orthopa

You forgot to post this part: CAUTION: Syndromic surveillance data can be hard to interpret. Any increases above expected could be due to changes in healthcare seeking behavior (people might be more likely to go to the ED now with less severe symptoms because they are aware of the COVID-19 epidemic), or it could be due to actual viral illness, or a combination. Maybe your eyes are better then mine but when did COVID testing starting start in NYC?

Here is the post that I analyzed the C conversion deal. It should answer your questions. https://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/general-discussion/fnma-and-fmcc-preferreds-in-search-of-the-elusive-10-bagger/msg382592/#msg382592 Short version: yield somewhat mattered (the 6.5% series got 85% of par, the >8% ones got 95%) and the market clearly didn't see it coming. This and the liquidity seems to explain the premium that FNMAS has had most of the time over the other issues. Although now with volatility there is a much wider gap compared to the lower dividend issues.

For banks only? Read this thread. Thoughts? I just found Tim Howard's response. He thinks FHFA will do it: https://howardonmortgagefinance.com/2020/01/16/how-we-got-to-where-we-are/#comment-14815 The Federal Reserve, FDIC and Comptroller of the Currency issued a joint press release today that among other things said, “Banking organizations that are required under U.S. accounting standards to adopt CECL this year can mitigate the estimated cumulative regulatory capital effects for up to two years.” I’m assuming that FHFA will grant similar flexibility to Fannie and Freddie, although to my knowledge it has not yet done so. Its my understanding at this point FnF are included in the CECL delay as long as this is still declared an emergency correct? I believe that was the language in the bill. The Difference now with the banks is a definitive 2 year time period? With the Fed stepping up and helping the servicers the $$$ that would be originally be coming from mortgage payments will just be coming from the the fed through the services to FnF right?

Can you expand more on this? Is it along the lines of the decay with the leveraged vxx etf/ns?

Does anyone have any text/video of what Calabria said a couple of days ago to the effect that "Fannie and Freddie are doing what they are supposed to do during hard times" in regard to reform? Thanks

The Mortgage Bankers Association, the industry's lobby group, said it has held talks with the Fed and the Treasury Department for the past few weeks on this request for help. "They have been very understanding of this issue and the need for liquidity," Robert Broeksmit, CEO of the MBA, told CNN Business. The MBA estimates that if one-quarter of borrowers request forbearance for six months or longer, advancing requirements on mortgage servicers could exceed $75 billion. Wow, dont things come full circle. MBA is willing to belly up for help now too. I wonder if this will stop the intense lobbying against recapping the GSEs. Would love to interview that douche Dave Stevens now!

Any of those that were predicting exponential deaths in Washington State have an explanation for why the death toll is only at 130 deaths? The first case was there and over 2 months ago to boot. For sure we should be way higher then that by now right? What gives?

Uh oh this is from our boy Fauci. And in the New England Journal of Medicine. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2002387 "Either children are less likely to become infected, which would have important epidemiologic implications, or their symptoms were so mild that their infection escaped detection, which has implications for the size of the denominator of total community infections." "If one assumes that the number of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic cases is several times as high as the number of reported cases, the case fatality rate may be considerably less than 1%. This suggests that the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10% and 36%, respectively." Uh oh, looks like Fauci saying maybe more along the lines of the flu? We will find out once antibody testing comes.

Almost like this thing follows an order (regions hit later peak later). More holes in the "this has been widespread since January" thesis. Spain becoming the new Italy. My fear is that the U.S. will be a late peaking country (due to it being a late onset country) and right now the focus is on NY/WA, but it has already seeded throughout the nation... :-\ Not sure if this is a reliable source, if not throw it in the trash. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2238578-uk-has-enough-intensive-care-units-for-coronavirus-expert-predicts/ "His comments come as a team at the University of Oxford released provisional findings of a different model that they say shows that up to half the UK population could already have been infected. The model is based on different assumptions to those of Ferguson and others involved in advising the UK government." UK has 67 million people. There is a link to a FT article about the Oxford Study, but I dont have a subscription for the text.

don't we have pretty solid data from two different continents by now showing us that they aren't (apart from a few isolated exceptions)? It feels like the tone in the thread becomes adversarial at times, so please take this message as merely providing data. In general, it might be useful if we acknowledged each other's opinions instead of making this more of a debate (which I have been quite guilty of). Yes, you are right, elderly folks are far, far more likely to have adverse outcomes. See the table below. As others have pointed out, it's also true that many otherwise healthy young folks may have adverse outcomes. Here's what we know right now for the US: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6912e2.htm#T1_down Not disputing the data the ICU admission criteria I think is self explanatory but I would like to know the admission criteria for the younger populations is/was as well as length of stay/treatment.

