FOFreddie
4 minutos hace
2021 Letter Agreement "Litigation End Date "
“Litigation End Date” means the date on which all litigation pending as of January 14, 2021, against Purchaser, Seller, or the United States or any of its agencies or officers arising out of or in connection with the placement of Seller into conservatorship and/or the Third Amendment, other than litigation that presents a maximum total aggregate potential monetary exposure of less than $5 billion, has been (a) resolved in a final non-appealable judgment or (b) settled with prejudice and Seller has indemnified Purchaser and the United States from and against any loss, cost, or damage of any kind arising out of such placement into conservatorship or the Third Amendment.
This does not seem to include any liability regarding the warrants since there was no warrant litigation outstanding as of January 2021 - but it does give discretion to settle up to $ 5 bn.
FrostyEmpire44
7 minutos hace
FNMA Valuation today based on Annual report for 2024
Simple Book Value = Equity divided by common shares outstanding. $94,657M or for those who want simpler $94.7B dollars divided by $1.16B shares outstanding = $81 dollars and change per share. For comparisons JP Morgan chases trades at double book value of the stock. I used JPM because it has similar assets, it is a financial, and for the most part is considered best of breed reputation wise if you were to poll a large percentage of Wall Street. The GSEs do not have such a reputation. So lets compare them to Wells Fargo which is trading around price to book, slightly less assets, and also under regulatory cap on their assets (which is set to expire). Wells Fargo trades almost right at price to book. So this why I think the $81 dollar per share is a better number to get to after relisting AND ending conservatorship and a couple years post conservatorship. Dividends wont be reinstated for some time...but they will be. I would expect to 20-30 dollars (maybe higher on euphoric spikes) as a stable early range. The Banks after 2007-8 who were not in conservatorship but under heavy regulation were hovering around 20-30 percent price to book.
another thing to consider is the GSEs price to book ratios are rising quickly as they keep retaining capital. On the balance sheet of their reports, you should see under retaining earnings a number in brackets which is going down year after year. That number when it gets to zero equals full capital requirements. (Yes I know the capital requirements could/will be lowered)
This would also help offset any share dilution (if that does happen)
The first 10 years post conservatorship are going to see this stock rise 10-30 times current prices and keep pace with inflation.
Essentially, even if you consider this stock "risky" to buy, the potential rewards make it a worthwhile opportunity with much better odds than picking the next tech start up or drug to come out.
Lite
2 horas hace
Far worse we will now have 2 systems, as us dept to income is too high as Reserve Currency(124%). It wil now be old USD(Fiat) and new BRICS backed by precious metals (Brazil, Russia, India, China, south Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates)— Ano (@Ano3020100) April 12, 2025
navycmdr
5 horas hace
Treasury stealing from Fannie and Freddie shareholders
by Ken Blackwell - 06/03/14 4:00 PM ET
“My responsibility in the conservatorship
is not to the shareholders, really. So I don’t lay awake
at night worrying about what’s fair to the shareholders,”
Watt said in a recent interview on C-SPAN’s “Newsmakers”.
Mel Watt, newly installed Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) director
and top regulator of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, says
that reforming the unfair housing finance system and protecting property
rights is not part of his job description.
As voices across the ideological spectrum have come to recognize the need
for serious reform of our housing finance system with a greater role for private
capital, the nation’s top housing regulator made an unfortunate revelation.
A revelation which points to the difficult path for serious housing reform.
Mel Watt, newly installed Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) director
and top regulator of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, says
that reforming the unfair housing finance system and protecting property
rights is not part of his job description.
“My responsibility in the conservatorship is not to the shareholders, really.
So I don’t lay awake at night worrying about what’s fair to the shareholders,”
Watt said in a recent interview on C-SPAN’s “Newsmakers”.
Secretary Watt’s unfortunate, and somewhat shocking, statements betray
an arrogance on the administration’s part that is not helpful in the effort to
effectively – and equitably – reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac so the
public can feel confident going forward. After the financial disaster our
country experienced in 2008, Watt ought to lay awake every night concerned
with shareholders, investors, taxpayers and all Americans who have a stake
in ensuring such a collapse never happens again.
When the housing market collapsed and government bailed out Fannie and
Freddie, the system needed private investors and many took a risk to put
capital into the two entities, hoping they would see a profit. The investors
were told they were still entitled to their share of future profits. Once the
companies became profitable again in 2012, the government changed the
terms of the conservatorship to a “net worth sweep,” making Fannie and
Freddie turn over all profits each quarter to the Treasury Department.
The new agreement leaves shareholders out in the cold and gives all profits
over to the government. These actions by the Treasury Department are a
theft of private property, taking the gains of investors who risked their money
with the stroke of a pen in order to pad the U.S. Treasury.
By changing the rules in the middle of the game and taking away the property
rights of shareholders in this way, the government is also discouraging private
investment in the housing market, which is key to its success. How would
we expect private capital to enter the housing market when there is obviously
no protection of property rights and investor rights? Such a precedent will
discourage investment in the sector and the lack of certainty and property
protection may even reverberate into other industries. The 30 year mortgage
and the stability and vibrancy of our housing finance system depend on
private capital. That should keep Mr. Watt up at night.
In Congress, reform of Fannie and Freddie is faring no better. The Senate
reform effort sponsored by Sens. Tim Johnson (D-S.D.) and Mike Crapo
(R-Idaho) that recently passed the Banking Committee is not the solution
to these problems. Across the political spectrum, people have come to
realize that this bill is not a true reform as it does not protect property rights
and it actually keeps in place the mechanisms that could lead to another
financial collapse.
