Flynnstone5 Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 I have followed this board for over a year now and believe that it provides some of the most knowledgeable analysis and insight available. Assuming the writ of mandamus is denied, how quickly do the P's counsel receive the 56 docs? Also, given that they are under seal, how soon would they make their way into the public domain or is it possible that the P's receive, but seal is never lifted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orthopa Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 My common/preferred FNMA is not marginable. Tradeking is my broker. Fannie holding currently ~9% of portfolio. Why not more? I guess outside of cash coming in, which I have used over time notably after Sweeney released a large tranche of docs this past summer not sure I want to sell other appreciated holdings which are good cash flowing yada, yada businesses. With just recent dip of common I added some. If common/preferred ultimately go to 2-10x currently value we all will do quite fine. I guess I think back to Buffett's comment that its foolish to risk a lot of what you have to get more of what you don't need. As good as things look this is still not a guarentee but if I lose ~9 of my portfolio I can still get up the next day and live to invest again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoCitiesCapital Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 Well not sure how all in to be with this thing I don't know how he borrowed his money, but I don't believe it was margin. He does hold over $2M worth, at current prices, of preferred shares. I don't know if that's all his money or if he's also managing money for others, but the 100+% rally we've seen in the last month has probably been a life altering change for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Guest cherzeca Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 I have followed this board for over a year now and believe that it provides some of the most knowledgeable analysis and insight available. Assuming the writ of mandamus is denied, how quickly do the P's counsel receive the 56 docs? Also, given that they are under seal, how soon would they make their way into the public domain or is it possible that the P's receive, but seal is never lifted? fairholme will request docs under seal right after mandamus denied, and govt will find some reason to stall. then fairholme goes to sweeney and asks for contempt order against govt, and asks sweeney to hand over copies of the docs that she reveiwed in camera under seal. i dont know if govt can have merits panel decision reviewed en banc or not but that would take time for the full appeals court for the federal circuit to decide that. i will research their rules later. i assume that these docs will never see the light of day. one way for the seal to be leifted is if govt makes arguments before sweeney or before a perry remand that are directly contradicted by the sealed docs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... investorG Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 understanding we are waiting on various pieces of news that could aggressively move the shares in either direction, a major source of opportunity is that only 1 analyst on wall street writes research on the #12 company in the fortune list. because for the common the expected value targets are likely circular due to long term capital raise requirements fueling uncertainty over the final shares outstanding, one favorable report by a respected wall street firm could be very very positive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Guest cherzeca Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 I have followed this board for over a year now and believe that it provides some of the most knowledgeable analysis and insight available. Assuming the writ of mandamus is denied, how quickly do the P's counsel receive the 56 docs? Also, given that they are under seal, how soon would they make their way into the public domain or is it possible that the P's receive, but seal is never lifted? fairholme will request docs under seal right after mandamus denied, and govt will find some reason to stall. then fairholme goes to sweeney and asks for contempt order against govt, and asks sweeney to hand over copies of the docs that she reveiwed in camera under seal. i dont know if govt can have merits panel decision reviewed en banc or not but that would take time for the full appeals court for the federal circuit to decide that. i will research their rules later. i assume that these docs will never see the light of day. one way for the seal to be leifted is if govt makes arguments before sweeney or before a perry remand that are directly contradicted by the sealed docs. see http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/rules-of-practice/MASTERFederalCircuitRulesOfPractice-12.01.16.pdf rule 35 for the federal circuit appeals court permits en banc hearing if majority of judges believe it is a question of exceptional importance. this is disfavored generally. so i can see govt asking for en banc review, and this will delay even if denied. rule21 relating to mandamus writs makes clear that this proceeding takes precedence over ordinary civil actions so it has been fast tracked so far and a decision is likely reasonably soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Flynnstone5 Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 I have followed this board for over a year now and believe that it provides some of the most knowledgeable analysis and insight available. Assuming the writ of mandamus is denied, how quickly do the P's counsel receive the 56 docs? Also, given that they are under seal, how soon would they make their way into the public domain or is it possible that the P's receive, but seal is never lifted? fairholme will request docs under seal right after mandamus denied, and govt will find some reason to stall. then fairholme goes to sweeney and asks for contempt order against