Jump to content

FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.


twacowfca

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 17.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

 

"The bill aims to establish the new system within five years of enactment, though it provides a series of possible extensions, raising the prospect that Fannie and Freddie could continue to operate for at least another decade while the new infrastructure is built."

 

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303287804579443601120329542?mod=WSJ_hps_sections_markets&mg=reno64-wsj

 

Its a long shot, but even if the bill does become law the GSEs will be around for years and years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2014/04/have-gses-fully-repaid-the-treasury/

 

Have GSEs Fully Repaid the Treasury?

 

http://www.frbatlanta.org/assets/images/cenfis/pubscf/nftv_140324.jpg

 

What we can observe in the chart is that the 10 percent rate set in the senior preferred stock agreement is rather favorable to the GSEs over this period. The bond rate was over 15 percent at the time the GSEs were being put into conservatorship and the rate was being set on the senior preferred stock. The rate subsequently spiked at around 40 percent, and dropped below 10 percent only for brief periods prior to the latter part of 2013. [Author's note: Epstein points out that the GSEs also granted a warrant for the purchase of 79.9 percent of their common shares for a minimal price to the Treasury. However, at the time these warrants were granted, the GSEs were in financial distress and could not have survived without assistance. Thus, it is not clear these warrants had much value when granted.]

 

Thus, looking at the value of Treasury’s contribution relative to the GSEs’ pre-conservatorship business, we find that Treasury’s $188 billion senior preferred stock holdings understate the value of its contribution by attributing no dividends to Treasury in 2012−14, by ignoring the value of Treasury’s promise to absorb all of the GSEs’ losses, and by using a senior preferred stock dividend rate that likely provided inadequate compensation for the risk Treasury bore as a creditor.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest wellmont

 

 

Fannie, Freddie Say Overhaul Would Boost Mortgage Rates

 

Companies Outline Concerns on Senate Bill to Replace Them

 

 

 

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304788404579524093755984248?mod=U.S._newsreel_3

 

I totally forgot about the incentives of the employees of fannie and freedie. of course they don't want change. of course they want status quo. Of course they don't want to have to worry about a wind down and finding a position at a new company.  People don't like change. They want to stay in their comfort zone. I know I do. It makes total sense that they are saying that "disaster" will strike without fannie and freddie!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest wellmont

silly article. that's because they haven't been recapped to provide way more capital, or changed their business plan yet to mitigate losses in a downturn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest wellmont

 

Speaking at a Milken Institute conference last week, Freddie Mac chief Donald Layton explained that after one-time and temporary items are excluded, “our core earnings are a mere fraction of what has been recently reported.”

 

he has an incentive to say that-  he wishes to maintain the status quo. and this is what a caretaker CEO who, along with his friends, is destined to replaced in any overhaul, is bound to say. I don't believe the earnings are one time. I believe he is referring to loss reserves coming off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was reading the 1949 edition of the Intelligent Investor and Graham points to a Lazarus-type rising from the dead situation in the Cotton Belt railroad.  The railroad was in bankruptcy and the common shareholder protested the fact that they were not a part of the plan all the way to the Supreme Court.  This took 12 years after declaring bankruptcy and by then the railroad had accumulated enough cash to pay off all creditors and resume operations by exiting bankruptcy with the common shareholders in tact.  I know FRE/FNM have more politics surrounding them but this has happened before.

 

Packer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was reading the 1949 edition of the Intelligent Investor and Graham points to a Lazarus-type rising from the dead situation in the Cotton Belt railroad.  The railroad was in bankruptcy and the common shareholder protested the fact that they were not a part of the plan all the way to the Supreme Court.  This took 12 years after declaring bankruptcy and by then the railroad had accumulated enough cash to pay off all creditors and resume operations by exiting bankruptcy with the common shareholders in tact.  I know FRE/FNM have more politics surrounding them but this has happened before.

 

Packer

 

 

Yeah, I remember reading about Kao from  Akanthos talking a bit about the possible similarities there from the 2011 Value Investing Congress, I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was reading the 1949 edition of the Intelligent Investor and Graham points to a Lazarus-type rising from the dead situation in the Cotton Belt railroad.  The railroad was in bankruptcy and the common shareholder protested the fact that they were not a part of the plan all the way to the Supreme Court.  This took 12 years after declaring bankruptcy and by then the railroad had accumulated enough cash to pay off all creditors and resume operations by exiting bankruptcy with the common shareholders in tact.  I know FRE/FNM have more politics surrounding them but this has happened before.

 

Packer

 

Let's say the GSEs have a similar outcome, and it takes 12 years as well. It wouldn't be that great of a return for the preferreds. And the dividends I believe are non-cumulative so those wouldn't be paid either, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest wellmont

I was reading the 1949 edition of the Intelligent Investor and Graham points to a Lazarus-type rising from the dead situation in the Cotton Belt railroad.  The railroad was in bankruptcy and the common shareholder protested the fact that they were not a part of the plan all the way to the Supreme Court.  This took 12 years after declaring bankruptcy and by then the railroad had accumulated enough cash to pay off all creditors and resume operations by exiting bankruptcy with the common shareholders in tact.  I know FRE/FNM have more politics surrounding them but this has happened before.

 

Packer

 

It wouldn't be that great of a return for the preferreds.

 

holders of the preferred could swap for common shares. this is essentially the fairholme plan in a nutshell. it's also mentioned in the Ackman slide deck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...