (elderly and ill) wasn’t sufficient motivation so the ante was upped by saying no this is everyone’s issue of the hospitals are fucked. But here we are and if we try to change the argument now it just makes it seem like the old argument was manipulative. If we don’t change the argument then we should be relaxing social measuring in areas with minimal hospital resource usage. You sort of have to pick one. Somehow the argument has also gone from we have to bend the curve knowing a large portion of the populatoin will get infected and we have to spread it out....To now we cant re open because people WILL get infected and are being put at risk. When did we ever believe that a large portion of the population was not going to be exposed? I have read many that think the early to open states are foolish and "crazy". Did people really think they were going to out run this virus forever? Just like after 911 those that went to flying planes were foolish, didnt know the risks, were naive, "must have wanted to die". Same thing we are seeing now.

Perfect bully move here..Fair enough, I will revisit Third Grade - what will you revisit? Here is a tweet from your Governor. "People will die if we get cocky about reopening. To those who are upset about our careful approach — don't blame your local official. Blame me." Things were moving quickly back in March and still are to some degree but Cuomo didnt think a shelter in place would work on 3/20/2020. A couple days later he did and now says it can't be lifted unless certain measures are taken even though now it seems the shelter in place may responsible for the majority of all continued infections in NYC. In reality all involved have blame. https://www.ksla.com/2020/03/20/california-becomes-first-state-order-lockdown/ In New York, where coronavirus has killed 32 people, Gov. Andrew Cuomo said he has no plans to impose a statewide mandate. “My job is to make sure that the state has a coordinated plan and it works everywhere,” he said this week. “I don’t think shelter-in-place really works.”

Yeah a lot did, esp BAC and the Buffett deal. If capital rule really released in late May maybe the PSPA amendment is pulled forward a little if there is a big kumbaya? Per ACG by July 4th FnF capital advisors should be picked. PSPA amendment could maybe be a q3 thing but dont see how it could happen before capital plans are drawn up. It seems the emerging collective thought is a realization that in the end all parties involved want the same outcome so why continue all the fighting? The sticky situation is the $$$ though.

https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/review/?uri=urn%3Aaaid%3Ascds%3AUS%3A2c1c44a8-7097-46ca-874f-a05130964e2f Rosners note

https://thefly.com/landingPageNews.php?id=3076666 While it is early on in the economic downturn and many unknowns remain, Fannie Mae (FNMA) and Freddie Mac (FMCC) are well positioned for a recessionary environment and can emerge stronger on the other side, Nomura Instinet analyst Matthew Howlett tells investors in a research note. The COVID-19 crisis puts a greater urgency on policy makers to raise private capital, and Republicans and Democrats are more united on the future role of the government sponsored entities given the disruption in the mortgage market, contends the analyst. He believes this was evident by yesterday's announcement regarding servicing advance obligations. The crisis is also likely to unite the various parties involved toward a settlement, "sooner rather than later, as a sense of urgency has likely increased on both sides," says Howlett. The analyst believes Fannie and Freddie are ready for a recession and reiterates Buy ratings on both stocks with price targets of $5 and $4.50, respectively. https://www.thirdpointoffshore.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Third-Point-Q1-2020-Investor-Letter-TPOI-1.pdf Loeb notes GSEs paid back and investors need trust in gov. Looks like FnF will charge to take on the loans due to risk. Very nice Mark!!

To piggy back on this Cuomo was just on and said hospitalizations are still troubling high. With all of the pictures online of NYC barren and a stay at home order for over a month how can the hospitalization rate/positive rate be so high? With a state lock down for over a month where are all of these infections coming from if not within in Shelter in place family/groups? People have to socially distance in public and wear masks. The subway is still running but so that could be a source. Where are all of these continued infections coming from? This looks like Italy/Spain with its stubbornly high numbers.

Rosner apparently had a note out about the latest GSE servicer move. Anyone have the note by chance?

