ADVFN Logo
Registration Strip Icon for discussion Register to chat with like-minded investors on our interactive forums.
Fannie Mae (QB)

Fannie Mae (QB) (FNMAG)

17.10
0.42
(2.52%)
Closed December 09 4:00PM

Your Hub for Real-Time streaming quotes, Ideas and Live Discussions

FNMAG News

Official News Only

FNMAG Discussion

View Posts
EternalPatience EternalPatience 8 minutes ago
I also agree. She will never seen 2 again..  those days are behind us.
👍️0
Mr Michael Mr Michael 29 minutes ago
You don't give advice with honor.


Michael 
👍️0
Angelmin Angelmin 35 minutes ago
Interest amount is higher than the principal of the loan? Imbecile! 
You will be squeezed to death!!!!🥰
👍️0
along4zride along4zride 3 hours ago
Doesn't look like the Calvary is coming anytime to save soon .(FNMA).
Even though more than $246 Billion has been paid back on loan unfortunately for hopeful investor the payments were interest only . Probably best to take a finance 101 course before investing in stocks in conservatorship.
The original $187.5 Billion is still due I hate to tell you .
👎️ 1
mrfence mrfence 5 hours ago
If the FHFA Director Nomination is "The one I want", that's precisely what's going to happen all month long.
👍️ 2
TightCoil TightCoil 5 hours ago
Tomorrow we obliterate the door of
resistance; we shall destroy that wall of oppression and corruption and deceit.
----Break Out and Break Through----
👍️ 4 💤 1
mrfence mrfence 5 hours ago
At $12 dollars per share annual net profit, the intrinsic value of a share with a standard PE ratio of 10 to 30 would generate a PPS from $120 to $360 PPS depending on market sentiment.
👍️ 3
mrfence mrfence 6 hours ago
I've been thinking about the Lawyers and why they didn't pursue a Takings Suit because I've been saying that we should be doing just that for over a decade. The Government has hidden behind the idea that we still have our shares and all they have is unexercised warrants that expire so they haven't taken anything. Therefore, if we won a Takings suit, we win a few bucks and da Gooberment keeps the Twins. So the bottom line is, we really want our Twins back.
👍️ 3
jog49 jog49 6 hours ago
"The Plaintiffs brought the wrong lawsuit."

Incredible how stupid the law firm must be. They should have been "embarrassed" out of business. Perhaps the higher the profile and status, the dumber the lawyers.
👍️ 1
mrfence mrfence 6 hours ago
Today, Tracy Lords's demanding Catman's explicit cooperation in no uncertain terms.

Traci Lords discography Lords of Acid
👍️0
Aunt Jemima Aunt Jemima 7 hours ago
"Time to blow I say" - that is what Traci Lords use to say.
👍️ 1
JOoa0ky JOoa0ky 8 hours ago
Barron & Co don't actually believe in what they claim... otherwise the lawsuit would've been filed already since it's a slam dunk.
👍 2 👎️ 1
Rodney5 Rodney5 9 hours ago
DCBill, you ask why would the (MAGA) courts (as in SCOTUS) suddenly start deciding in favor of shareholders??

The Plaintiffs brought the wrong lawsuit.

Director Lockhart Regulator, and Director Lockhart Conservator. Strangely enough, Holding both positions as Regulator and Conservator; The Plaintiffs brought APA Charges against the Conservator NOT the Regulator.

The Administrative Procedures Act (APA) that’s the problem with the lawsuits. The lawyers did not challenge the actions of the FHFA Director under the APA. The lawyers brought the APA argument against the FHFA as conservator. No mention of the FHFA Director violating federal law. The courts are barred from judicial review of the conservator.


Rodney5
06/25/24 12:08 PM
Post #796524 on Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)
SPSPA which is a contract. 4617f bars courts from questioning the actions of a conservator. The stockholders’ statutory claims are barred by the Recovery Act’s strict limitation on judicial review. See 12 U.S.C. § 4617(f).

Our friend Barron brought this to our attention. You have to prove FHFA / Treasury broke the law.

Notice: the argument doesn’t include the conservator at all. The argument is the FHFA / Treasury violation of the law.

Barron said, “ I propose claims alleging illegal exaction due to Treasury and FHFA violating Federal statutes that any district court has jurisdiction over. The Federal statutes are the Charter Act, the Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, as amended by HERA, Administrative Procedures Act, and potentially the Chief Financial Officers Act.

None of the current litigation makes any claims of violation of these acts. They all challenge the actions of the Conservator and attempted to squeeze the APA and the 5th amendment takings into the Actions of the FHFA-C within the terms of the SPSPA. all have failed to this point.”

