orthopa

Based on the preferred alone the market must still see a way where FnF are allowed to retain capital, conservatorship ends and preferred still gets nothing based on todays prices at 20-30% of par.

Wow all of a sudden congress (democrats) now seem to care about what all of these minority groups have to say. 9/29 is the day or day before $$$ is to be sent to treasury right? Not a coincidence. Congress seems to have taken to heart that Mnuchin is not discussing building capital with Watt. I certainly though otherwise as they have had meetings correct? 2nd last paragraph shows that congress no where near reform happening by end of 2017. Question is what happens to shareholders if FnF are building capital until congress gets its act together say 6-18 months. They combined could have 15-20B by then no? I need to refresh my memory on the possible outcomes in a building capital scenario where they are released out of conservatorship etc. I have kept my investment but haven't thought about this in a while frankly because I never thought a day like this would come. Although at first glance it appears that congress just want to buy themselves more time.

My best ideas are still V and PM. Neither is cheap but have held both a long time and like the next 5-10 years for both. Otherwise just building cash. In regards to the bitcoin discussion haven't the greatest investors of all time said things such " if you cant describe your investment in a short paragraph", "if you cant draw it with a crayon" etc etc. I'm completely ignorant to the entire discussion and not calling those involved wrong but it seems like such a terribly complicated investment. Often on the board people can have large differences in opinion on value but not so much of an opinion on what they are actually investing in and what the function of the investment is. I would have a very hard time putting significant money into an idea that others view the value of so different. Is it a currency, a store of value, a technology, a means of privacy, etc, etc? Not sure that this is opaque as the "black box" that banks were during and after the GFC but it maybe close. Good luck to those involved. If this is the future and Im this ignorant to all of this Im f*cked.

This hints at what I believe to be a substiantial risk- settlement with only certain shareholders (plaintiffs) while concurrently stopping the shares from trading. Would wipe out retail shareholders and wouldn't allow other funds to buy up the shares and sue. Berkowitz has said before that the preferred shares are a contract. How does the contract hold for one person and not the other?...When the entire premise of the takings is just that? I can see "some" being preferred vs common.

I think the amazon argument has some legs but for the people who are really comfortable working on cars and have time to burn because the part isn't that necessary. If your on Amazon searching for a part your car is running and the part isnt necessary. That or you can ride your bike or walk to work. Say your battery is dead. Going to wait for amazon for 2 days or ship a 30 lb battery?(can you even ship a battery?) Could do Walmart but they have always been there. Your alternator dies. Same thing. Going to wait 2 days? What about your core? You going to ship that back?What if you accessory belt needs to be changed at the same time? Ever change a water pump and tear the gasket? Break a bolt reefing on it with a breaker bar? etc. Secondly I think honestly if you took the vast majority of women/wifes/gfs (extrapolating from my wife) and told them they could save 10-15% by fixing their EGR valve or their TPS sensor IAT sensor etc of have someone do it....they are having someone do it. Question then is where are the garages getting their parts? I am pretty handy with cars and can do 80-90% of repairs outside of major tear outs/rebuilds and sometimes the part cant wait or its not worth waiting 2 days to get it. Not to mention even as society has become more thrifty the vast majority of people are becoming less familiar with car repair. Ever see people on the side of the road with AAA there to change a tire for christ sakes! If anything it may go a long way for AAP, AZO, ORLY to lower their prices just a smidge because some stuff is just ridiculous if you have a reasonable idea of what stuff should cost. Is ORLY worth 20% less now then a week ago because of one SSS miss? I doubt it.

I recommend reading chapter 8 again of The Intelligent Investor. FWIW your getting diluted significantly as a common shareholder. Not quite sure you understand that yet. The NWS and the 80% common dilution as well as senior preferred are two different things. Once the sweep stops, your still at risk of getting diluted by a minimum of 80% and likely even more if jr preferred are converted to common. AIG common was diluted by ~92% so its not without precedent. Your stance and anger is appreciated but obviously going to do very little in regards to personal return. It sounds like are strongly in favor of common but if preferred may long run give a better return why not consider it? Unfortunately no has cared or will care if someone stole from you. Placing yourself in the position to get the best returns for your $$ should be your main focus now. Suffering from anchor bias traditionally hasn't been the best way to proceed with investing. My 2 pennies.