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-04-21/autopsies-reveal-first-confirmed-u-s-coronavirus-deaths-occurred-in-bay-area-in-early-february?mod=article_inline There have been growing concerns that the new coronavirus has been in California longer than experts first believed. Dr. Jeff Smith, a physician who is the chief executive of Santa Clara County government, said earlier this month that data collected by the CDC, local health departments and others suggest it was “a lot longer than we first believed” — most likely since “back in December.” “This wasn’t recognized because we were having a severe flu season,” Smith said in an interview. “Symptoms are very much like the flu. If you got a mild case of COVID, you didn’t really notice. You didn’t even go to the doctor. The doctor maybe didn’t even do it because they presumed it was the flu.” https://www.marketwatch.com/story/santa-clara-county-officials-identify-additional-covid-19-deaths-2020-04-22?mod=home-page he local medical examiner collected samples during autopsies performed on people who died on Feb. 6, Feb. 17, and March 6 that later tested positive for the novel coronavirus. If COVID was in California earlier then expected it was in NYC earlier then expected. Both get tons of international flights. That being said community spread was happening undetected. Was it the stay at home order that poured gas on the fire in NYC? Initial business closure was on March 16th, schools closed on March 18th, Shelter in place March 22nd. Peak hospital usage April 8-10th so 21-23 days after kids forced to stay home. Are there a lot of multi generational homes in NYC? Was the gas on the fire bringing everyone together and locking them up in close contact for days on end? People of color would seem to be more likely to live in a multi generational situations. Is this why they are more hard hit in addition to comorbidities? Italy had some of the strictest stay at home orders started on March 9th and 30% of Italians live in multi generational homes https://www.wsj.com/articles/family-is-italys-great-strength-coronavirus-made-it-deadly-11585058566 Italy has a ton of multi generational homes Wouldn't that be a pisser if the stay at home orders had just the opposite effects in NYC, Italy and Spain?

For those that feel strongly we should track and trace how would you go about that? I'm not arguing against it but the man power needed, the time for testing, and the tracking really would border on unfathomable. How often do you test someone? If they have a fever at home? At work? Whats a fever? I have patients that tell me they "run low" and 99 degrees is a fever for them. Once a week for everyone in a hot spot or cluster? How do you coordinate a couple hundred thousand people that may have taken public transit, etc and find the time let alone the resources to actually see these people in a medical facility, test them, and then trace even outside of immediate family/workplace. You quickly could be over a million contacts in a week. Its mind boggling and virtually impossible. I think in theory its great and those seeing patients/clients in any business would quickly understand the many power/time/facility/cost to event try to test 5000 people in a couple days let alone trace contacts ON TOP providing healthcare for the public once the States re opn. Who is going to do this? As bad as it sounds practically speaking herd immunity/vaccine/cure is only option. I fear a testing/tracking program would fail miserably. Not because its not the right thing to do or best thing to do but I feel it would border on downright impossible in a country like the US. I give the S. Koreans a lot credit if this was the true reason it worked. God damn.

http://www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/phcommon/public/media/mediapubhpdetail.cfm?prid=2328 USC and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health (Public Health) today released preliminary results from a collaborative scientific study that suggests infections from the new coronavirus are far more widespread - and the fatality rate much lower - in L.A. County than previously thought. Based on results of the first round of testing, the research team estimates that approximately 4.1% of the county's adult population has antibody to the virus. Adjusting this estimate for statistical margin of error implies about 2.8% to 5.6% of the county's adult population has antibody to the virus- which translates to approximately 221,000 to 442,000 adults in the county who have had the infection. That estimate is 28 to 55 times higher than the 7,994 confirmed cases of COVID-19 reported to the county by the time of the study in early April. The number of COVID-related deaths in the county has now surpassed 600. If all these antibody tests are wrong they are all wrong in the same direction and same amount? Maybe if we get 2, 3, 4, 5 more studies we will know if we are being fooled by the false positive rate? I agree having a poor test is no good, just like 1, 2, 3 months ago this is all new and are learning about this disease everyday. What is very concerning is relying on these tests to track and trace if they are no good. If you dont believe the lowered CFR you get with tests how do you reliably track and trace with them? What a complete and utter waste of time that is.