govt, and asks sweeney to hand over copies of the docs that she reveiwed in camera under seal. i dont know if govt can have merits panel decision reviewed en banc or not but that would take time for the full appeals court for the federal circuit to decide that. i will research their rules later. i assume that these docs will never see the light of day. one way for the seal to be leifted is if govt makes arguments before sweeney or before a perry remand that are directly contradicted by the sealed docs. The en banc review is what I'm afraid of, but that is definitely outside of my knowledge base. Does Sweeney have the right/discretion to remove seal if she wanted without either of scenarios you described happening? As in, I wouldn't ordinarily do this, but after your excessive stalling, filing the writ, etc....I'm lifting the seal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... hardincap Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 with a "friendly" treasury sec coming in, i think we want more delays not less. why risk another lamberth? the nws *must* be cancelled as a necessary condition to privatization Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Flynnstone5 Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 with a "friendly" treasury sec coming in, i think we want more delays not less. why risk another lamberth? the nws *must* be cancelled as a necessary condition to privatization I suppose, but my thought was with P's gaining docs and getting a remand or reversal, this gives shareholders the greatest leverage in a settlement. Equally important imo, it gives the admin. cover as we already know the mantra from the left and corresponding media coverage will be that Trump enriched his billionaire h.f. buddies. I'd like to see the attempt at that narrative crushed from the onset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Guest cherzeca Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 with a "friendly" treasury sec coming in, i think we want more delays not less. why risk another lamberth? the nws *must* be cancelled as a necessary condition to privatization i've been thinking about this, whether the courts matter at this point. i think mnuchin is going to face some kind of blowback from crapo hensarling etc, and i still think it would be nice for mnuchin to have some court opinions in his pocket, even if "just" remand. the wind down crowd in congress cant proceed on that basis anymore even if there is only a remand. i think it is more likely that they slink away if the courts rule Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... hardincap Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 yes that is the upside scenario. i generally prefer to focus on downside though. can you imagine how much blowback there would be if we get another lamberth? even if mnuchin wanted to privatize fannie on terms favorable to shareholders, it could cost him political capital that he may not be willing (or able) to pay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Guest wellmont Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 with a "friendly" treasury sec coming in, i think we want more delays not less. why risk another lamberth? the nws *must* be cancelled as a necessary condition to privatization I suppose, but my thought was with P's gaining docs and getting a remand or reversal, this gives shareholders the greatest leverage in a settlement. Equally important imo, it gives the admin. cover as we already know the mantra from the left and corresponding media coverage will be that Trump enriched his billionaire h.f. buddies. I'd like to see the attempt at that narrative crushed from the onset. the media can spin this any way they want. nobody cares anymore. one thing that has happened since nws is the absolute destruction of msm credibility. the djt administration will spin this as pragmatic, good for housing, good for the economy, and good for the little guy. it really doesn't matter what vox.com says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... BTShine Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 Agree with you, Wellmont. In general DJT and Mnuchin don't care what the media thinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Guest cherzeca Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 somewhat OT there is a theme going on with the trump transition, and a recap of GSEs is perfectly consistent with the direction of much trump policy changes of obama policy. take for instance the appointment of the oklahoma atty general for epa. obama by exec order had epa reinterpret clean air act to authorize the clean power plan, which is now enjoined by scotus and being decided by dc circuit. person leading fight against the clean power plan? our new epa director former ok atty gen a true 180 turnaround in epa administration. it is certainly consistent for treasury to now recap the GSEs rather than milk them and eliminate them, another 180 trump v obama turnaround. there will be a lot of mainstream media hissing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... investorG Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 Agree with you, Wellmont. In general DJT and Mnuchin don't care what the media thinks. for some potential outcomes, having the courts on FNMA+FMCC's side would be very helpful. for many reasons, I genuinely hope that the courts reject the NWS, or HERA overall -- right now the govt is arguing that FHFA can do whatever it wants, no matter what. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Seahug Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 I think he was margin called based on reported holdings Hmm. Recalculated his holdings. Maybe not margin called or if at call not a big amount. I got mixed up with the 50 pars. Current market value is about $900k, which is about 2x previous value. My bad, apologies to all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Flynnstone5 Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 I read an interesting post this morning, which I have thought about in the past myself. Can any of the law experts explain why none of the lawsuits ever challenged the legality of HERA under constitutional power? And could such a suit still be brought today by shareholders? