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

[BeerBBQ]

Didn't Icahn buy common shares from Berkowitz awhile back?

[TonyG]

I believe he did. Also, i think more documents were unsealed

 

http://fanniefreddiesecrets.org/resources/

 

Haven't read them yet.

[doughishere]

Investors Unite - Newly Unsealed Documents Show How Treasury Violated HERA

 

http://investorsunite.org/newly-unsealed-documents-show-treasury-violated-hera/

[muscleman]

Investors Unite - Newly Unsealed Documents Show How Treasury Violated HERA

 

http://investorsunite.org/newly-unsealed-documents-show-treasury-violated-hera/

 

Why is Jim Parrot's deposition only partially unsealed? Just two pages?

[Guest cherzeca]

Investors Unite - Newly Unsealed Documents Show How Treasury Violated HERA

 

http://investorsunite.org/newly-unsealed-documents-show-treasury-violated-hera/

 

Why is Jim Parrot's deposition only partially unsealed? Just two pages?

 

likely all P counsel wanted judges to read from it.  judges didnt go to evelyn wood speed reading school

[Mephistopheles]

So the plaintiffs decided to black out the rest? Interesting

[Guest cherzeca]

So the plaintiffs decided to black out the rest? Interesting

 

it was all already redacted. P counsel unseals what it wants to unseal (and what it is permitted to unseal).

[muscleman]

So the plaintiffs decided to black out the rest? Interesting

 

it was all already redacted. P counsel unseals what it wants to unseal (and what it is permitted to unseal).

 

Got it. I guess most of the remaining redacted answers are like, "I can't tell you. I can't tell you. I can't tell you...." But surprisingly Jim Parrot didn't say this for all questions.

I wonder if Perry P will now file this new info to the Appeals Court, and FHFA will again file an objection and ask the court not to look at it?  :)

[Mephistopheles]

So the plaintiffs decided to black out the rest? Interesting

 

it was all already redacted. P counsel unseals what it wants to unseal (and what it is permitted to unseal).

 

Oh ok, got it. So the parts that are redacted remain redacted regardless of what's unsealed? Even if Sweeney decides to go ahead with motion to compel?

[Grenville]

I remember someone mentioning that the staff turns over in August for the courts. Is it fair to assume we won't hear anything substantial from the Perry Case until September?

[Guest cherzeca]

I remember someone mentioning that the staff turns over in August for the courts. Is it fair to assume we won't hear anything substantial from the Perry Case until September?

 

i think that is a fair assumption since the case is complex and they just received the supp briefing a short while ago, and even judges take vacays.  but not so much because of clerk turnover.  clerks should have done all of their work by now; i imagine what remains is judge work

 

EDIT: interestingly, looks like no oral arguments until after labor day.  so opinion writing time!  https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/sixtyday.nsf/fullcalendar?OpenView&count=1000

[Luke 532]

  so opinion writing time! 

 

Sure hope so, let's get this decision in the books in August.

[merkhet]

  so opinion writing time! 

 

Sure hope so, let's get this decision in the books in August.

 

Hopefully it's not just vacation time, lol.

[Steve_Berk]

i seriously doubt we'll see anything in August. From a practical standpoint, not only is it the summer, but the judges probably have relatively new law clerks who will need time to catch up on everything.

 

  so opinion writing time! 

 

Sure hope so, let's get this decision in the books in August.

[Luke 532]

i seriously doubt we'll see anything in August. From a practical standpoint, not only is it the summer, but the judges probably have relatively new law clerks who will need time to catch up on everything.

 

  so opinion writing time! 

 

Sure hope so, let's get this decision in the books in August.

 

But if the clerk work is already done and it's currently on the desks of the judges...

[Guest cherzeca]

i seriously doubt we'll see anything in August. From a practical standpoint, not only is it the summer, but the judges probably have relatively new law clerks who will need time to catch up on everything.

 

  so opinion writing time! 

 

Sure hope so, let's get this decision in the books in August.

 

 

But if the clerk work is already done and it's currently on the desks of the judges...

 

 

this is all supposition, luke.  judges use clerks differently among them. some use mostly for research.  some also have them draft opinions. most merits panels take some sort of vote after orals to see what the lay of the land is, and assign opinion writing responsibility. but generally once first draft of an opinion is written, other judges review the opinion and there is debate over language etc. at the end of day, there may be concurring opinions and dissenting opinions needed to be drafted and reviewed.

 

something tells me that in perry case, you will see three opinions, since judges could agree on result but for different reasons. moreover, if there is remand for APA claim that NWS not consistent with conservatorship, you may have different standards enunciated for the district court to follow even if judges agree to remand...all the more reason for judges to debate among themselves to try to reach a single instruction for the district court.