Yes, your opinion is that, let's say, 6 million were infected as of March 9th. If the infection rate doubles every 3 days, there should be 200 million infected. And by Friday, every single person in the US will be infected. The problem is that no evidence supports this opinion. I guess better then your opinion that I was adding zero value by assuming there were way more infections then thought? I believe I said hundreds of thousands/millions fuck me for not zeroing it in with all of my up to the minute tests. How about your 3000 people tested 100 infections in Ontario or whatever that was you posted. I was right in theory, but you my friend were completely wrong with your opinion. Still bothers you huh? ;D

Im done trying to read the tea leaves with this investment but did find it interesting that he retweeted this. Maybe it was a bit of a public service announcement with discussion of forbearance etc.

Thanks for your honest response--I really do appreciate it when people are willing to act with intellectual honesty. So much of that is missing in the world today. That said, your 86% asymptomatic rate isn't credible. The most credible number I've read is ~30% (though at this point, I'd be delighted if it were 86%. Asymptomatic people are bad early in a pandemic, and good when it's out of control.) In any case, we'll have to keep watching New York to see when they get overloaded. New York's normal capacity is about 60K hospital beds and 3000 ICU beds. So, I'll assume that if we go over, say, 70k simultaneous hospitalized COVID-19 patients or 3300 simultaneous COVID-19 ICU patients, that means that you'll have recognized that "this isn't a big deal, there are already hundreds of thousands if not millions infected and there's been no problems" analysis was incorrect. It's nice to have goal posts planted firmly in the ground, and clearly if COVID-19 patients alone--without even taking into account people in the hospital for other reasons--exceed hospital capacity, then it was a pretty big deal. All that said, I'm pretty surprised that you don't understand why people would care much more about an epidemic than heart disease deaths. I guess I understand why a mostly investor/business crowd (this board) cares more about a pandemic as its an immediate known threat to ones life and when driven by fear even more so. I guess my point again tho is that people die every day in medicine. We run codes when the pt arrives with no pulse, sometimes they die. We see strokes paralyze people. We see people on dialysis who are dying right in front of your eyes. We see non compliant cardiac/DM patients who are taking years off their lives and dont care even though they know it. This happens every day, all day, all across the world. This will likely be a flash in the pan looking at the big picture many years from now. The other diseases I have mentioned wont. And almost everyone on this board/parents loved ones will die of CA/MI/DM etc and surely right now care much more about Covid19. Does that many any sense? Dont be worried about what is going to kill you and how to change that but what your AFRAID might kill you? My point regarding time spent with those dying wasn't necessarily a jab but is true. If we really cared that much about people dying we would be spending time in nursing homes, rehab facilities, dialysis centers etc. That obviously wont happen. Many non medical people have become very interested in deaths and treatment of the ill. Thats great but IMO is mostly due to a the natural flight or flight response we all have to an immediate know threat right in front of our face 24hrs a day. I have read on twitter many people abhorred by the fact that the economy may open and people may die. That being said I cant believe how many people on waiting lists for lung/heart/kidney etc transplants die never getting an organ. You just don't hear about it everyday and we each have the power to control that directly, but few will. You can go down this rabbit hole quick but I think I made my point.

Granted this is an opinion piece but this has been my position all along. Will be interesting to see what the end result of this. Glad to see this was published in WSJ.

Lets hope for a quick recovery then, will probably depend heavily on when economy gets opened back up. Getting them out by 2021, 2022 was always the plan from a 100% out of conservatorship standpoint if the ACG timeline was to be believed. From a preferred stand point as Midas mentioned what really is needed is a PSAP amendment to get rid of the Srs. Even if the economy stresses FnF I think that should still be on the table and the legal story continues as well. Realistically capital cant be raised until early 2021 so out of conservatorship in 2021 maybe even a stretch, but by then Preferred should have been dealt with or their fate should be determined.