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... waynepolsonAtoZ Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 Those are the federal court of claims cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Flynnstone5 Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 Those are the federal court of claims cases. I didn't think that they specifically challenge HERA as opposed to issues surrounding HERA, overreach , etc.? Apologize if I'm incorrect. If so, could you point me to the specific cases? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... onyx1 Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 Those are the federal court of claims cases. I didn't think that they specifically challenge HERA as opposed to issues surrounding HERA, overreach , etc.? Apologize if I'm incorrect. If so, could you point me to the specific cases? http://gselinks.com/Court_Filings/Collins/16-cv-03113-0001.pdf Collins vs. FHFA, filed in Texas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... undervalued Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 Anyone betting larger than 50% of their net worth into the preferred here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... investorG Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 fwiw there are some unverified comments on another blog that calabria is in the mix for FHA. it appears he has been open to the GSEs surviving but with some restrictions like high capital levels. perhaps would suggest using a revised warrant strike price and/or preferred conversion options to get the capital up quickly, in addition to retained earnings and public market equity raises. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... blainehodder Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 Anyone betting larger than 50% of their net worth into the preferred here? If so, you better be prepared for the very serious possibility of vaporizing half of your wealth at the whims of the government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... investorG Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 Anyone betting larger than 50% of their net worth into the preferred here? that's aggressive. not me and not sure if anyone is going to volunteer that info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Flynnstone5 Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 Those are the federal court of claims cases. I didn't think that they specifically challenge HERA as opposed to issues surrounding HERA, overreach , etc.? Apologize if I'm incorrect. If so, could you point me to the specific cases? http://gselinks.com/Court_Filings/Collins/16-cv-03113-0001.pdf Collins vs. FHFA, filed in Texas Thanks. I thought this was similar in that it challenges NSW, but not the legality of HERA itself. I'll be sure to read. As an aside, I keep going back reviewing the oral arguments in Perry and the courts additional questions regarding sovereign immunity. I continue to be absolutely amazed that this has dragged on for so long. When you look at the definition of a conservator and the actions of the gov, it really makes me wonder what world we're living in where this wouldn't have been remanded at the very least by now. I made a substantial investment in common and prf'd (55%/45% accounting for 5% of my net worth) long ago believing that justice would prevail for P's. Lamberth, the incessant delays in Judge Sweeny's court and the FBI not recommending to file charges against HRC have all given me serious pause. Trump/Mnuchin has provided a great deal of optimism. I hope Mnuchin will provide additional clues sooner than later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Prev 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 Next Page 198 of 687 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 Share More sharing options... Followers 10
Guest cherzeca Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 I have followed this board for over a year now and believe that it provides some of the most knowledgeable analysis and insight available. Assuming the writ of mandamus is denied, how quickly do the P's counsel receive the 56 docs? Also, given that they are under seal, how soon would they make their way into the public domain or is it possible that the P's receive, but seal is never lifted? fairholme will request docs under seal right after mandamus denied, and govt will find some reason to stall. then fairholme goes to sweeney and asks for contempt order against govt, and asks sweeney to hand over copies of the docs that she reveiwed in camera under seal. i dont know if govt can have merits panel decision reviewed en banc or not but that would take time for the full appeals court for the federal circuit to decide that. i will research their rules later. i assume that these docs will never see the light of day. one way for the seal to be leifted is if govt makes arguments before sweeney or before a perry remand that are directly contradicted by the sealed docs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