PUBLIC LAW 110–289—JULY 30, 2008
HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT

HERA is public law not a contract, the Senior Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement is a contract not the law.

FHEFSSA

Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 was amended to establish the Federal Housing Finance Agency. HERA amended certain parts of both FHEFSSA and the Charter Act. AMENDED not to do away with. Safety and Soundness still exists just as the Charter Act still exists.

Page 9 Title I
Establishment of the Federal Housing Finance Agency

FHFA is now the Regulator by reason of HERA.

Links:

FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION CHARTER ACT
As amended through July 25, 2019

link: https://www.fanniemae.com/sites/g/files/koqyhd191/files/migrated-files/resources/file/aboutus/pdf/fm-amended-charter.pdf

HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2008

Link: https://www.congress.gov/110/plaws/publ289/PLAW-110publ289.pdf

SENIOR PREFERRED STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT
Dated September 7, 2008.

link: https://www.fhfa.gov/sites/default/files/2023-07/FNM-SPSPA_09-07-2008.pdf

ALL THE AGREEMENTS

link: https://www.fhfa.gov/Conservatorship/Pages/Senior-Preferred-Stock-Purchase-Agreements.aspx
👍️ 2 💯 1
Rodney5 Rodney5 11 hours ago
Donotunderstand said Quote: “Personally - my memory is the GSEs were burned supremely and hugely by junk MBS paper issued as AAA that the GSEs owned in their reserve part of the BS.” End of Quote

Your memory is not working properly. The GSE’s were not burned supremely. Read the June 30, 10Q

Fannie was no where near bankruptcy.

Congressman Alan Grayson Discusses Fannie Mae's use of Derivatives with James Lockhart of the FHFA. Hearing on June 3, 2009.

Time 5:00: Mr. Alan Grayson, Quote: “If those losses are only 192 million dollars how could 192-million-dollar loss result in a 100 billion dollar plus loss to the Taxpayer how is that possible?” End of Quote.

Mr. Lockhart of the FHFA answers, “Had to put up reserves, ooh ooh aha aha ooh aha, reserves, ooh ooh aha ooh, put up reserves for loans, aha aha aha ooh, if you think you cannot recover and loans aha aha ooh and that's what happened.” Reserves... (not an exact word for word quote of Mr. Lockhart).

Note: “If you think you cannot recover.” (Mr. Lockhart).

Time 5:55: Follow up question; Mr. Alan Grayson, Quote: “I still don't have a clear understanding from you about how a relative tiny amount like a 192 million dollar of unpaid mortgage interest on what is a trillion-dollar portfolio how that could possibly lead to Taxpayer shell out a 100 billion dollars plus.” End of Quote.

Mr. Lockhart attempts to explain the need to build up reserves... reserves... reserves...
Reserves Fannie Mae never needed.

Congressman Grayson referred to page 78 of June 30, 2008, 10Q. A relative tiny amount like a 192 million dollar of unpaid mortgage interest on what is a trillion-dollar portfolio how that could lead to a Taxpayer shell out a 100 billion dollars plus.

Facts: Page 7 “Our core capital as of June 30, 2008, was $47.0 billion, $14.3 billion above our statutory minimum capital requirement and $9.4 billion above our regulator-directed 15% surplus requirement.”

Link may not continue to work the discussion took place. You can google it on you tube. I just saw it. The link seems to not work. But it’s there.

👍️ 5 💯 1
Guido2 Guido2 11 hours ago
Doesn't explain why you want $90 target to be divided by 16. I personally feel it's too low based on their earnings history the last 10 years and their current books of business.
👍️ 10 💯 5 ❤️ 1
blownaccount9 blownaccount9 11 hours ago
That seems silly. Besides those who invested that long ago surely would have averaged down hard at $0.40 or $0.60 and should have been taking their yearly loss deductions to remove those high cost shares.
👍️ 1
TightCoil TightCoil 11 hours ago
But all is not lost - Have No Fear
Trump will fire the whole kit and kaboodle of 'em
Yellen You Is Fired
👍️ 2 💤 1
Lite Lite 11 hours ago
If one had invested 16 years ago…I believe that should be factored in.
👍️0
TightCoil TightCoil 13 hours ago
All the wrong-doing by Fannie and Freddie Officers and Directors got exonerated upon the imposition of the Conservatorshp, and prevented (precluded) some massive derivative suits by shareholders which would have resulted in massive firings and possibly criminal charges.
👍️ 2 💤 1
Guido2 Guido2 13 hours ago
Why?
👍️0
trunkmonk trunkmonk 13 hours ago
focus on the years before 2008, congress was making them take on risky mortgages, as is Mad Max is trying to do all over again with low income high risk loads that would do the same as back then, be the first casualties and make them look bad. which is where we are now, Mad Max is no longer in control and will soon be irrelevant. which is why we see price going up.
👍️ 4 💯 3
Lite Lite 13 hours ago
Might want to divide that by 16
👍️ 1
JusticeWillWin JusticeWillWin 14 hours ago
FNMA $90 PRICE TARGET, wow that's +3200% 🚀💥🚀

