Firestone Diamonds Plc (FDI) Noticias

You know, I always like a little reading material when I hit the john, but that's ridiculous.

I have no reason to lie to you about it zona

Unlike you I have no boss who gives me marching orders.

Do I laugh or cry?

https://youtu.be/isNlC0RYOyE?si=2JPsJf7kc-9VmrsP

Can anyone explain this. In reviewing the 12/31/24 financials of FMCC and FNMA, I see that FNMA drew $119.8B
from treasury back in 08-10 financial crisis. FNMA now show senior preferreds of 120.8B.

The senior prefs had an initial liquidation preference of $1B and that got incre

At this point I think there are negative political consequences to a SPS cramdown scenario because in a SPS cramdown the JPS holders will come out at PAR while common will be in the $ 5 to $ 10 range depending on the ultimate dilution.

A few years ago Treasury's lawyers thought that i

Ok, but what does this have to do with Treasury owning 92% of AIG for a very short period of time?

Quite a bit, given that Treasury did own 92% at one point and had no controlling interest issues.

Familiar and incorrect. When the GSEs are released, which they will be eventually, we will see what residual value remains in the common. I do not need to file a lawsuit to reap my share of the residual value. Time will tell us more accurately than a court document.

That's not at all

I don't know what the blog says as its behind the paywall. But I have pointed this out before - I believe that he can change the ECRF by a Final Notice - no drawn out comment period necessary. I have done this at one agency. We found that there was a rule that was clearly harming the Government and

There is an accounting rule that the balance sheet should be added to that of the parent if the have a stake above a certain threshold. My memory is that those making the takeover thought that the threshold was 80%.

Perhaps it was 80% in the past, but in 2014 it was changed to 95%.

My understanding is 80%. That's the reason for the free warrants to be set at 79.99%. In fact, in most other countries, the limit is 50%.

The warrants were issued in 2008 while the FASB pushdown accounting rule wasn't published until 2014. Perhaps the threshold was 80% in 2008, but it

1. Treasury: they can make all different kinds of salads: 79%, 90% and 95%...2. Me: I am happy with $30/shares, below that I am not satisfied.

Then you better cross your fingers, like Ackman does, that Treasury exercises the warrants. You're not getting $30 per share if Treasury ends

In the midst of this Signal chat issue this stock may see some see some unbelievable growth as it works up to the Big N uplist. Should be a fun ride.

Any updated thoughts on cap requirements? That will be a huge swing factor in all of this. 2.5% and almost no dilution beyond government. 4.5% and it's ugly. I haven't seen a peep related to this.

You will have to be more specific.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/t

I believe the number 79.99 percent ownership is not about assets but who is actually in control of the companies.

You probably mean common shares, not assets. The control part doesn't matter during conservatorship anyway because FHFA controls the companies; Treasury could go up to 99.

The wait is frustrating for sure. Especially now that the general market seems to have bottomed

You hope.

Congratulations! Yours might just be the dumbest post I've ever seen on this board.

signal is the app equivalent of a burner phone. Not very strong encryption but alleged no records and immediate deletion and scrub of chats and meetings. It was created with the silk road in mind. Or so some sites say.

The discount dictator doesn't want any records of any of their cri

And how do you know Merck could have even bought NWBO? Did LP tell you Merck even approached NWBO?
Making it up to fit your narrative are you?

NVO? Or NVS like I opined? Actually I have no clue on either, or any potential buyer with worldwide presence. The Bhatt editorial sent our way today should serve to clear up loose ends in some minds that chose to see ambiguities. I'm not at all sure about any AVXL buyout timing either.

Indeed. I didn’t show my stock position. This was not a requirement I felt necessary for the ‘type’ of post I was making (purely DD). It’s also definitely NOT something I have seen with every post on wallstreetbets - but mods reached out to me to tell me they required it and removed the post. Reddit

Why are you so afraid of the facts?

A Fact that in April 2024 SAPX release an 8k stating that the Starz subsidiary of Lionsgate signed a 10 year deal worth 8 million dollars.

A Fact that the Starz split from Lionsgate was expected to close April 24

A fact

Jimmy John,

You make a solid point—organic growth is the foundation. No argument there.
But here’s the problem: when the market refuses to recognize that growth due to manipulated trading, short suppression, and dark pool games, then retail never sees the benefit.