Intesa Sanpaolo (I08361) Quote

I guess y'all have something in common! Let's start a Venn diagram for this fka $bioaq forum.

You ever been to their headquarters? I pass by there once a week or so. Their office is a mail slot on the 11th floor of 20 Bay Street, Toronto. Pretty cramped quarters, actually... Hey, what's with the London UK office address (85 Great Portland St) they're showing on OTC Markets. Is that new?

What do you think is holding this back or up still?

We need a Nikodemos level 2 snaporoo

There ya GO 

dirty Dave is a wordsmith.them #s are horrendous

Now10 days above $5
FNMA
Date - PPS - Volume
Jan 24 $5.74 32,035,179
Jan 23- $6.50 - 9,201,548
Jan 22 - $6.85 -18,576,012
Jan 21 - 7.01 35,380,100
Jan 17 - 6.91 36,487,200
Jan 16 - 5.40 41,137,700
Jan 15 - 6.21 46,566,200
Jan 14

Isn't opinion, it is the documented in clinicaltrials.gov trial protocols. Dr. Liau's interim trial analysis publication, and the revised trial protocols done 2 weeks before the end of the trial. Not hard to look up, but most NWBO holder denies it without look up the facts.

What if by listing on NYSE and announcing removal from conservatorship shares hit $30+ and instead of warrant conversion they cancel those and convert senior preferreds? That would involve less dilution if I did the math right.

That's assuming that a senior conversion would occur at p

IMO there is plenty of capital.

Your opinion on FnF's capital sufficiency is irrelevant. It is FnF's regulatory capital levels (hugely negative according to their latest 10-Q) and the capital thresholds set by the FHFA director (which can't be less than 2.5% of balance sheet assets by

Nice to see you again senor!
I didn't realize so much time had passed since you'd gone. Delfin and TGLO hit the snooze button for a few months there

I think the focus should be on how much Index tracking Institutional Investors will have to buy of FMCC and FNMA upon release.

I think you're looking too far into the future. By release time all of the dilution will have happened, whereas the decision as to whether or not to own/hold/

The fact that the GSEs did not need a bailout, and they were taken over in an attempt to literally kill them is not in the mainstream narrative. It's lost to history at the moment.

Agreed. Harping on this point hasn't done any good in the past; why would it do any good in the future?

I concur can. Danny provided the incentive (his initiative to obtain patents on his ideas). A convincing guy capable of drawing in others in support of his ideas (of making money of course), even obtains sideline financial support. A Pinky is born. 17B shares later, here we are. Ultimately, Dann

The CFR Statute on Compromise of Debts is left to the discretion of the UST.

The seniors are equity, not debt, and the CBO report only contemplated a reduction in their value, not a complete writeoff.

Bottom line is that there is not much to gain in trying to convert th

kevinlamb1961@gmail.com

But when you can't provide a statute to support your own position ("DOJ advised it's illegal"), you just chalk it up to an unreasonable request. It's only unreasonable because it would require you to prove your point.

No. It's unreasonable because it would require a level of understa

In my opinion, the lawsuits will not be based on the resulting share price, but on what equity amount Treasury plans to steal and just how obscene that makes their overall return.

Why would anyone, even Treasury, care about Treasury's overall return going back to 2008? That's a second

agree > not to mention all the >
big economic events happening in same time frame Next Week
Wed will be a big day And going into AH

https://tradingeconomics.com/calendar

lol. Not saying it is. But it got #1 today in the vol scanner

If he wanted to say Treasury still needs to be compensated for the SPS specifically, he could have just said "yes" which would have directly answered the question. He didn't. So he is focused on the compensation, not necessarily the vehicle or method. The compensation could come from anywhere - e.g.

Any really because unless you or I was there it’s up to someone else’s opinion and bias what they write down for us to read. So none really 100% of the time maybe some are worth of 75% truthful reporting.

Sorry, but you're way off the mark here.

Against this background, I now see the word “past” in a different light. Bessent disagrees with Mnuchin's narrative. And as I understand it, this means nothing other than that the shareholders are also entitled to the profits that the companies

He didnt explicitly say he would but given he purposely avoided being in the major ones so far one could say hes been saving the possibility for this case

I found that telling given that Ackman actually had filed his own takings lawsuit over the NWS. If Ackman himself wouldn't bring a