Desert_Rat

"Mortgage Industry Expects FHFA Chief Watt to Change the GSE Dividend; Five Senators Warn Against It" Is this fake news? paywall: http://www.insidemortgagefinance.com/imfnews/1_1073/daily/five-senators-tell-fhfa-not-to-change-gse-dividends-1000040730-1.html

Doing so would have cost political capital. There was really no reason to suspend the payment before tax reform determines an immediate issue, and of priority right now is the budget and debt ceiling. To have come out of left field and forced conversation on housing reform now would have been counter-productive I think. Besides, Corker has accomplished just as much with his apparent desperation. The market seems bored but this has been a good morning, imo.

If the zombie status remains as it is right now, ithr common and preferred are zeros too, it just will take a long time until all hope isn't gone and the stock prices adjust accordingly. And its been discussed multiple times over the "zombie status" cannot persist. I beg to differ. Whatever can exist for 9 years can exist for 90 years. I have never heard a convincing argument why not. I agree that it those entities probably will not remain in the current state, but I think they could, especially since the status quo works really well for the government right now. I think the argument against zombie state persisting is that GSEs run out of capital buffer in 2018 and need capital injection then or something similar. What if govt does the capital injection but continues the same state with a higher ownership of prefs/warrants/whatever? Maybe this is prohibited. Resident experts will tell you. 8) and if they need a capital buffer, which they absolutely will if they're forever disallowed to save for their own buffer, that cash comes straight from govt. FnF, once a cash cow, becomes a liability. Sure, more preferreds would be issued but what point are they if they essentially have a zero int rate attached to them?

I'd think the greatest possible scenario for it becoming a zero is this country becoming a political state in which all private possessions are turned over to the govt, or a variation of. Otherwise, no zero.

Yes, but how could the NWS 'violate the conservator's power to issue preferred stock' if issuing such stock was already forbidden?

I thought the original agreement disallowed further equity raises. The following covenants apply to the GSEs as part of the agreements. Without the prior consent of the Treasury, the GSEs shall not: Make any payment to purchase or redeem its capital stock, or pay any dividends, including preferred dividends (other than dividends on the senior preferred stock) Issue capital stock of any kind Enter into any new or adjust any existing compensation agreements with “named executive officers” without consulting with Treasury Terminate conservatorship other than in connection with receivership Sell, convey or transfer any of its assets outside the ordinary course of business except as necessary to meet their obligation under the agreements to reduce their portfolio of retained mortgages and mortgage backed securities Increase its debt to more than 110% of its debt as of June 30, 2008 Acquire or consolidate with, or merge into, another entity. https://www.fhfa.gov/Conservatorship/Documents/Senior-Preferred-Stock-Agree/2008-8-7_SPSPA_FactSheet_508.pdf

FNMAS... FMCKJ... Maybe I'll proven wrong on others crazy dividend dreams but I won't pay 40% more, and usually higher, for the same stuff. For example, FMCCJ ($50) cost $8.51 today. When I add, I always add the lowest cost stuff.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-28/fannie-freddie-fix-is-focus-of-senators-push-across-party-lines

Not gonna happen before housing reform is my opinion.

Budget is tight, debt ceiling needs addressing, and GOP can't push initiatives through Congress. Tough times in Fannie Land.

Too late. If we were placed in receivership the preferreds would be pennies and I wouldn't be here. But we weren't and there's no cause now. Other than that, pretty optimistic stuff. The word is getting out how wrong this is.

Opinions like yours puzzle me. For one it implies the same reasoning with these men as to why the govt will screw us - they're all unscrupulous and have zero constitutional or righteous bearing. They're all in for themselves. Two, the conviction should be that, since nothing similar to this taking, on this scale anyway, has ever been perpetrated by a US Govt, it's not gonna happen this time either, regardless of support, or lack of, from Berk, Paulson, Mnuchin and Trump. All they mean to the big picture is a presumably faster resolution, which is convenient and all, but in the end the same result will be had. I've been accumulating for 4 years. I wish I was a great trader but I'm not so they all sit in my accounts. Going nowhere.

Of which I gotta believe GS would be a proponent of. They may not dig FnF scalping points they'd rather pocket, but I'm sure their primary concern here is with the govt stealing assets. The next asset stolen could be theirs.

I could be mistaken but I think that is a Kate Kelly quote. Not from Trump team but still nice to read.

Energy/Oil is hurting my bank and I fear will be health related to my heart attack.

Holy jesus that was funny!

that's a CNN level comment there. No, no believes that Obama personally tapped Trumps devices and spent his off time recording it all. Seriously. Obama applied thru fisa to bug trump associates involved with a russion bank, it was denied. He applied again and it was approved. Is the question with you really that it never happened or, instead, why was it approved? Id' be more concerned with the latter

On Fox News: "Some people say they took money from all sorts of agencies to pay for Obamacare.. like Fannie and Freddie. That's been circulating all weekend." Maria Bartiromo. The narrative is building. If nothing else this is interesting to watch. Still need a bit more to completely buy into it but very encouraging. I agree, as long as Infowars name isn't attached. The scapegoat it was done to finance ACA brought by legitimate accusers portrays us as victims, and as such may change the opinion of those who actually believe the sweep was necessary. They might be inclined to dig deeper.

It's actually simpler than that given that most people are not vegans or otherwise insistent on miserable food consumption. Remove the high risk participants and our system, the US system, becomes the best in the world again. Older and at risk? medicare or phuck off. Oh, you don't carry insurance but want it now that you're ill? Pre-existing as of a week ago, huh. Phuck off. 20 and not in college studying? You too, phuck off. Of course it would take a admin with balls to roll that out. So it will never happen. So the best healthcare system in the world, which I had all my life until now, is gone. Thanks, Obama.

On Fox News:

That, right there. and if you're not convicted don't buy it in the first place.

If only Infowars ugly mug wasn't all over that. If only..

My understanding is that you don't have to pay for it until you need it. You won't have a good selection of doctors, or preventative care, but Obama created an 'insurance' policy that really isn't - people have the right to acquire it once they get hurt, and presumably for only as long as they're hurt.

"Trumpcare", "Obamacare" Silly, the difference is obvious.

Yeah, that too. I'm most interested in how many votes this Trumpcare bill gets though. It has a better shot then housing reform, imo.