orthopa

Fair trade is the issue here. Not global trade. Once tariffs are maxed out next should be more limiting of companies able to do business ie Huawei. On top of that is reciprocal forced transfer of technology, mandatory partnerships or joint ventures etc, cyber theft etc. What is good for the goose... Anyone have any examples of fair trade with China where Trump is going wrong? China has given the WTO and the world and big middle finger, everyone ok with that?

There is no reason to give in to China and honestly you wont see Congress act. Because this needs to be done. Where is everyone speaking out against this? Dems? Repubs? No one. This needs to be done. Plain and simple. Trump has tied himself to the market but volatility is a necessary price to pay at this point. Raise em again if you have to, crush the fucking Chinese.

Treasury has submitted its GSE plan to the White House for approval — http://go.politicoemail.com/?qs=fae052525580081f05575e20604e86684b54f4bb38ae7fbf38e01aeb97583c46e2153b4d78e5d9311ad52a07a3cce4a8 …

Founds this today, sorry if its been reposted. A couple interesting tidbits. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44525.pdf From page 15; Can Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Leave Conservatorship? Absent congressional or executive action, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could exit their conservatorships in two ways. First, if one (or both) of the GSEs were unable to become financially viable—particularly by drawing down all remaining Treasury support—then it could be placed under receivership, in which all of its assets would be liquidated. 62 The usual priority of claims on remaining assets applies in receivership. The GSEs’ guaranteed MBS investors would be repaid first, followed by the GSEs’ debenture holders, followed by the Treasury’s senior preferred stock, and finally private stockholders. The value of the outstanding MBSs would depend on the payments of the underlying mortgages, the rules of receivership, and any action the government might take (or not take) to support the MBSs. Likewise, the value of the debentures would depend on the cause of the receivership and the details of the liquidation process. For example, if mortgage defaults and losses were to increase, the assets available for creditors would decrease. How the mortgage market would function if one or both GSEs were to go into receivership is unclear. Alternatively, one or both of the GSEs could become financially viable. This outcome, however, is unlikely to happen because the PSPAs limit the GSEs’ capital buffers to $3 billion each, preventing them from becoming financially viable to return to stockholder control. The GSEs currently have less capital than what would have been statutorily required prior to conservatorship. 63 Furthermore, when the federal government has previously provided significant financial support to companies, Treasury has auctioned off similar warrants for profit after the companies’ financial health was restored; the company that issued the warrants to Treasury typically wins the auction to purchase them. 64 With limited capital reserves, the GSEs would unlikely be able to purchase their warrants from Treasury. Furthermore, private investors would be unlikely to purchase the warrants from Treasury as long as the GSEs’ capital reserves are low enough to make them financially vulnerable to returning to conservatorship. Looks like if I'm reading the dividend chart right on page 14 it looks like Fannie and Freddie met the 10% moment in 2013?

The way I read it, Treasury finished the report in June but it's the White House that has been reviewing and revising it since then, with their part of the process nearly complete. I haven't yet heard anyone address the fact that the timeline has been pushed back again, from some time in September to September/October. It is perfectly fair to wonder why it is taking so long, especially since it seems that the administration is on a tight timeline. Not sure if this makes any sense but are they waiting for just before q3 earnings are released to make a 5th amendment and stop NWS? Q3 results are usually out very early in November and would be paid in early 2020. Maybe trying to release this close to the eventual FHFA capital rule? Once the capital rule is out and the steps to get out of conservatorship are known, all we need is a NWS announcement and IPO can start in motion. Getting that all done by Jan 1st 2020 would be quite a giddy up at this pace. Lastly wasn't the purpose of the memorandum to have Treasury submit a plan to the president not necessarily "work" with them on a plan? Seems like the WH had way more say in the plan then what was initially expected. What was requested was pretty cut and dry wasnt it? Im not insinuating anything good or bad as a result but god damn this has taken a long time.