I would assume (yeah I know what assume means) that unless there is a complete melt down and FnF have to draw on the Treasury again the recap plan should continue forward. All the upcoming steps really are not dependent on the economy other then raising capital which is still ~12 months away at the soonest. The capital rule is written. Mnuchin and Calabria have been "negotiating" another PSPA amendment for 7 months and I would be quite sure 2 amendments are on the table based on legal outcome. I would still strongly believe that some hedge will be put in place before the election. I think this has been the plan all along as the election is a toss up. Some believe that even if Trump loses the ~3 months afterwards is enough time to get all the ducks in a row before the democrat is sworn in. Two things which were discussed which I hope gain some traction going forward are 1. Just how punitive the bailout to Fannie was when compared to bailouts being done now. 2. Just how much FnF helped during this crisis and their value to the system. The Fed had to step in, in a big way but imagine the banks being on the hook for all of this? Jesus. What a mess that would be.

Weren't we just arguing about this in my example of extended contact at airport ? Now because he says it, its true? LOL Orthopa, do you think you can slow down a bit and try to communicate a little more clearly? I think you are making some good points, but it seems your points may not be getting across clearly or that you may even be misunderstood. This post in particular makes me think that is the case. I also thought your earlier point about testing the role of testing in a diagnosis is likely a good point, but was probably too hasty to get your point across. Maybe some other medical professionals could weigh in on that, especially if you're to busy to respond. I dont know how much more I can slow down. I have probably posted 50 times? Trying to get some points across. Am I completely right?, of course not but I have experience FWIW. Others have graphs, twitter links, and or political angles which are underwhelming at best sometimes. Again points that I have made that I believe are true FWIW (we are allowed an opinion right?) 1. The virus has been here for months, likely early January and has been seen/dealt with in the health system under other diagnoses for months. 2. The first test confirmed, was not the first test here. 3. There was nothing the government or any nation in the world could do to stop the initial spread 4. Older people and those most at risk will die. There is no cure, and viruses kill people. Elderly people should take appropriate precautions. 5. Because the virus has been here for months testing is borderline useless and your going to chase your tail the entire time. This is due to numerous contacts and the extended incubation period. 6. If you don't test everyone the virus will continue to spread quickly, again via asymptomatic people and kids. Best policy is to test everyone, but its impossible and too late. 7. Best way to prevent spread is standard precautions! This includes isolation, hand washing, yada, yada. NOT TESTING. 8. If a patient test positive and there has been minimal definite contacts say someone who is home bound with a handful of contacts testing may make sense but these are limited cases. 9. The the spring/summer will bring a reprieve in new cases and hopefully that was well as the fact that nearly everyone will have been exposed or infected this will limit virgin hosts. 10. A vaccine is useless if the virus mutates significantly. 11. The number of cases are vastly under reported, probably numbering in the millions by now in the US. 12. If someone you know or yourself had a cold/URI/flu symptoms that tested negative, and was "way worse" then the common cold there was very high chance it is/was the corona virus. 13. Every case of the virus is not severe, so don't model it as such. Corona virus dx does not = ICU and ventilator. 14. I believe eventually those in charge medically will come to the conclusion that its inevitable that this becomes a pandemic with everyone getting infected in time. 15. If your human, you will get the virus in your lifetime. Nothing you can do. 16. Flattening the curve makes sense but I question when the curve will bump as the virus again likely has been here for months. I think you have an excellent understanding of this at this point, and apparently able to put it down on paper better then me. Thanks. Just trying to make sure I fully understand the various perspectives. Again, apologies again for the comment before re: the profession you've chosen. It meant no disrepect. I do want to ask you - if you were to take a step back and think about your position, where could you be wrong? I could be wrong by how much of a hit this will be to the ICU/need for respirator, ie breakdown of health system. I can only think back to working during the H1N1 outbreak and the 17-18 flu season and that volume load which was ~15 million cases if I recall correctly. The system was stretched, but did not collapse, My opinion is the virus has been here for 6 weeks/months and cases are vastly under reported. So in my mind we are currently in an environment of where many think we will be from documented patient 1 say 4-6 weeks from now, already! Its in this mind frame I have a hard time rectifying a wickedly high death rate and medical system collapse if we are operating in this environment currently. I certainly could be wrong on this, I hope I'm right of course. We will see. The fact of the matter is if the cases are severely under estimated and we are handling it now maybe we are further along on the curve then we think, and handling it fine. I guess I will know for sure if I was wrong if/when the healthcare system collapses. I could get lucky as my predictions above (not too bad for 2 weeks ago huh?) were before the nationwide stay home theme and ramp up in healthcare preparedness across the country. I believe a lot of our back and forth at the time was about Washington state? and the deaths there? They are at 110 so I guess it remains to be seen if that continues to exponentially increase with time. NYC will be the test as that is where the healthcare system could break and wasnt even close at the time of our discussions. FWIW I still think there is no doubt millions had been infected then, and even more so now. Dont forget the asymptomatic rate is 86% per Chinese data. For now its a point that is a waste of time to argue as until further means for testing comes out we will never know. What will really tell us for sure will be serologic testing which I hope for the economy's sake happens very soon as that would be a means for every group to tell if they have been infected and are immune. That could be a very quick send away lab and could be done on all asymptomatic people and in any doctors office, ER, etc. FWIW the healthcare system is holding up good(NYC to be determined still), and has been since we talked. Its been ~2 weeks since we went back and forth and we are up to 698 deaths. Since that time ~26k give or take have died from heart disease so heart disease may still be the winner this year. Will have to see. And yes they are real living people so them dying counts too, even though it doesn't "spread". And yes those people that live have life long lung and heart issues, CHF, etc. I didn't know we had such empathetic people on the board! I do find it very interesting how much everyone who is not medical trained does seem to care about people dying, ICU beds, ethical hard decisions, medicine etc as this what those in the medical field deal with every day. My hope is once this is over there is just as much passionate discussion about diabetes, HTN, heart disease etc. With the amount of outpouring and compassion I can certainly envision many on the board spending time at nursing homes, cardiac rehab facilities, and community health centers going forward. That will be great as opposed to a passing interest due to self preservation.