I would argue against that. If you have followed this story from the beginning with mnuchin he has expressed strong opinions about FnF and has reserved acting alone multiple times in front of congress although not his "preference". What does the Treasury Secretary do with FnF when he says the status quo is unacceptable, has not gotten a legislative solution from congress and has the ability to execute the Moelis act in its entirety without any input from congress? My guess is not "nothing". Mnuchin can easily point the finger at congress for no solution. I think every day we are finding out there really isn't a better system.

Why is is cherzeca's "job"? Secondly I think we need to make sure shareholders rights are respected way before we worry about a div. That has been hard enough to assure let alone any sweeteners. No reason to get greedy IMO.

i am just trying to rationalize mnuchin going from a (seemingly) gung ho quick (administrative) solution early on to a more deferential posture now. i think he wants to appear to congress like a working partner, and he may eventually work with congress to achieve "reasonable gesture" of accommodation with those in congress that would side with MBA. my bottom line is that the passage of time is no friend of MBA and those in congress that would promote the MBA proposal, and that the thoroughness and quality of the moelis blueprint has to put MBA and its friends in congress on the defensive. if mnuchin and watt want to go with an administrative reform, the blueprint is ready to be adopted and executed Agree and its semantics but Mnuchin has said he wanted to "Fix Fannie". Blueprint does this.

I also think an important part of the blueprint is that it can be done without input from congress by Mnuchin and Watt. Congress and the Senate Banking Committee may never even get a chance to tweak it. Why/how could that happen? 1. Congress as mentioned has a lot on its plate and GSE reform is becoming urgent but will it be passed by both houses of congress and signed by Trump? 2. Mnuchin has not ruled out acting alone twice and Watt said he may have to dance. Blueprint slides in nicely here. 3. Watt may start to act alone and discussed in blueprint with holding divs. The GSE's have been reformed significantly already and the closest bailout examples of AIG and Ally were processed alone by Treasury and went very smoothly. Would a plan like MBAs be able to be done by FHFA/Treasury without input from congress?

Never thought I would see the day a fannie investor would complain about actually being able to make a return on the investment! :P :P

Like what I see so far. Looks like a new financial times article came out. Anyone able to post it for us that dont subscribe? Thanks

Is anyone able to post the text of the WSJ article? Thanks

Does anyone here thinks we will lose Delaware and Sweeney case? It doesn't matter because there's probably no chance in hell that the outcome is determined through litigation. All analysis has been completely wrong. i think congress is not focused on settling litigation in connection with reform. i think watt/mnuchin have it on their radar, but it is not a big concern unless and until govt loses one case. at some point though, late in reform process, i think the existence of outstanding litigation will be something that will have to be settled in order to raise new capital. and there will be outstanding litigation for a long while Chris How would outstanding litigation be handled say if reform goes through, shareholders get screwed but for some reason 2-3 years from now a court rules favorably for shareholders. Where would relief come from if say FnF is liquidated and new companies are formed?

Court cases continue to disappoint. Sweeney up next. The issue with the court cases is any decision may come long after reform signed off on. A political/legislative solution may have originally seemed riskier then a court or rule of law outcome but looks to be just the opposite now as the court case losses piling up. More waiting....

...and to continue my parade of posts....For whatever reason it seems like on TV Mnuchin comes across as much more shareholder friendly in that he says the right things. Once he talks to congress or on the record its easy to start to question his stance. Which is a better impression of the real thing? When he speaks off the cuff on TV or in front of a congressional panel on the record?

FWIW, a little late in responding. All preferred, ~10% of portfolio at these prices. Anyone have any thoughts as to why to date NO ONE has mentioned the word shareholders? Last person in reference to FNF was Corker when he called it a lotto ticket/ and or to short it what ~2 years ago now? If they were going to wipe out shareholders in a worse case scenario, and everyone in power currently and going back to the Obama administration knows it why the wait? Why ont just do it? Why not just wipe out shareholders and get it over with? What is the monetary/political/visual benefit to the gov in waiting?