If White house is providing a final word, and it then goes back to treasury to finalize what the hell takes another month or two? En Banc decision has to be weighing on this somewhat.

more on this NOW with @LizClaman as @USTreasury eyes Sept-Oct time frame to release long-awaited memo on reforming GSEs. @WhiteHouse will provide comments in coming days before Treasury finalizes $FNMA $FMCC Treasury had no comment on matter Must be another big player spreading rumors to unload. :o

https://www.americanbanker.com/opinion/taxpayers-are-the-gses-true-stockholders

This seems to be gaining traction, especially with those who for better or worse live day to day with their finances. This is part of the new "push" program from Visa/Mastercard, VisaDirect etc. Great for Visa/shareholders as now you get money riding on the rails but to and from the person with a visa debit/credit card. Convenience and immediate access should cost some money. If someone wants to wait 1 or 2 weeks for the $$$ fine. If you want it right away pay a little. I think this will take off as the lower earners are going to relish in getting paid right away as a money emergency seems to present itself very often for that group.

Sure it is a risk, and if it happens it happens and I’ll move on from this trade. I think it’d be silly to sell now based on this rumor. Or the other 30-40 rumors that have proceeded this one about everything that could go wrong with the GSEs. If mnuchin leaves there is a good chance we are fucked for the obvious reasons. When/once it happens we will be the last to know and prices will reflect that. Not much sense in worrying about it ahead of time.

You have to be careful of "buying low sell high" when you see negative news and stock declines. It can keep going on for a long time. The smart guys have been selling since June. I could guess that someone knows Maloni is such a whack job that he's willing to spread any rumors for free to get famous, so they just fed him the Collins rumor, which pumped the stock to 14, and then they started selling day after day since then. This isn't meant as an attack but an independent observation. I know you have mentioned before multiple times that you were not a great fundamental investor which is fine and a great admission. But I cant help to think that it was how you rationalized things, made correlations, and or assumptions that may have been part of the issue. I say this only because to invest based on rumors, baseless assumptions, strong thoughts about people buying or selling when there is nothing to support the assumptions, tweets, blog posts, etc etc is honestly one of the craziest things I have ever heard of. Some here have thanked you for observations and again of course we are all welcome to our opinion but idea that the price of the GSEs are influenced by nearly criminal market manipulation, irrational share disposables in illiquid securities, and shadow market deals is a little disconnected. I think some of what your describing can occur across the market and has occurred over time in other parts of the market as incentives can be bent that way but the hindsight observations your making here, either for longs or shorts are verging on purely entertainment value if that. Again maybe I'm the one with blinders on but a lot of what matters with this security has nothing to do with what your placing value upon. Again Im not insulting you, just my opinion and continue to welcome yours.

Where'd you hear that? Thanks in advance. Why are we giving so much credibility to this? Sounds like gossip to me.

fairholme and perusing are not the two biggest players in the junior prefs. Im not connected enough to tell you who is but I have a suspicion there are many hedge funds/family offices that have interest in the trade that many are not readily aware of due to fund size or disclosure requirements. This is 10 years in the making and almost 3 years since Mnuchin said it was a priority. This is the most well known trade that no one has heard of.

I think the ACG video could be a pump and dump scheme to support some big players to continue to unload. I do agree with everything she said though, but I've been consistent wrong on my FA......... . The "big players" have been in it since the beginning and show no signs of getting out without a resolution. I don't care who exactly it is. I trust my chart reading skills and it tells me big players are unloading. And for those waiting for the September treasury plan, I have to ask you this: Do you think there is still some opportunity for information arbitrary? Isn't it already well known that Treasury will have a plan released in early September, and it is supposed to be good? There is nothing in the charts to suggest "big players" are unloading. The volume the last couple of months outside of a couple of days would not let a big player out without crashing the price even in the most liquid FNMAS. That statement is twaddle. Again this is not a FA or chart "trade". The keys are Treasury plan, FHFA capital standards, 4th Amendment/NWS then recap. Each along the way may bump % of par value but final value will likely be realized in the days following the recap plan release. Didnt we already go over this?....and what big player would be unloading right before the fireworks go off? That's ridiculous IMO. For better or worse if you have made the decision to invest in this why would you get out right before the most anticipated 3-6 months in this whole saga? No I’ve been doing this long enough that I am no longer an ego driven investor who constantly need to prove to other people that I am right. And no, i am not hoping the stock would go lower so I can buy low. I am a momo trader who will only buy if the stock already goes up. Well I have been doing this a long time and I think the charts are saying big players are loading up? Where does that get us? Its all nonsense and you know that too.