Agree even that douche bag Whalen is crying uncle. Dave Stevens cant be loving the current environment either. Based on Whalen's article it seems like his attitude changed from let them eat cake to you can save them now as long as you save me too. Without seeing the text of the bill it is hard to know what happens but as a shareholder I would be very leary of the terms. Remember this is the first "round" of bailouts. Its still early in this and others may come in future in other industries and amounts if this drags on for 3, 6, 9 months. Remember AIG, C got multiple bailouts with increasingly harsher terms. Granted not apples to apples but it does shine a little bit of a light on shareholder treatment and the completely random terms that each one seems to have. With a 2 Trillion stimulus bill on the table and the Fed expanding their balance sheet by trillions is now really the time to wipe out the GSEs and put them on the govs balance sheet? It will take some time but eventually if FNF actions stabilize the market, help home buyers with forbearance the turd may come out smell like a Rose just in time for summer/late fall action period. it is Tim Howard's view that near term the GSEs wont suffer an impact to earnings from increased delinquencies (borrowing at near zero to make guaranty payments) as much as CECL and increase in loss reserves. one hopes that CECL will be deferrd in the stimulus bill Agree, and any bailout I was referring to above was for airlines, boeing, etc. I dont think the GSEs are even on the radar for Congress at this time. FnF appear to be doing their job and out of the spot light.

Agree even that douche bag Whalen is crying uncle. Dave Stevens cant be loving the current environment either. Based on Whalen's article it seems like his attitude changed from let them eat cake to you can save them now as long as you save me too. Without seeing the text of the bill it is hard to know what happens but as a shareholder I would be very leary of the terms. Remember this is the first "round" of bailouts. Its still early in this and others may come in future in other industries and amounts if this drags on for 3, 6, 9 months. Remember AIG, C got multiple bailouts with increasingly harsher terms. Granted not apples to apples but it does shine a little bit of a light on shareholder treatment and the completely random terms that each one seems to have. With a 2 Trillion stimulus bill on the table and the Fed expanding their balance sheet by trillions is now really the time to wipe out the GSEs and put them on the govs balance sheet? It will take some time but eventually if FNF actions stabilize the market, help home buyers with forbearance the turd may come out smell like a Rose just in time for summer/late fall action period.