https://sinvestsllc.com/fannie-mae-fnma-price-target-90/
👍️ 9 🚀 6 🤪 1 ❤️ 1
RickNagra RickNagra 14 hours ago
Are you sure it was not $6.42 ?
👍️ 2
TightCoil TightCoil 14 hours ago
I just emerged from The Sphere, the place if go to gain insight into Fannie and Freddie
possible predictions, The Sphere is very easy to enter, but unfathomably difficult to exit. Anyway, The Sphere was a bit vague today, but told me our pps by next Friday"s close would be either $4.26 or $4.62.
👍️ 5 💤 1 🤣 3
Clark6290 Clark6290 15 hours ago
$Thanks $Bubba. $Of $coures, $they $are $companies
👍️ 1 💤 1
navycmdr navycmdr 15 hours ago
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac aren’t people — here’s how

they keep mortgages affordable for homebuyers

https://sg.finance.yahoo.com/news/fannie-mae-freddie-mac-aren-130000607.html

Maurie Backman - Sun, 8 December 2024

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac aren’t people — here’s how they keep mortgages affordable for homebuyers

If you’ve ever heard the names Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and pictured them as a sweet old couple running a quaint bed-and-breakfast, you’re not alone. Sadly, they’re not humans — no cookies baking in the oven or cozy rocking chairs here. Rather, they’re government-sponsored entities with a far less charming but much more important job: keeping the mortgage market running smoothly.

Here’s how they work: Fannie and Freddie buy mortgages from lenders and then package those loans into mortgage-backed securities, which are sold to investors. While this might sound like a big money-making scheme at the borrowers’ expense, these entities actually help make mortgages more affordable. By guaranteeing loans and assuming some of the risk, they help keep interest rates lower.

The current average 30-year mortgage rate — it’s currently 6.81%. Without Fannie and Freddie, that rate would probably be a lot higher, making homeownership a lot more expensive.

One way they influence affordability is by setting yearly limits for conforming loans — the types of mortgages they’re willing to purchase. And in 2025, these conforming loan limits are increasing, bringing potential benefits to homebuyers.

Conforming loan limits are increasing

Each year, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac set a baseline conforming loan limit, adjusting it for high-cost areas. For 2025, the baseline limit is rising from $766,550 to $806,500.

Limits for high-cost areas, including Alaska, Hawaii, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, are also increasing — from $1,149,825 to $1,209,750 in 2025.

How higher conforming loan limits can benefit you in 2025

Conforming loans are typically cheaper and easier to qualify for than non-conforming loans. For instance, jumbo mortgages — loans that exceed Fannie and Freddie's conforming limits — often come with higher interest rates, stricter credit score requirements and larger down payments.

With a conforming loan, you might qualify with a credit score as low as 620 and a down payment as low as 5% (though anything less than 20% will require private mortgage insurance, so that’s something to consider). In contrast, a non-conforming lender might require a minimum credit score of 700 and a down payment of 10%, 20%, or even 30%.

The increase in conforming loan limits gives buyer more options, which is especially important given the way home prices have risen substantially in recent years.

During the third quarter of 2020, the median U.S. home sold for $327,900. By the third quarter of 2024, that number jumped to $420,400 — a 28% increase in just four years. Without higher conforming loan limits, more buyers would be forced to turn to pricier non-conforming mortgages.

Read more: I'm 49 years old and have nothing saved for retirement — what should I do? Don't panic. Here are 3 of the easiest ways you can catch up (and fast)

Helping younger buyers access homeownership

Rising home prices and mortgage rates have made it harder for younger buyers to break into the housing market. In 2024, the National Association of REALTORS reported that the median age of homebuyers increased to 56, up from 49 the previous year. Similarly, the median age for first-time buyers increased from 35 to 38.

Higher conforming loan limits could ease these challenges, especially for younger buyers with smaller savings or less home equity. Being able to buy a home sooner can set them on a path toward greater financial stability and wealthy.