I think the ACG video could be a pump and dump scheme to support some big players to continue to unload. I do agree with everything she said though, but I've been consistent wrong on my FA......... . The "big players" have been in it since the beginning and show no signs of getting out without a resolution. I don't care who exactly it is. I trust my chart reading skills and it tells me big players are unloading. And for those waiting for the September treasury plan, I have to ask you this: Do you think there is still some opportunity for information arbitrary? Isn't it already well known that Treasury will have a plan released in early September, and it is supposed to be good? Recap plan realizes ultimate value for both common and preferred. Until then these are claim tickets. Biggest risk of this outcome is how long takes. The ups and downs in the meantime are entertainment. Sure there is some opportunity for information arbitrage, unless there is a plan circulating no one is aware of?

I think the ACG video could be a pump and dump scheme to support some big players to continue to unload. I do agree with everything she said though, but I've been consistent wrong on my FA......... . The "big players" have been in it since the beginning and show no signs of getting out without a resolution. I don't care who exactly it is. I trust my chart reading skills and it tells me big players are unloading. And for those waiting for the September treasury plan, I have to ask you this: Do you think there is still some opportunity for information arbitrary? Isn't it already well known that Treasury will have a plan released in early September, and it is supposed to be good? There is nothing in the charts to suggest "big players" are unloading. The volume the last couple of months outside of a couple of days would not let a big player out without crashing the price even in the most liquid FNMAS. That statement is twaddle. Again this is not a FA or chart "trade". The keys are Treasury plan, FHFA capital standards, 4th Amendment/NWS then recap. Each along the way may bump % of par value but final value will likely be realized in the days following the recap plan release. Didnt we already go over this?....and what big player would be unloading right before the fireworks go off? That's ridiculous IMO. For better or worse if you have made the decision to invest in this why would you get out right before the most anticipated 3-6 months in this whole saga?

Another good guess on a slow summer afternoon. So far we have. 1. Plan leaked a little and very dilutive to common 2. Delay in discovery but has hidden silver lining of settlements. 3. Freddie sweeping profits discouraged those hoping for a surprise Throwing my hat in the ring I would say although not nearly apples for apples Freddie sending 1.8B to treasury means more capital needed via IPO for FNF. Not 10% more though.... I think we need to see more heavy selling of the common over next couple days and then I would really start to wonder if some details leaked out. So far today ~75 million dollars worth of fannie traded. Not necessarily hedge funds unloading levels but if it continues heavily and prfd stay where they are on normal volume something may have leaked. All fun speculation of course. ;D

Interesting take, that or the assumption is once the treasury plan comes out the lawsuits will go away like Calabria says. Does the trial date even matter if/when the plaintiffs are satisfied and drop the suit?

