Flynnstone5

seems to me these stress test loss numbers can serve as the total minimum amount of capital the GSEs should have going forward...and this indicates about 2%, which is way less than most peopl have been pulling out of their most convenient orifice. I thought the same.

Some incredibly damaging info, which Josh Rosner is posting all over Twitter. What is it going to take for this to finally become a prime time media story? Perjury, fraud, cover up, etc.

understand this, but wonder how much (positive) weighting to put on notion that congress appears incapable of doing anything at moment. feeds into thesis that administration is just giving congress rope on gse reform and congress is getting near out of rope Chris, with all due respect, judging by the Jumpstart Act Congress is never out of rope. Even if we get to 12/31/17 with no bills on the table a harsh action by Mnuchin or Watt could trigger a last minute reaction. Then, we will again see swift crap coming our way. My hope is that Corker is beginning to understand the WH is not supporting his efforts/goals as Obama did and that the FHFA has its own power to act and it is not in the same page he is. With the balance of power shifting a more reasonable Corker may decide to adjust accordingly. It is just a hope... Wouldn't he be aware of the shift at this point? Why is he so optimistic about reform being passed if he believes he's lost leverage? My sense is Mnuchin either hasn't been straight with him (sure bob, we think you're solution is great) or Mnuchin has decided that he can gain political capital by giving into any corker/warner legislation for areas with more public visibility - healthcare and tax reform - which will have more importance in determining Mnuchins legacy in the eyes of the public. Could make an argument that his incentives (maybe guided by trump) are to give in to housing reform and use that capital to gain votes on tax reform/healthcare. Healthcare and taxes are certainly important, but I can't believe Mnuchin would go along with a plan like Corker/Warner. It would pose great unknown risk to the market and more importantly would drive up rates, which would have a negative effect on home ownership, home values, construction, etc. Corkers a snake though so could certainly see him trying to stuff some last minute shit in a larger bill.

Bought half of what I sold in prfd's back. I have to bet Mnuchin acts with common sense and that admin is not going to give up $ avail. Still worried about crooks and incompetence of the Corkers/Hensarlings.

Hadn't watched this in a while. It is an excellent talk!

Slow bleed

Tell me you're glad you didn't dump your whole position on the Feb verdict now that it's been halved. One wrong statement from Mnuchin and this goes on sale again. Like I said, kept half of a large position. Either my downsides limited, I'm successful with half or I get an opportunity to buy at lower price if that seems intelligent at the time. Makes pretty good sense IMO.

Interesting. Added 50% more of Freddie preferred at 4.50ish cost basis in the last week to Fannie preferred after reviewing Moelis proposal and listening to audio presentation as well as CATO institute discussion. My thought is without any catalyst/positive news, I can see it just continuing to bleed lower and lower. When we're closer to a catalyst can always buy back possibly lower at that point. If I miss it and it spikes, then I'm still holding half.

Sold half my position today. Too many unknowns and too much $ tied up as dead money for too long.

If you believe that Cohn, Mnuchin and GS are such strong opponents, what is it keeping you in the investment? Not disagreeing, but with litigation as good as dead IMO, what's the positive catalyst that you see?

Volume on prfds and price action absolutely sucks lately. Some positive comments/developments would be nice just to stop the slow bleed.

I recommend reading chapter 8 again of The Intelligent Investor. No offense, but you're sounding more and more like the iHub board.

Thoughts on these filing's? http://www.glenbradford.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Document.pdf http://www.glenbradford.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Document-1.pdf Particularly: "In sum, because a purchase of stock, whether in an original issuance or on the secondary market, forms a new contract with the corporation rather than assignment of a past contract, the objections advanced in Class Plaintiffs’ Petition are without merit and do not warrant rehearing." "In such a case, the owner presumably paid a discounted price for the property. Compensating him for a ‘taking’ would confer a windfall.”

This proposal seems to be very solid. I think one of the biggest keys is the capital buffer as Mnuchin has repeatedly made reference to the issue of safety. This plan provides an extraordinary level of safety, preserves the entities, makes the gov a handsome profit and benefits shareholders. Question for all here is what is the downside with respect to the anti FnF crowd? Saying you're against it on the basis of HF making money isn't going to cut it although many will surely take that approach. If you're a Corker, Crapo, Warner, etc, etc, what if any could be construed as substantive arguments made to Mnuchin and co against this plan? I don't see any short of the HF stock speculator line or perhaps someone saying the gov should make even more.

So after all this BS Sweeney will just go along!? How is it she can order, gov goes to appeal and majority of her opinion is upheld, but gov can simply ignore again without consequence? So much for the Sessions factor as well.