I think as Calabria mentioned a couple of days ago the stress of what is going on will help others realize the importance of FnF and the role they play. Imagine if this was all privatized and the big banks had to take on all of these mortgages, forebarance, and MBS issues? That would be a huge stress to the system now. We are seeing real time the function FnF perform and how valuable they are. They just need more capital, and will get it eventually.

I have thought about moving from Fannie to Freddie and vice versa which I think would not constitute a wash sale. Different companies entirely. The issue I have come across is the bid ask and volume. In the end I believe I would get less shares as I would get caught on the wrong side of the spread in both.

it is my view that if scotus decides seila the way I expect, then the NWS is toasty if not toast. I believe Ps should not give any credence to the seniors in a settlement negotiation unless the seila outcome is bad If things start to unravel or the treasury sees a window to settle and/or return some money over the 10% do you see them doing so before selia is decided? The could suddenly be operating from a position of weakness if the MBS market takes a shit right? I'd be guessing but I think their first priority is and should be helping Americans by using FnF rather than worrying about legacy shareholders, for now. No and I agree with that too, Im just hypothesizing a quick recap via the Sr preferred. Isnt a recapped FnF a stronger FnF? My assumption for price would be last 30 days trading price like other bailouts, C etc.

You realize Malaria is also an infection right? Obviously a clinical trial would take a long time. But time is not what we have on our side in a pandemic, and we have to rely on the best data we have. Take a look at this report by French providers: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857920300996 Lol at "Azithromycin is an antibiotic". So dismissive. I highly suggest you read the evidence on synergistic effects of Azithromycin+Plaquanil in malaria: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3170143/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4944689/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC127390/ I'm not relying on Trump or Twitter either The mechanism of action of Chloroquine and related compound on heme in RBCs and therefore malaria is known. COVID has nothing to do with RBCs. Azithromycin is a very commonly used antibiotic with some antimalarial properties. Malaria is not a virus. The evidence that Azithro could work against viruses is not really out there. Coronaviruses are not new either. There is very little real evidence out there that these drugs would work against COVID. Obviously if there is a patient who is very ill and nothing else is working, it may be worth a shot, but the French study showing a combination of Azithro + Hydroxychloro is very very flawed and you can read what's out there from physicians & scientists on how poorly constructed that study was. I am not here to discuss pharmacology anyway. I think probabilistically and I my estimates for Azithro working is not zero, but close. Hydroxychloro is higher, but it's not significant and nowhere close to 50%. Remdesivir sounds more promising (and unlike any other drug that's being discussed something that targets single stranded RNA viruses), but we'll have to wait. This thread has taken up much of my time the past month or so I've been sounding the alarms on this whole COVID thing. Glad to see some people out in the real world finally taking this seriously. Hope many patients can be spared from the worst of this, and glad to have a real leader in Gov Cuomo. I'm out. Your not "out". Your locked down in NYC for the next 4-6 weeks who are you kidding. What else do you have to do in your 300 sq ft apartment besides argue with guys you have never met. ;D

it is my view that if scotus decides seila the way I expect, then the NWS is toasty if not toast. I believe Ps should not give any credence to the seniors in a settlement negotiation unless the seila outcome is bad If things start to unravel or the treasury sees a window to settle and/or return some money over the 10% do you see them doing so before selia is decided? The could suddenly be operating from a position of weakness if the MBS market takes a shit right?

At this time wouldnt it be best to swap the Sr Preferred for common and scrap the warrants? Would get to own way more of the company, common does get screwed way more then warrants but would recap faster right? Would have to watch out for owning more then 80% though. In any scenario where the Srs are gone preferred should go to par. Maybe if anything this helps move along another PSPA amendment? Settling the whole FnF issue although projected to go longer would be a nice kitchen sink move while everything is hitting the fan. If whalen is right (I dont have a good feel for if he is or not as I dont have access to any of the markets he speaks of) this could unravel fast along with the market.