Its been a little under a year since this video came out. This is where Calabria spilled his guts the most. Then someone threw the brakes on big time. Interesting to see how things were talked about then. https://www.cnbc.com/video/2019/05/20/fhfa-chief-wont-wait-for-congress-to-take-frannie-and-freddie-public.html

I could be wrong but it seems as if these forbearance-s may not impact FnF for some time. For a period of up to 12 months the servicers will be liable to forward P and I. FnF really gets on the hook when the borrower defaults. Technically they cant default until after 12 months and are responsible for a possible balloon payment at the end or other modification. No one is going to default before they have to, ie 12 months. Homeowners now are going to be incentivized to stay in the home as they likely have equity and dont want to walk away. As Calabria has said the smaller less capitalized servicers can get absorbed by the larger better capitalized versions and there is still the possibility of a Fed/Treasury facility for liquidity. I think its reasonable to assume that some small servicers will fail (thus all the MBA squawking) but if absorbed by larger firms and the loans do go on to default how is Fnf affected before even say an IPO a year from now? The new better capitalized servicers makes good on the payments, absorbs the book and the system is stabilized as you go up the ladder. Sure this isnt a fail proof endless process but there are a couple of lines in the sand before FnF. I wish I was smarter on the topic but I cant believe Calabria whose sole mission is to preserve/conserve/recap the GSE would make the statements he has if they truly were at risk. It also seems that even though the servicers are feeling a lot of pain none are insolvent yet, and again there are others according to Calabria that could absorb those who are not equipped to deal with the forbearance.

Yay! Misunderstanding #1 again: misunderstanding of exponential growth. I'm kind of shocked that this misunderstanding is so persistent, but I guess if one understands exponential growth, then it basically destroys the "widespread growth in March" thesis, and that would be intolerable. https://www.ksla.com/2020/03/20/california-becomes-first-state-order-lockdown/ Im kind of shocked that you think there is continued exponential growth during a state wide lock down with shelter in place orders that went into effect 5 days after I suggested it was as wide spread as it was. If the exponential growth was continuing as you suggest then I clearly don't understand and we just F'd up on an epic scale as a county and it completely invalidates this: Yay! So timeline here. March 15th I make a suggestion regarding how wide spread the disease is which you heavily disagree with. March 20th California becomes the first state to lock down, enacts shelter in place orders. March 21st-April 3rd Somehow exponential growth continues to occur in here obvious to you and everyone else but me with the state in complete lock down April 3-4th Stanford does a study which we find out suggests a single county in said state has possibly 50-80k people infected. April 15th You post a picture saying we bent the curve(severely halting exponential growth ) by locking down the state/country and its proof positive it worked because the deaths were lower then expected. :o :o :o :o :o So which is it? Exponential growth occurred that I'm stubbornly ignorant to, or your picture that you made a point of posting is false? Cant have both occurring in the same time period. Which one you going with here?

1. Its coming from the MBS rag 2. Calabria has made it clear its not Fannie and Freddies problem and has doubled down with the CFPB to really pile on the servicers 3. Calabria is following HERA, HERA does not allow Fannie/Freddie to be a liquidity source for the servicers. Preserve and Conserve. At this point I wouldnt pay much mind to it. The economy is slowly starting to re open thank god, housing prices are staying firm and Treasury/Fed are watching this. Calabria has made clear where he stands on this.