10 am https://www.c-span.org/video/?428775-1/treasury-secretary-mnuchin-testifes-fy-2018-budget-tax-reform worthless

Mnuchin live: https://waysandmeans.house.gov/live/

interesting. probably important not to dismiss. i'm guessing a solution where FnF exists but with material competition and thus a lower earnings base. this would likely satisfy the banksters. the shareholders, in return, could get cancellation of warrants / sr preferred (govt's been paid back with full interest), and preferreds voluntarily tendered to common (using threat of no dividends during capital building phase). capital raised through retained earnings and equity offerings (hence hiring MS treasurer as deputy cfo). lawsuits dropped. or maybe all that's just too simple....good luck everyone! We have seen the same movie over many years. What do they say, doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results? Congress will get nothing done. Don't you think Corker is trying to buy time till Jan 2018 by saying "don't worry, we are working on it, be patient" until the train wrecks in Jan 2018 when they call for liquidation (remember Mark Warner asked a question of shareholders being wiped ?" . I am getting pissygsetyk pessimistic here. We have 2 more days for them to turn all docs and if Sweeney gives them more days to comply would mean she isn't serious about this case, it has been years for her to drag on. And you dumped prfd to buy common because.......... Returns higher in commons. How so when there's an extremely high probability of dilution? Common is a fools play at this point IMO. It made sense prior to the litigation losses, but not now. I am not as savvy as many of you who are in preferreds. I do not know what will happen. I do know that all eyes are on to make sure hedge funds do not make money and they all hold preferreds. Preferreds would not be trading at $5-$6 if they were a sure bet. Believe me, I'm not as savvy as many on this board either. Prfd's are far from a sure bet, but they have a significant advantage over common. To your point, I see Ackman losing and taking one for the HF's.

interesting. probably important not to dismiss. i'm guessing a solution where FnF exists but with material competition and thus a lower earnings base. this would likely satisfy the banksters. the shareholders, in return, could get cancellation of warrants / sr preferred (govt's been paid back with full interest), and preferreds voluntarily tendered to common (using threat of no dividends during capital building phase). capital raised through retained earnings and equity offerings (hence hiring MS treasurer as deputy cfo). lawsuits dropped. or maybe all that's just too simple....good luck everyone! We have seen the same movie over many years. What do they say, doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results? Congress will get nothing done. Don't you think Corker is trying to buy time till Jan 2018 by saying "don't worry, we are working on it, be patient" until the train wrecks in Jan 2018 when they call for liquidation (remember Mark Warner asked a question of shareholders being wiped ?" . I am getting pissygsetyk pessimistic here. We have 2 more days for them to turn all docs and if Sweeney gives them more days to comply would mean she isn't serious about this case, it has been years for her to drag on. And you dumped prfd to buy common because.......... Returns higher in commons. How so when there's an extremely high probability of dilution? Common is a fools play at this point IMO. It made sense prior to the litigation losses, but not now.

interesting. probably important not to dismiss. i'm guessing a solution where FnF exists but with material competition and thus a lower earnings base. this would likely satisfy the banksters. the shareholders, in return, could get cancellation of warrants / sr preferred (govt's been paid back with full interest), and preferreds voluntarily tendered to common (using threat of no dividends during capital building phase). capital raised through retained earnings and equity offerings (hence hiring MS treasurer as deputy cfo). lawsuits dropped. or maybe all that's just too simple....good luck everyone! We have seen the same movie over many years. What do they say, doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results? Congress will get nothing done. Don't you think Corker is trying to buy time till Jan 2018 by saying "don't worry, we are working on it, be patient" until the train wrecks in Jan 2018 when they call for liquidation (remember Mark Warner asked a question of shareholders being wiped ?" . I am getting pissygsetyk pessimistic here. We have 2 more days for them to turn all docs and if Sweeney gives them more days to comply would mean she isn't serious about this case, it has been years for her to drag on. And you dumped prfd to buy common because..........

True, but you can cherry pick negatives or positives. "The Administration has publicly expressed its desire to work with members of Congress to facilitate a more sustainable housing finance system. Any reform of the housing system likely will impact the cash flows attributable to the GSEs in the 2018 Budget projections in ways that cannot be estimated at this time" "Historically, investors in GSE debt have included thousands of banks, institutional investors such as insurance companies, pension funds, foreign governments and millions of individuals through mutual funds and 401k investments."

Probably crazy, but there's a part of me that wants to load some shares on FNMAS.

I just don't see where outstanding litigation has any leverage when you have a litany of lost court cases. If we get closer to Jan 2018 and most cases have been lost, the only leverage I can see is possibly with Fairholme and what is to say the gov can't settle with them and simply screw the rest of us? Hoping that doesn't happen and it wouldn't be normal by any measure, but the whole situation just continues to take turns no one would have thought possible even six months ago.

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.

+1. as trump would say, sad! +1 Chris Certainly some madness going on and I'll admit that I have contributed, but then again the thousands of legal posts supporting our position were all completely wrong so value add seems about the same.