In fact, a report by the National Association of Home Builders confirmed that homeownership plays a key role in household wealth. It also found that households' primary residences were their single largest asset as of 2022, underscoring the role of homeownership in building wealth. By adjusting conforming loan limits are adjusting to today’s housing market conditions, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac may help open the door to more people, including younger buyers, in 2025.
👍️ 3
RickNagra RickNagra 15 hours ago
We will be in the green everyday this week.  I have a new and improved and super obnoxious super duper loud whale horn.  Time to blow I say.
👍️ 5 🚀 3
krab krab 15 hours ago
I never buy JPS with company, like GM, that's gone into bankruptcy. Risky business !!!
👍️0
mrfence mrfence 15 hours ago
I just cancelled all my sell orders .

$FNMA~ $FMCC~
👍️ 2 🤣 1
Donotunderstand Donotunderstand 16 hours ago
returned ? 300B ?

or simply say - the 200B owed is gone - zero - for the same reasons you gave - PLUS the GSEs paid 300B (not re collected or returned)

kill the 200B obligation and PPS will quadruple - with no change of where they trade or any action on freeing us ----- because then we stand a year from some form of freedom on our cash reserves
👍️0
Donotunderstand Donotunderstand 16 hours ago
digest ?

?

all links in last week say AT MOST F and F was an experienced hand to buy PAPER and then sell it to FED RESERVE

?

and the Paulson clip re affirms that GSEs only bought conforming paper for themselves
👍️0
Donotunderstand Donotunderstand 16 hours ago
HELP
Rosner says F and F need a guarantee
I agree - although it would be behind large reserves and maybe even a re insurance buffer

What does he think about the 200B of LP/SP ----- will it land on us - or be killed ?
👍️0
Donotunderstand Donotunderstand 16 hours ago
thank you
I do not agree with a bunch of your guesses

but

I have always thought of the warrants in the WRONG way !!!
I think of them as 4B shares - or 80% of say FNMA if used

i did not think of the warrants as 80% of any number of common - e.g. post a new capital raise

you are right - and also right that such privilege to get for pennies 80% of outstanding stock must be gone and off the table to sell one more share
The warrants are "magic", in that they give Treasury a 79.9% stake in the common once exercised no matter what the prior share count had been.

As such, there is no way that outside investors will contribute capital or the juniors will agree to an exchange for commons if the warrants still exist and haven't been exercised. .
👍️0
Donotunderstand Donotunderstand 16 hours ago
NO
NO
No where did he say GSEs would buy TOXIC stuff

He went out of his way to say GSEs do their thing and Treasury will ADD more liquidity

The JUNK clogging the system was spoken to separately

So what the GSEs bought pre crash (tons of bullsheet PLMBS voluntarily not knowing the banks lied) is not the subject and no where in THIS clip does it say that GSEs would buy the shit clogging the system

What may have happened in the real world LATER - after this clip - can be debated but this clip if anything says for GSEs business as usual . Again the damage to the GSE Balance Sheets - used as an excuse to grab them was the overall decline in value of bonds on any places BS ---- and the super reduction in the value - market price - of the PLMBS FNMA held. It was temporary and bluntly it could have been overlooked with the GOV saying they would cover losses (as they did at Money Markets0 - but the BS per GAAP fell below required operating safely levels as the PLMBS that the GSEs already owned plummeted in value - market price (of course they went back up)
👍️0
TightCoil TightCoil 16 hours ago
Fannie Mae - All The Way
Freddie Mac - Load Up and Don't Look Back
For Monday: 12/9
Launch by Lunch
Mooon by Noooon
👍️ 1 💤 1
Guido2 Guido2 17 hours ago
I disagree with most of attached article, but won't be surprised if it causes a boost in pps if enough fools read it.

https://you.stonybrook.edu/crisisandcatharsis/2024/07/13/fannie-comes-to-town-and-may-soon-be-history/
👍️ 1
JSmith5 JSmith5 17 hours ago
Maybe, but why would the (MAGA) courts (as in SCOTUS) suddenly start deciding in favor of shareholders, when they have In over a dozen years?

DCBill - For sure. I was expecting our case in the SC to be decided in our favor by 6-3. Silly me - I was looking at, like, the merits of our case.

Not being political, no joke intended, I always thought that Libertarian meant extreme liberal (like Abby Hoffman or someone like that). When I went a few years ago to the George Mason Law forum where Calabria spoke, I was surrounded by like-minded Libertarians (not like minded to me - just each other). The light bulb went off as Calabria was speaking - I'm like - hey, this doesn't sound like something Abby would say!