There is a bipartisan consensus on how to wind down Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac, while protecting property rights and shareholders and
limiting the role of government in the housing marketplace. This bill is
not that solution. Rather than rush through bad legislation, Congress
needs to take a step back and take its time to address all the concerns
that have been raised in order to achieve a real reform that helps
Congress and officials like Director Watt need to take this issue seriously
and decide if they are going to be part of the solution or part of the problem.
The FHFA needs a leader who will step up and take responsibility to fix
the flaws in our housing system, not one who is comfortable with its failures.
We need legislators and regulators who understand the vital role that
investors, shareholders, taxpayers and consumers all play in the health
and vitality of our housing finance system. Fortunately there are Democrats
and Republicans who take this effort more seriously, and bipartisan
consensus for meaningful reform will hopefully carry the day in the long run.
Then, we can all sleep better at night.
Blackwell, a director of the Coalition for Mortgage Security, is a former
undersecretary at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development,
a former Ohio state treasurer, and former mayor of Cincinnati.
JSmith5
7 horas hace
The comment period or its significance is irrelevant.
Only if you are not a stockholder or someone who does not have has a mortgage or may apply for one in the future.
We are dealing with new players here. And there is more at stake than the cap rule. There are a lot of moving parts to this whole process and this is an opportunity to air out - in the most public and official way possible - our views on any part of this. We can't tell the degree of influence the comments may have if there aren't any. You don't think people will whine about the conversion of the seniors?
You can text to the powers that be on X or whatever, but this is the best place to take a stand that even has a shot at being considered. If enough are of the same opinion, maybe it may have some impact. But to not want a comment period is like not buying a lotto ticket and complaining you didn't win.
I would suggest that, if they go out for comment, every stockholder - man, women and child - common, preferred - whatever - weigh in on some aspect of ending the conservatorship. Again, I will add that general comments like the "whole thing was a theft, etc." would not be helpful as they already got that - ad nauseum (not that I disagree with that - as it clearly was).
Nats
TightCoil
16 horas hace
Apr 11 - Monday will be Spectacular
Go Fannie Mae - Go Freddie Mac
Recap of our PPS since Mar 7 which was Day 39 of over $5 when we were at $5.84. Then the next trading Day (Mar 10)) we went BELOW $5 to $4.91, but rebounded swimmingly the next Day (Mar 11) to $5.19 and hit $6.11 on Mar 14...
Apr 11 - $5.80 – 4,577,778 up 8 c TODAY
Apr 10 - $5.72 – 7,625,278 down 30c
Apr 9 - $6.04 – 17,754,792 up 84c
Apr 8 - $5.20 – 12,114,769 down 47c
Apr 7 - $5.67 - 17,127,154 - (20 days above $5)
Apr 4 - $5.65 – 16,044,402 down 47c
Apr 3 - $6.13 – 11,688,776 down 44c
Apr 2 - $6.57 - 3,013,251 down 3c
Apr 1 - $6.60 - 6,043,923 up 28c
Mar 31 - $6.32 - 8,618,220 down 38 cents
Mar 28 - $6.70 – 5,985,439 down 31 cents
Mar 27 - $7.01 - 5,469,580 - up 9 cents
Mar 26 - $6.92 - 9,576,797 - down 39 cents
Mar 25 - $7.31 - 13,849,144 - up 21 cents
Mar 24 - $7.0879 - 16,707,951 - up 71 cents
Mar 21 - $6.38 - 8,510,618
Mar 20 - $6.25 - 8,037,839
Mar 19 - $6.03 - 8,071,667
Mar 18 - $5.65 - 10,339,547
Mar 17 - $5.82 - 9,309,100
Mar 14 - $6.11 - 16,518,200
Mar 13 - $5.50 - 5,951,400
Mar 12 - $5.65 - 9,589,600
Mar 11 - $5.19 - 10,480,900
Mar 10 - $4.91 - 16,783,700
Mar 7 -- $5.84 - 23,007,600
TODAY
truedat
19 horas hace
They, the administration, just keeps talking, and Tweeting, X'ing, they need to start Doing. All these background moves are, or should not be priority to release. The 50 million person staff (joke), kept it running for years as they adhered to the political whims of others, they could deal with staff after. Just git 'er done already.
DaJester
21 horas hace
Yes, but being wrong about this one is potentially catastrophic if one's common investment thesis hinges on the idea that lawsuits will prevent Treasury from pursuing a senior pref conversion
Well it's a good thing I'm diversified. 😄 And it's not just lawsuits that can prevent it. So can change in directive from Executive branch, so can political will and optics, so can compromise for release expediency, and so can plain ol' imperfect decision making.
The issue here is that all the surprises so far have been to the detriment of shareholders (original SPSPAs, NWS, Collins ruling), whereas owning the common now is a bet on a positive surprise occurring, one inconsistent with all past government actions.
Past government actions were directly aligned with the attempted dismantling of the GSEs and preventing them from ever exiting Conservatorship. If you think future government actions will be restricted to follow along those lines, you are intentionally ignoring the shift in government focus. This is not a "surprise" coming.
Judge Lamberth said the NWS "permanently alienat[ed] shareholders from the profits of the GSEs". That's the opposite of temporary.
You and I, and everyone else KNOWS he is not saying the Conservatorship is permanent, nor is the NWS.
Regístrate para obtener alertas en tiempo real, cartera personalizada y movimientos del mercado.
2latefortears
5 horas hace
RickNagra
14 horas hace
Hot Features
Premium