Isn't the recap solely for the purpose of getting FnF on their own two feet and with plenty of capital cushion? And didn't cherzeca suggest that it's probable that blowback was experienced with earlier plans? So plan A may not be solution anymore. Plan B: 1) Sufficient capital 2) Resolve lawsuits 3) Make some sweet money for taxpayers That can be accomplished without seniors (and warrants) being cancelled. I still contend that those seniors are not just going away. Wish I was smart enough to know how they're not and we'll be fine regardless, but I'm not. Where is that sweet money for the taxpayers going to come from? Someone who wants to buy common just off of a freshly removed NWS for 12 years and a huge overhang from still in place Sr Preferred? Who the hell would do that? No one in their right mind or group of people with enough money to account for the largest IPO in history staged or not will put up Billions of dollars with the Sr. Preferred in place. I highly question why you are invested in this if you don't believe they get resolved in some fashion, esp if your holding preferred. Common is its own story and discussion. If you think the Sr. Preferred do not go way plus/minus some return of overage you better sell when the market opens Monday.

https://www.clickorlando.com/news/florida/2020/04/17/north-florida-beaches-among-first-to-reopen-since-coronavirus-closures/ Florida was one of the last to shut down, only shut down for 16 days, and has one the lowest deaths per thousand in the entire country and a top 5 population. Makes you wonder if heat/population spread>then a statewide lockdown. Texas and California would suggest the same.

This is my quick take from the full text: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.14.20062463v1.full.pdf 1) Completely disproves the "this infection has been widespread for months thesis". It wasn't even widespread by April 3 in this CA county. 2) Pretty much makes herd immunity unfeasible due to #1 3) Their estimated mortality rate is very low--like close to Flu level low. Note how they recruited volunteers: they used facebook ads. From the Dutch bloodbank study, we say that younger folk have this in much higher numbers asymptomatically. So their estimate of asymptomatic infections may skew higher due to Facebook ads as the method of recruiting. There are some other caveats to their estimates that cigarbutt pointed out. And note: But anyway, let's say this is the case and it is just as deadly as the Flu. How does one explain Italy, parts of WA, and NYC getting a surge of ICU/vented patients? Is it just as deadly as the Flu, but much more contagious so we see a sudden surge of critically ill patients? If that is the case, then why should we declare "this is nothing to worry about"? You have two choices here: 1) Occam's razor: every country that saw this didn't overreact for a reason--this is something to take seriously and Wuhan, Italy, NYC show that clearly. 2) Everyone is wrong and this is no different than the Flu. Choose wisely. Or unwisely. The choice is yours. Not looking for an argument here just clarification of my thoughts and others who have consistently said I was wrong. Im not looking for a victory lap here or looking to be ridiculed. Im just looking for a little clarification of thoughts vs what I hypothesized on or about March 15th since you continue to allude to it, case in point your 1. What exactly is wide spread to you? 50x suspected cases is not wide spread? Jesus Christ. My framework of thought was on around March 11-15th there were hundreds of thousands if not millions of people that had the corona virus. I was not able to project a specific number and the observation was completely anectotal. I get that. I also never suggested herd immunity. So now that this latest antibody test comes out and its projected 50-80k people in one county in California in early April may have had the virus is it really that big of a stretch to think 100s of thousands/millions had it across the US in Mid March? If it was 500-1000 people in the Standford study I would raise the white flag. If this study is to be taken even at face value the number infected was easily over a millon one month ago. Using that nationwide against confirmed studies we get 34 million in US infected that is too simple of a projection but gives a frame of refence. Even now is this not possible? How much more evidence do we need? We have the German study....flawed bc area was hard hit so too high at 15%. Pregnant woman...flawed not random. Homeless study...flawed not random. Dutch study, people too young. Italian article on 60% of people had antibodies...area was hard hit, doesnt count. This study...flawed...they advertised on Facebook so people who may have had the virus more likely to participate even though we take our CFR from only the people we test who show up and are in a window to test positive via PCR. I think many who have tracked this maybe pretty anchored on their theory and again that is up for debate. But so far we have 5 antibody studies all non perfect true. But all point to an infection rate way above what is confirmed and thus the CFR drops significantly as a result. Early in this pandemic looking even at the recent Gilead study these studies are not perfect but we are looking for any early data points we can get. But all the antibody studies as imperfect as each is points to way more spread then shown by confirmed tests and way lower CFR. Is there an antibody study that has shown just the opposite? Many of the critics of this antibody studies immediately point to the sensitivity/specificity of the tests used to find this data suggesting they cannot not be relied on to say this is "like the flu". Yet many including RichardGibbons advocate for heavy testing and say this is a necessary metric and should be used extensively. If you dont use it you are dangerous, we must test!!. So which is it? ??? When the data fits we love em and when it doesn't we hate em?