After the decision I read that all 6 conservative judges were Libertarians. And that the Libertarians would rather eat dirt, or a dirt-like substance, than see the GSEs released.

So I guess any route that would take us to the SC may not be helpful.

Nats
👍️0
EternalPatience EternalPatience 17 hours ago
Someone that you will like 
👍️0
JSmith5 JSmith5 17 hours ago
Who is the expected nominee?

Sandra Thomson. I like her because she had enough sense to sit on the companies and give us all more chances to buy before the election.
Sandy - my check is in the mail. Thanks!

Nats
👍️ 2 🤣 1
EternalPatience EternalPatience 17 hours ago
Not sure he will get the sarcasm though 
👍️ 1
Donotunderstand Donotunderstand 18 hours ago
interesting reminder

do you recall what happened to legacy stock - common stock - holders ?

I think I recall they were wiped out !!

I do not remember what happened to JPS GM holders

(I do remember as I bought a bunch - what happened to TRUST PREFERRED STOCK - which are NOT at all JPS equity but ruled - at that time for banks and GM - over and over to be DEBT (check out any financial website and you will see how TRUST preferred were unique) . And even with all of that - I made money as the % of GM I owned grew when the UNIONS said we do not want any equity - none - we need cash for pensions and benefits

What happened at GM to JPS?
😂 1
Stern is Bald Stern is Bald 18 hours ago
Who is the expected nominee?
👍️0
Donotunderstand Donotunderstand 18 hours ago
sorry to the poster and all those who agree

this post - to me at least - says the FED bought up paper - left and right

(indeed that article says GSEs over and over and NEVER shows what F or F did - as I read that one article)

For example
The Federal Reserve’s program purchased MBS issued by the GSEs (this is a sentence - of fact - from the article posted)
The following sentence is an opinion or subjective comment or editorial - Putting aside toxic or not the Treasury / Federal Reserve freely admitted the GSE's were used to help prop up the housing marke - HOW

and if you are saying the GSEs were a risk free (to them) funnel to move securities to the FED ---- that is 1,000,000 miles from GSEs eating and losing money on tons of poor paper

Personally - my memory is the GSEs were burned supremely and hugely by junk MBS paper issued as AAA that the GSEs owned in their reserve part of the BS. SO the FED bought that paper or guaranteed that paper . Again - as posted prior - even if no one reads --- the GSEs could not have had such a low loss ratio on paper they backed (regardless of issuer) and could not have made profit on profit and profit if they were a garbage can

I go back to GSE - quality !!! paper held by foreigners was in jeopardy of being used to beat up the USA economy and Paulson decided to make sure that all GSE paper was Treasury backed and HERA and Paulson got us there ----- where IMO a declaration of the same - would have been sufficient . The conservatorship seems more and more a traditional Republican (pre DJT populism) knee jerk grab of the GSEs that R hated since FDR . We were robbed !!!
👍️ 4
trunkmonk trunkmonk 18 hours ago
during up list you do IPO of new shares through Broker, they find out demand, and at what price, then they go with it, 20s 30s, 100s all kinds of wild estimates. EPS means nothing at that point, its not a walmart, its demand and buy into housing again, its will be huge....price will start at same as BAC, then bid from there.
👍️ 2
krab krab 18 hours ago
Yep, we would soon see both FnfF boost to $20+
👍️ 3
mrfence mrfence 19 hours ago
An up listing forces reconciliation of all $FMCC~ $FNMA~ OTC FTD's
ABC easy as
1. Write down Senior Pref and Warrants
2. Up list and capitalize.
3. Release

The Jackson 5 Plan 😉😘
👍️ 6 🚀 3 🤑 2 🤪 1
krab krab 19 hours ago
Quick & easy solution is to move FnF from OTC to the big boards !!!
👍️ 7 💤 1 🤑 1
mrfence mrfence 20 hours ago
Trying hard to be the Shepard 😉

$FMCC~ $FNMA~ BMF TWINS
👍️ 1
JSmith5 JSmith5 20 hours ago
do you have any thoughts on how the GSEs multifamily program could be redirected to incentivize the construction of multi-family housing as part of a new DJT housing program?

I really not familiar with it - so I just looked up some information on it. If they can use some of the proceeds to encourage it, it will be helpful. That being said, I really wish they would stick to encouraging the construction and financing of single family, owner occupied homes so families have the opportunity to own their own home.

Nats
👍️0

Your Recent History

Delayed Upgrade Clock