1.Good thought process here. The one person we have heard NOTHING out of on the whole issue since he was put in place is Kudlow. Could be nothing or something but maybe he is or has been an issue. Apparently the plan gets presented to him via the mandate and he is the "white house" or "administration" as it has been referred to. Calabria was handpicked on purpose, its not him. 2. I think the main reason now that I think about it more is the en banc decision. If your going to publish a plan in June and once it gets rolling a court now orders you to throw back another ~20B the optics look bad as you have to modify the plan already. The end banc was announced in Nov 18 and heard late Jan/Feb 19. Otting spoke just before this. Maybe the gov/lawyers didn't like the hearing and that put a wrench in all of the works. Trumps' mandate came in March, then Calabria got to talking favorably in april/may then everything got delayed once June hit. Its been ~6.5 months since the enbanc? The gov probably figured it would be decided by now but as a result plan cant come out so late august/sept is the guess by the gov then. The plan is written, done, but I bet there are two versions based on enbanc decision. 3. Its obviously confirmation bias but why would Calabria say all that he did, and he spilled a lot, if it wasn't true? I think he was talking what he knew/read/discussed. Why would he go and stick his neck out and shoot from the hip if this is all as big of a deal as it is? Like cherzeca has said he was probably told to cool it and back off talking about the plan until the enbanc decision tells the gov which way its going to go. 4. I think the 4-5 year timeline is BS. I still think this is closed to getting wrapped up or is well along by Jan of 2021 in regards to capital structure/raises. Why? Because why would you expend this much time/energy/manpower for almost 3 years to let it all go to waste by losing an election you cant control? Think about all the planning this has taken. Paulson supports Trump, Trump makes Mnuchin treasury secretary, Paulson worked with Mnuchin, Mnuchin and Trump invested with Paulson, Paulson is an "economic advisor", Otting is put in place supposedly to act but doesn't. Otting worked with Mnuchin and Paulson on Onewest, Calabaria is conveniently nominated for FHFA, Calabria was Pence's economist, Calabria worked with Mnuchin on trade, etc, etc, etc. Its so god damn obvious what has gone on and will eventually happen. No way this doesn't. Did Trump run on reforming FnF? Nope he didn't talk about it one god damn time. No one did but his treasury secretary went on live TV the day after he was elected and said it was a priority and would get done during the next 4 years. Where did that come from? Who was he speaking for? Sure as hell wasn't him! Anyone every care to think why Mnuchin and Calabria are so hell bent making this work out and have such strong feelings about this? Because they are nice people and really give a fuck about the 30 yr mortgage and interpreting HERA? No way. This was planned from day one and there is one person behind all of this. That person needs to get paid and if you come this far you finish it and everyone involved makes damn sure it doesn't get fucked up.

I don't see any sign of bottom yet. However I don't have much skills picking bottoms. Looking at the chart since Jan 19, $2.50 looks like support to me. There aren't any catalysts until the plan late August unless something leaks, and the timeline has potentially been pushed out. Trading should probably follow the trend until more news. No idea where we end up if we breach $2.50. I haven't the tools to see what a moving average would suggest. Any thoughts? If you are not a TA expert, then you shouldn't try to do TA like this. The bottom could happen at a previous bottom, or it could happen somewhere between that 2.5 bottom to the $14 top. (Some TA uses fibonacci levels to draw various lines between a major bottom to major top, which I think is voodoo.). Or it could happen below 2.5. Who knows. The only thing I know is that a bottom will form when there are large buying forces, and we don't know it until we see large buying happening. I am not interested in studying bottom picking, and I haven't found many TAs who succeed in it. I once saw an interview with Paul Tutor Johns (Or maybe someone else. I am bad at names), who said journalists like to write sensational headlines like "Paul picked the Dow futures bottom within 2 ticks", but the reality is that he finally picked that bottom within 2 ticks, on the 6th try. His first 5 tries all got stopped out. I believe what we have been seeing for the past week or so is a lot people getting stopped out which IMO is ludicrous. Having a stop on an investment like this only shows lack of conviction which is the antithesis of what you need to even look at this investment. So large buying forces like when the price goes up? I mean honestly would'nt we all know the bottom is in at that point?

Who exactly is it that is "arrogant and thinks they are smarter than everyone else in the world?" If you're going to make statements like that, name names. Also, Mr. Market slaps everyone down at some point regardless of personalities or intentions. All your post boils down to is pure schadenfruede, gloating over having made one good move. I really thought you were better than this. I don't have a good memory for names who taunted me. But I always remember people who helped me. Let me tell you who I respect the most in this thread. First is Chris. Second is Luke. :) Im late to this as was busy all day so not try to rehash.... I don't think people were intentionally taunting you but I think the issue people take up are one of a couple. 1. This is a news/event driven trade that really is probably the poorest technical choice I can think of in recent memory. One could wake up to a day like today stuck with a wide bid ask with no volume. No technical trader in their right mind would technically trade this. Seriously. If your a news/momentum trader I think your approach is reasonably consistent with that but lets face it. If you cant predict the future or even try (ie future price target, buy/sell level)as you say, have never mentioned support, MAs, indicators, oscillators etc your not a technical trader.......because that what technical trading is. 2. Obviously this is a FA website but this investment isnt about fundamentals in the true sense of valuing a company regarding earnings, multiple etc. This is a news/event driven investment. That meaning the other people in this thread are in the SAME exact boat as you regarding news flow. You get it when/Me, Luke, Midas, Chris, beaufort, hardincap, InvestorG, and ahab get it. That being said any conclusion you make is an opinion and that alone unless you part of FHFA, the treasury and the white house. Your interpretation or guess worked out recently congrats. But it was just that, a guess and to draw conclusions otherwise I think upsets people when its presented as an absolute, especially when referring in hindsight, I mean how easy is that? 3. I think everyone except for maybe you is in this for the long haul ie the end. That being either the day the preferred trades at or near par, the common is at a satisfactory price and one hits the sell button, or equal or greater value is given for what is held. I think people do value the discussion and in an investment like this that's all you can really do...talk about what happens. People become incredulous when someone says they "knew", because face it, no one knows. I don't have an issue with you at all and I used to trade technically for a while so I respect/believe some points but lets face it. To trade on tweets, feelings, wishes, guesses etc is a little nuts, especially with whats at stake for both sides and the information that they could put out, the incentives for both and the fact that EVERYONE is in the dark. Maybe this wasn't necessary to explain but this is a frustrating investment for nearly all of those involved.