It seems Milbank was brought on for more of what seems the recap aspect then the litigation. Does Milbank replace Arnold & Porter at some point in entirety? I appreciate the Milbank advising FHFA what the bad new would be but would the DOJ do the same for Treasury? They seem to be the most stubborn. if Milbank is substituted for A&P that will be headline news. but it wont happen. recap v. litigation is a false dichotomy. Milbank HAS to develop a view and advise FHFA re litigation prospects in order to advise FHFA re recap, which necessarily involves settlement prospects. this in my mind is very important. I see so how does this happen? FHFA just keeps fighting the lawsuits half heartedly until they release a recap plan? I have been involved in contested transactions that have been litigated. at some point the worm turns from pursuing adversity to pursuing common interest. settlement is a momentum building process, and each transaction has its own profile. here, we have a FHFA that is very much on record as seeking a conservatorship release...very different from the FHFA that hired A&P to defend litigation. so it goes Great insight, thanks.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/16/early-peek-at-data-on-gilead-coronavirus-drug-suggests-patients-are-responding-to-treatment/?mod=article_inline Promising results so far. This would surely make opening easier.

Debate sholdn't be taken as life vs economy to be honest. It's life vs life. Hospitals have started firing employees becasue we have shut down everything except virus cases. It's simply not sustainble even if Fed keeps prinintg money. I agree I believe you have to assume the eventual goal is herd immunity with the brunt of infections taken on by the younger lower risk crowd. Looking at the studies if we are able to keep those 65 and older protected as much as possible you remove the highest risk population and the projected CFR and projected medical need drops to a much more palatable level. The older group is more likely to be on SSN, have a pension, etc and if needed much easier to keep this group above water with new money if needed.

It seems Milbank was brought on for more of what seems the recap aspect then the litigation. Does Milbank replace Arnold & Porter at some point in entirety? I appreciate the Milbank advising FHFA what the bad new would be but would the DOJ do the same for Treasury? They seem to be the most stubborn. if Milbank is substituted for A&P that will be headline news. but it wont happen. recap v. litigation is a false dichotomy. Milbank HAS to develop a view and advise FHFA re litigation prospects in order to advise FHFA re recap, which necessarily involves settlement prospects. this in my mind is very important. I see so how does this happen? FHFA just keeps fighting the lawsuits half heartedly until they release a recap plan?

Of course we have to re-open at some point. You're creating a false choice/strawman. The idea is to do it well to minimize the chances of this thing getting out of control again, to minimize death and suffering, and to minimize eventual economic impact. Just like if the US had done the early containment well, the problem would've been smaller and the economic impact would've been smaller. Now that ship has sailed, but it looks like the next phases aren't being handled much better than the early ones, with the daughter and son-in-law and some ex-TV hosts in charge. I think its great and as good as an outline your going to get to control a population 328 million. If you think a more directed approach is needed we need way,way,way more man power then what is available as well as instant testing and tracing capabilities that likely dont exist yet or are not feasible. We will continue to have a surge of cases over and over again until we reach herd immunity or get a good vaccine. The way to minimize the most death and suffering is to do what we are doing, which is not possible, so yes there will likely be a good deal of death and suffering. Until a good vaccine comes out or treatments not much we can do about that if we plan to open the economy.