 

so all things being equal, this should be a longer rather than shorter judicial decision process

[Luke 532]

i seriously doubt we'll see anything in August. From a practical standpoint, not only is it the summer, but the judges probably have relatively new law clerks who will need time to catch up on everything.

 

  so opinion writing time! 

 

Sure hope so, let's get this decision in the books in August.

 

 

But if the clerk work is already done and it's currently on the desks of the judges...

 

 

this is all supposition, luke.  judges use clerks differently among them. some use mostly for research.  some also have them draft opinions. most merits panels take some sort of vote after orals to see what the lay of the land is, and assign opinion writing responsibility. but generally once first draft of an opinion is written, other judges review the opinion and there is debate over language etc. at the end of day, there may be concurring opinions and dissenting opinions needed to be drafted and reviewed.

 

something tells me that in perry case, you will see three opinions, since judges could agree on result but for different reasons. moreover, if there is remand for APA claim that NWS not consistent with conservatorship, you may have different standards enunciated for the district court to follow even if judges agree to remand...all the more reason for judges to debate among themselves to try to reach a single instruction for the district court.

 

so all things being equal, this should be a longer rather than shorter judicial decision process

 

I hear ya.  Thanks for the info.

[doughishere]

If this does work out the absolute cherry on top for Bruce will be the fact that he gets to hand the Obama administration(And Corker et all) not only a loss, a very hard thing to do, but a loss using their own arguments:

 

 

In February, Federal Housing Finance Agency (“FHFA”) Director Mel Watt publicly acknowledged that the “lack of capital” resulting from the Net Worth Sweep is “the most serious risk and the one that has the most potential for escalating in the future.”1  Legislators agree, but have failed to resolve the issue. 

 

A key lesson from the 2008 crisis is that all financial institutions need adequate capital.  Regulators, including FHFA and the United States Treasury (“Treasury”), readily acknowledge that large financial institutions need even more.  However, in the context of Fannie and Freddie – the largest financial institutions in America – FHFA and Treasury pretend that neither company needs tangible equity capital on its balance sheet because of a government standby commitment.  This is neither safe nor sound.  The ability to “Phone-a-Friend” is not capital and certainly does not protect taxpayers.  Our ongoing litigation seeks to ensure that Fannie and Freddie retain earnings to prudently rebuild capital and honor all obligations.

 

Bruce gets to point the finger back at Mel Watt(and whoever else) and say "You cheated and you still lost. You admitted it and now you painted yourself into the corner and I got you."

 

And then he drills it right in......why? because......"The ability to “Phone-a-Friend” is not capital and certainly does not protect taxpayers. .."..thats the best line in here. The implication that Fannie and Freddie have to “Phone-a-Friend” precisely because of those that dont want it to “Phone-a-Friend.” Bruce Berkowitz, champion of the tax payers.

 

 

 

Come on, there's some irony there......if he gets that ruling. I hope he does.

 

[merkhet]

i seriously doubt we'll see anything in August. From a practical standpoint, not only is it the summer, but the judges probably have relatively new law clerks who will need time to catch up on everything.

 

  so opinion writing time! 

 

Sure hope so, let's get this decision in the books in August.

 

Clerks don't start until September. One of my buddies from YLS is clerking for Judge Brown. :P

[muscleman]

Does anyone know the next action for the DE case? Judge Sleet seems to have fallen sleep again since he woke up last month

[Guest cherzeca]

Does anyone know the next action for the DE case? Judge Sleet seems to have fallen sleep again since he woke up last month

 

sleet not only has hindes/jacobs before him, but also a request from fhfa to remove to federal court the books and records case that pagliara brought in delaware state ct.  they are related in the sense that he has to determine to what extent federal law displaces state law.  so perhaps, just perhaps, he is not a sleeping sleet, but working on or at least thinking about both cases

[doughishere]

Anyone have the S-2 or what ever prospectus documentation for FNMAS handy? Id like to look at that.

 

 

 

Edit: Doesn't matter what series of preferred shares it is so long as its par with FNMAS.

 

 

[Mephistopheles]

Don't have the link on me but just go to the website and they have a whole section on preferreds in the investor relations

[Mephistopheles]

So Trump just announced his economic advisory team, and it includes John Paulson, who's a GSE shareholder. Icahn was also offered a spot apparently which he declined, but Trump has made it clear that Icahn would have his ear if he becomes President.

 

I think this tilts the odds in our favor, perhaps significantly if he wins. Thoughts?

[rros]

So Trump just announced his economic advisory team, and it includes John Paulson, who's a GSE shareholder. Icahn was also offered a spot apparently which he declined, but Trump has made it clear that Icahn would have his ear if he becomes President.

 

I think this tilts the odds in our favor, perhaps significantly if he wins. Thoughts?

And how is Paulson going to handle the conflict of interest?