investorG Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 understanding we are waiting on various pieces of news that could aggressively move the shares in either direction, a major source of opportunity is that only 1 analyst on wall street writes research on the #12 company in the fortune list. because for the common the expected value targets are likely circular due to long term capital raise requirements fueling uncertainty over the final shares outstanding, one favorable report by a respected wall street firm could be very very positive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cherzeca Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 I have followed this board for over a year now and believe that it provides some of the most knowledgeable analysis and insight available. Assuming the writ of mandamus is denied, how quickly do the P's counsel receive the 56 docs? Also, given that they are under seal, how soon would they make their way into the public domain or is it possible that the P's receive, but seal is never lifted? fairholme will request docs under seal right after mandamus denied, and govt will find some reason to stall. then fairholme goes to sweeney and asks for contempt order against govt, and asks sweeney to hand over copies of the docs that she reveiwed in camera under seal. i dont know if govt can have merits panel decision reviewed en banc or not but that would take time for the full appeals court for the federal circuit to decide that. i will research their rules later. i assume that these docs will never see the light of day. one way for the seal to be leifted is if govt makes arguments before sweeney or before a perry remand that are directly contradicted by the sealed docs. see http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/rules-of-practice/MASTERFederalCircuitRulesOfPractice-12.01.16.pdf rule 35 for the federal circuit appeals court permits en banc hearing if majority of judges believe it is a question of exceptional importance. this is disfavored generally. so i can see govt asking for en banc review, and this will delay even if denied. rule21 relating to mandamus writs makes clear that this proceeding takes precedence over ordinary civil actions so it has been fast tracked so far and a decision is likely reasonably soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynnstone5 Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 I have followed this board for over a year now and believe that it provides some of the most knowledgeable analysis and insight available. Assuming the writ of mandamus is denied, how quickly do the P's counsel receive the 56 docs? Also, given that they are under seal, how soon would they make their way into the public domain or is it possible that the P's receive, but seal is never lifted? fairholme will request docs under seal right after mandamus denied, and govt will find some reason to stall. then fairholme goes to sweeney and asks for contempt order against govt, and asks sweeney to hand over copies of the docs that she reveiwed in camera under seal. i dont know if govt can have merits panel decision reviewed en banc or not but that would take time for the full appeals court for the federal circuit to decide that. i will research their rules later. i assume that these docs will never see the light of day. one way for the seal to be leifted is if govt makes arguments before sweeney or before a perry remand that are directly contradicted by the sealed docs. The en banc review is what I'm afraid of, but that is definitely outside of my knowledge base. Does Sweeney have the right/discretion to remove seal if she wanted without either of scenarios you described happening? As in, I wouldn't ordinarily do this, but after your excessive stalling, filing the writ, etc....I'm lifting the seal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hardincap Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 with a "friendly" treasury sec coming in, i think we want more delays not less. why risk another lamberth? the nws *must* be cancelled as a necessary condition to privatization Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynnstone5 Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 with a "friendly" treasury sec coming in, i think we want more delays not less. why risk another lamberth? the nws *must* be cancelled as a necessary condition to privatization I suppose, but my thought was with P's gaining docs and getting a remand or reversal, this gives shareholders the greatest leverage in a settlement. Equally important imo, it gives the admin. cover as we already know the mantra from the left and corresponding media coverage will be that Trump enriched his billionaire h.f. buddies. I'd like to see the attempt at that narrative crushed from the onset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cherzeca Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 with a "friendly" treasury sec coming in, i think we want more delays not less. why risk another lamberth? the nws *must* be cancelled as a necessary condition to privatization i've been thinking about this, whether the courts matter at this point. i think mnuchin is going to face some kind of blowback from crapo hensarling etc, and i still think it would be nice for mnuchin to have some court opinions in his pocket, even if "just" remand. the wind down crowd in congress cant proceed on that basis anymore even if there is only a remand. i think it is more likely that they slink away if the courts rule Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hardincap Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 yes that is the upside scenario. i generally prefer to focus on downside though. can you imagine how much blowback there would be if we get another lamberth? even if mnuchin wanted to privatize fannie on terms favorable to shareholders, it could cost him political capital that he may not be willing (or able) to pay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wellmont Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 with a "friendly" treasury sec coming in, i think we want more delays not less. why risk another lamberth? the nws *must* be cancelled as a necessary condition to privatization I suppose, but my thought was with P's gaining docs and getting a remand or reversal, this gives shareholders the greatest leverage in a settlement. Equally important imo, it gives the admin. cover as we already know the mantra from the left and corresponding media coverage will be that Trump enriched his billionaire h.f. buddies. I'd like to see the attempt at that narrative crushed from the onset. the media can spin this any way they want. nobody cares anymore. one thing that has happened since nws is the absolute destruction of msm credibility. the djt administration will