Well spill the beans. What are the possibilities you can think of? :D

This is likely what happened to Otting, and Mnuchin too remember. I guess its hard to play dumb and pretend like you dont know the answer to a question when its asked at first. Looks like all 3 have learned this now.

my guess is the jps go to 60-75% par on retiring senior prefs (must do so they have ipo option and treasury can monetize their warrants). anyone else want to venture a guess? As you say NWS has to stop and retiring sr prfds have to happen before recap so. 1. The Jr preferred become the Sr security and have a contracted par value. Once capital is built to the levels to cover the Jr preferred at par I dont see why they wouldnt trade within a close range to par in accordance with dividend yield. My guess is 80-90% of par. Right away until some capital is kept I think your 60-75% is a good guess. I know my 80-90% guess is optimistic but what is the value of a 1st in line security with a contracted value minus non cumulative dividends? I think this is unlikely tho for 2 reasons. 1. Treasury misses an opportunity to a quicker recap converting preferred to common 2. Some of the preferred have dividend yields that are quite generous relative to today's interest rates and from FNMAs perspective this would be a chance to wash their hands of the old preferred and start anew. I think in regard to the preferred you have to think in the end what would be accepted "to make the lawsuits go away". I think in the scenario above that maybe all that it is for litigants. Let the NWS stop, consider the Sr's paid off so we can get our par and dividend. I think though as I said above treasury would like to take the opportunity to restructure things, clean themselves somewhat of "oldco"and get a jump start on capital from a willing participant if the $$$ is right. Looking back at the TARP bailouts there were plenty of times the preferred were converted to common at or just below par and I think its because of the above reasons. So I would say 60-70% when NWS and Sr retired 80-90% if Preferred not converted, now 1st in line and capital built for full redemption 95%-100%+ if converted to common in light of giving up future dividends and to sweeten the deal for faster capital build.

settle lawsuits? It would be a pretty cheap way to do it... $2B-$2.5B/yr or so instead of paying them all off at par right now. If plaintiffs think this gets the prefs trading near par then why not? Would give the plaintiffs the choice of selling the prefs when they're near par, or keep them while enjoying the dividend. No way. I just think Calabria and mnuchin are sensing that moelis was too optimistic and they maybe right. Better to under promise and over perform why would Hamish hume argue in an editorial one week ago for no conversion then? does a jr pref want to wait for many years with no conversion and no dividends? He is representing both common and preferred shareholders right? Maybe with all of the chatter about conversion to quickly rebuild capital he felt compelled to speak up for the common shareholders he represents. I bet this was probably the jist of it. He also argues that the contractual rights of all shareholders should be respected so if common gets fair treatment then the preferred should get their div? If rebuilding capital entails both the NWS and Sr Preferred be dealt with AND the Jr preferred are not converted what is the mechanism that turns the divs back on? When target capital levels met? When conservatorship is over? It would be interesting to see where the jr preferred would trade relative to par once the NWS is done and the Sr. Preferred are dealt with. I suspect it would purely be based on dividend yield. I think this is important at least for myself BC the NWS ending and the Sr. Preferred being negotiated seems like its going to be way before target capital levels are met and conservatorship is over.