Well seeing if you still hold even only 1 share of preferred the our interests/luck are mutual. If you don't think mnuchin will be a big reason why shareholders are not totally screwed. You have a couple other options.... 1. Legal outcome, its my understanding you were a plantiff or something close in a certain case? To use your choice of words "I hope thats not the reason you post!" 2. Corker/Warner et al. 3. Trump who hasn't mentioned a word on FnF ever. 4. Watt who at least appears to be ready to act favorably on the div.

Think about how far we have come, a year ago these entities were dead as could be and now there appears to be some in fighting between the admin and congress, mnuchin, watt etc. Just what we need. The more they disagree the less likely something drastic happens in regards to structure but the deadlines and DTA coming and very real. The senate finance committee has not trusted mnuchin from the beginning. We are seeing why now. Mnuchin/Phillips are in the driver seat here. Have Mnuchin/Phillips consulted with congress on reform? Not likely. The senate finance committee doesnt know shit. If you watch the video you can tell they are lost. No clue. Corker does and I bet sees what happening. Congress at this point is there to pass the bill and I have every expectation that Mnuchin/Watt will do everything in their power to do as much as they can without congress's approval. Watt will defer everything to his duty as conservator but he will act based on Mnunchin's wishes. Remember what Mnuchin said, he said out of govt control/ownership/protect the taxpayer before he said he hoped there could be a legislative decision. Who is Congress fooling, they wont pass a bill on their own. They have 7.5 months right now to overhaul something as huge as fannie/freddie. No fucking way. How do Corker/Mnuchin/Phillips come together. If Corker/Warner go rouge Trump wont sign the bill. Mnuchin/Phillips are in the drivers seat, everyone else is along for the ride. Again this begs the question does Mnuchin fuck over Paulson/Berkowitz et al or does those guys finally get their pay back?

Mnuchin is the only reason we still post on this thread. Dont think I would keep riding him that hard. He maybe the only reason any of us make any $$$$ on this.

Corker says the white house is in a "downward spiral". Pretty critical for someone who is working with the administration on Housing Reform no? Also the snipet from Craig Phillips discussion at the conference yesterday said no further details on the "administrations preferred plan" for FnF and housing reform. No mention of congress there. Something does seem to have changed Mr. Corker.

How does Watt do his job as he states he plans to do if he lets the capital go to zero. He just spent 2 hours telling us it shouldn't. In my mind that means zero on 1/18 never happens. He also smerked when asked about a minimal buffer discussion with treasury. Watt and Mnuchin both know how much of a buffer they want.

I encourage those following this re watch the corker/watt exchange. Corker is very concerned and says Watt wanting to stop the dividend is concerning to him because it looks like the Admin is taking a different approach and not working with "us and others" to move ahead with reform but all of a sudden a unilateral step by you....it just creates a different direction, which sends a signal to the world that something different is occuring when its not. Watt uses his airbag analogy again and says the risk is small...corker tells him to just draw on it and see what happens then watt says "but I just dont under stand, understand why...(my assumption would be that why is with holding the div such a big problem) Disgusted with the reply Corker says its one of the most baseless arguments he has ever heard....no other company would be worried about market fluctuations...but something has happened recently, I don't know what it is... Corker more then anyone detests holding the div. Does this signal something specific? Does he feel like it circumvents the jump start bill or him directly? Why does he feel so strongly? I cant help but think back to when Warner said he did not trust Mnuchin to act alone during his diatribe before the Mnunchin confirmation vote. Dont forget Mnuchin did not promise to not act alone during his testimony too. :) :) Its all coming together a bit here..... The link I provided earlier said rumor was POTUS told him his input not needed on FnF. Doesn't seem to be all that far off no? Addendum...Corker must just be afraid retaining capital builds momentum to free the GSE's in light of low chance legislation is done? Right? As much as I think this is a long shot Corker must not. What do we do with GSEs building capital towards the end of the year with no legislative solution to change them????

If Watt has assured that stopping the NWS does not mean recap and release why is Corker so against the sweep stopping? For some reason that really bothers him as clearly displayed today and in his previous letter regarding the Q1 dividend.

I certainly think its a stretch he was trading a position but there is no doubt he was unhappy and frustrated when he left.