spin this as pragmatic, good for housing, good for the economy, and good for the little guy. it really doesn't matter what vox.com says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTShine Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 Agree with you, Wellmont. In general DJT and Mnuchin don't care what the media thinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cherzeca Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 somewhat OT there is a theme going on with the trump transition, and a recap of GSEs is perfectly consistent with the direction of much trump policy changes of obama policy. take for instance the appointment of the oklahoma atty general for epa. obama by exec order had epa reinterpret clean air act to authorize the clean power plan, which is now enjoined by scotus and being decided by dc circuit. person leading fight against the clean power plan? our new epa director former ok atty gen a true 180 turnaround in epa administration. it is certainly consistent for treasury to now recap the GSEs rather than milk them and eliminate them, another 180 trump v obama turnaround. there will be a lot of mainstream media hissing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
investorG Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 Agree with you, Wellmont. In general DJT and Mnuchin don't care what the media thinks. for some potential outcomes, having the courts on FNMA+FMCC's side would be very helpful. for many reasons, I genuinely hope that the courts reject the NWS, or HERA overall -- right now the govt is arguing that FHFA can do whatever it wants, no matter what. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahug Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 I think he was margin called based on reported holdings Hmm. Recalculated his holdings. Maybe not margin called or if at call not a big amount. I got mixed up with the 50 pars. Current market value is about $900k, which is about 2x previous value. My bad, apologies to all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynnstone5 Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 I read an interesting post this morning, which I have thought about in the past myself. Can any of the law experts explain why none of the lawsuits ever challenged the legality of HERA under constitutional power? And could such a suit still be brought today by shareholders? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waynepolsonAtoZ Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 Those are the federal court of claims cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynnstone5 Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 Those are the federal court of claims cases. I didn't think that they specifically challenge HERA as opposed to issues surrounding HERA, overreach , etc.? Apologize if I'm incorrect. If so, could you point me to the specific cases? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onyx1 Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 Those are the federal court of claims cases. I didn't think that they specifically challenge HERA as opposed to issues surrounding HERA, overreach , etc.? Apologize if I'm incorrect. If so, could you point me to the specific cases? http://gselinks.com/Court_Filings/Collins/16-cv-03113-0001.pdf Collins vs. FHFA, filed in Texas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
undervalued Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 Anyone betting larger than 50% of their net worth into the preferred here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
investorG Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 fwiw there are some unverified comments on another blog that calabria is in the mix for FHA. it appears he has been open to the GSEs surviving but with some restrictions like high capital levels. perhaps would suggest using a revised warrant strike price and/or preferred conversion options to get the capital up quickly, in addition to retained earnings and public market equity raises. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blainehodder Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 Anyone betting larger than 50% of their net worth into the preferred here? If so, you better be prepared for the very serious possibility of vaporizing half of your wealth at the whims of the government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
investorG Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 Anyone betting larger than 50% of their net worth into the preferred here? that's aggressive. not me and not sure if anyone is going to volunteer that info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynnstone5 Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 Those are the federal court of claims cases. I didn't think that they specifically challenge HERA as opposed to issues surrounding HERA, overreach , etc.? Apologize if I'm incorrect. If so, could you point me to the specific cases? http://gselinks.com/Court_Filings/Collins/16-cv-03113-0001.pdf Collins vs. FHFA, filed in Texas Thanks. I thought this was similar in that it challenges NSW, but not the legality of HERA itself. I'll be sure to read. As an aside, I keep going back reviewing the oral arguments in Perry and the courts additional questions regarding sovereign immunity. I continue to be absolutely amazed that this has dragged on for so long. When you look at the definition of a conservator and the actions of the gov, it really makes me wonder what world we're living in where this wouldn't have been remanded at the very least by now. I made a substantial investment in common and prf'd (55%/45% accounting for 5% of my net worth) long ago believing that justice would prevail for P's. Lamberth, the incessant delays in Judge Sweeny's court and the FBI not recommending to file charges against HRC have all given me serious pause. Trump/Mnuchin has provided a great deal of optimism. I hope Mnuchin will provide additional clues sooner than later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts