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)

17.50
0.40
(2.34%)
Closed December 09 4:00PM

Real-time discussions and trading ideas: Trade with confidence with our powerful platform.

FNMAG News

Official News Only

FNMAG Discussion

View Posts
mrfence mrfence 3 minutes ago
If FHFA director pick announcement is being timed for maximum influence, Tuesday morning is the dead center target.
👍️0
Kimbrown Kimbrown 4 minutes ago
It is not $3.5, it will be $35.
👍️ 2 ❤️ 2
Viking61 Viking61 7 minutes ago
If we’re looking at a V shaped recovery, tomorrow could be a huge day!!! That graph is picture perfect!!
👍️0
mrfence mrfence 15 minutes ago
Name them Tweek.
👍️0
Dabeav Dabeav 17 minutes ago
Post market has them up.
😴 1
JOoa0ky JOoa0ky 17 minutes ago
Not going to happen. $3.50 wall is in place.
👍️0
Clark6290 Clark6290 18 minutes ago
Level II would be great if my internet worked. I certainly wouldn't sit and watch it all day though
👍️0
Guido2 Guido2 20 minutes ago
https://x.com/GuidoPerei/status/1866221053049258213
👍️ 2 💯 1
Kimbrown Kimbrown 23 minutes ago
Stop the gimmick of dumping and pumping. Shareholders are long term, who will not follow you. Get the FNMA and FMCC to $8. They will be around $25-35 at release.
👍️ 3 🤬 1
trunkmonk trunkmonk 23 minutes ago
seems the How Not To Crew shows up everyday and says rule of law means nothing, this all started after they completely failed in SCOTUS with their Laser focus greed. Us GSE shareholders appreciate anyone who believes in Rule of Law. maybe MC can do another 180 and push for exit, without all the illegal dilution.
👍️0
navycmdr navycmdr 27 minutes ago
Level II acting crazy -

Freddie sometime higher than Fannie

Rollercoaster ride that is finishing up strong ...
👍️ 1
mrfence mrfence 28 minutes ago
How much Meth are you on right now?
👍️0
mrfence mrfence 30 minutes ago
.
👍️0
PennMilitia PennMilitia 32 minutes ago
kthomp19 works for the GOVT
👍️0
mrfence mrfence 33 minutes ago
Ooops, upside your head

👍️0
kthomp19 kthomp19 36 minutes ago
No one is going to buy a company that can be nationalized at the drop of a hat to be forced to buy shitty loans from every other bagholder holding toxic mortgages.

The fact that all of the outstanding common shares are currently owned by someone proves this wrong.

If new investors would be stupid to buy post-dilution common shares, whoever owns common shares right now is even more stupid.

If not no one will give a fuck about buying like right this moment.

You own common shares yourself, proving this statement wrong too.

There is likely more institutional interest in preferred though based on price action.

I agree.
👍️0
kthomp19 kthomp19 36 minutes ago
New capital isn’t going to take the risk of this happening again if they see previous shareholders hosed a final time after 16 years.

You mean new investors are going to look at the following:

1) strong-arming the BODs into consenting to conservatorship
2) extremely punitive terms in the original SPSPAs
3) the freaking NWS
4) defending every shareholder-brought lawsuit tooth and nail
5) liquidation preference ratchet in the last few letter agreements

and be okay with putting their money in, but a senior-to-common exchange would be the final straw? That makes no sense whatsoever.

If new investors won't ever buy newly-issued common shares due to past government mistreatment, then FnF will be stuck in conservatorship forever because Treasury will have no incentive to let them out.

And if new investors will buy, a senior-to-common exchange won't faze them.

But if they treat current holders fair and shareholders whoop it up a little it would create a far better investing environment and elicit more interest than if we all are screaming this is fing BS.

The more money that legacy common holders get, the less money new investors get. The pie is fixed. Why would new investors give away money to legacy common when they don't have to?
👍️0
kthomp19 kthomp19 36 minutes ago
Howard is about to lose his shirt thinking that commons need to be treated fairly for outside capital to invest...

Not personally. He sold his common shares a long time ago.

Still, he's wrong on that count and others who do own legacy commons and agree with his flawed thinking are certainly at risk of losing substantial amounts.

These two parties' interests are literally on opposite sides of the negotiating table.

That's the huge flaw in Ackman's thesis. He wants Treasury to exercise the warrants because in his mind it would align Treasury's interests with legacy common holders'. A senior-to-common exchange inverts that and gives Treasury a reason to grab as much of the pie as they can, thus leaving as little as possible behind for legacy common.

The fact that Ackman wants the warrants exercised also illustrates the backward thinking of some common shareholders, the ones who take Ackman's outdated $23-47 price target from 10 years ago and then argue that the warrants should be cancelled rather than exercised, leading to a higher common share price. They start with a high share price and start arguing for the steps it would take to get there, rather than looking at FHFA and Treasury's actual incentives first and estimating a share price from there.
👍️0
kthomp19 kthomp19 36 minutes 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.

Exactly right. Inactions speak louder than words.
👍️0
kthomp19 kthomp19 37 minutes 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.

Have you been paying attention at all?! There were a whole bunch of takings cases. They all got dismissed, unfortunately.

Therefore, if we won a Takings suit, we win a few bucks and da Gooberment keeps the Twins.

That's what would have happened if the plaintiffs had won the NWS takings cases anyway.

So the bottom line is, we really want our Twins back.

FnF being recapitalized and released from conservatorship is not at all the same as current common shareholders making a bunch of money. There are many paths to recap/release that leave the existing common worth $5 or less on a reverse split adjusted basis.
👍️0
kthomp19 kthomp19 38 minutes ago
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.

Same here.

What I can't wrap my mind around is the idea that the same court system that upheld the NWS would somehow be swayed by minor arguments like "the commitment fee in the SPSPAs violates FnF's charters".

My biggest takeaway from the Supreme Court's Collins ruling was that Treasury will not be forced into any resolution of the senior prefs and NWS by the courts. It will have to be voluntary on Treasury's part.
👍️0
kthomp19 kthomp19 38 minutes ago
Exactly. Regardless of what they say, to save the banking system, they treated the GSEs as a financial trash can.

No, this is false. FnF did NOT buy toxic mortgages after conservatorship started. Tim Howard looked at their books of business and found that the late 2008 and 2009 books of business were of high quality, similar to 2003-2004, which totally debunks the "FnF were forced by FHFA to buy toxic mortgages" myth.
👍️0
kthomp19 kthomp19 38 minutes ago
That’s an idea, Kthomp19 if a district court overturned the C-Ship you make tons more money.

And if I bought a winning Powerball ticket I would make even more than that.

Don't think in possibilities, think in probabilities. I think that the chances that a court overturns the conservatorships are close enough to zero that it isn't worth considering. The Supreme Court refused to uphold the Fifth Circuit en banc panel's overturning of the NWS and did uphold the CAFC's dismissal of all the NWS takings cases. I have no faith whatsoever in any large-scale court victory.

I consider the implied covenant case to be small-scale because the award was well less than $1B, it hold no precedential power at all, and Treasury was not a defendant.

The issues needed to understand now are the tough sneaky lawyer stuff. What is illegal exaction? What does sounding in tort mean? Can a derivative claim be heard under the little tucker act? Goal is to understand the actual limitations that can trip up any claim and head it off so that the claim can’t be dismissed on procedural grounds.

You don't know what these things are and yet you have the gall to claim "THE PLAINTIFFS BROUGHT THE WRONG LAWSUIT"? That's hilarious.

Have you ever considered the idea that the plaintiffs actually brought the right lawsuits and just lost anyway?
👍️0
kthomp19 kthomp19 38 minutes ago
Not an all-talk do-nothing hypocrite!!!! Please don't expose me.

Either show me your court filing or stop talking about supposed illegalities, like the commitment fee, and I will withdraw my accusation.

Your hypocrisy is already on display for all to see. You constantly talk about government wrongdoing but have yet to get off your ass and do something about it. All I'm doing is pointing it out.

I would love for you to join me and help me with a lawsuit. Why not?

To be blunt, it's because I don't think your lawsuit has any chance of succeeding. Any time and/or money spent on it will be wasted.

You are quickly running out of time, by the way. If a senior-to-common cramdown really does occur it will be nigh impossible to undo the dilution. FHFA is protected from injunctive relief by 4617(f), and any takings or illegal exaction suit against Treasury can only result in money damages being paid, not undoing the dilution.

Unless you have a vested interest and prefer to see the gov cramdown

I don't want a senior-to-common cramdown to happen. I expect it to. That's why I have positioned myself in the junior prefs instead of the commons, so that such a cramdown doesn't hurt me nearly as much.

and dilution of us poor retail investors.

Oh come off it already. You will get no sympathy from FHFA or Treasury when they execute their plan.

If you bought your shares after the conservatorships, and especially after the NWS, you do not have the moral high ground.
👍️0
kthomp19 kthomp19 39 minutes ago
Toxic or not Fannie and Freddie were the engine used to bailout the banks.

More sensationalist nonsense with no evidence behind it. The "evidence" you list doesn't have anything to do with this statement. The first piece only talks about the Fed engaging in a bailout, and the second only said there was a "plan". Tim Howard found that that "plan" never materialized when he looked at the numbers: FnF's book of business was of high quality just after they went into conservatorship, comparable to 2003-2004 rather than 2006-2007.

If the insinuation was that FnF were put into conservatorship for the purpose of facilitating this bailout, it falls flat. FnF had made a lot of political enemies via their aggressive lobbying and that was their undoing more than anything else.

Fannie and Freddie did not meet any of the 12 requirements passed by the newly passed HERA legislation justifying conservatorship.

Wrong. The boards consented to conservatorship, fulfilling the ninth condition: 12 USC 4617(a)(3)(I).

If you're going to bring up the tired old talk about the boards being coerced into consenting, three things:

1) One of the court cases (Washington Federal) already alleged this and the entire case was dismissed
2) Hank Paulson admitted as much in his book On the Brink, and yet that didn't help in the Washington Federal case
3) No currently outstanding lawsuit alleges this

Funnily enough, my first signature line does not apply to the "FnF's boards were coerced into consenting to conservatorship" argument because it was brought in a lawsuit and still failed.
👍️0
navycmdr navycmdr 42 minutes ago
Releasing Fannie/Freddie from Conservatorship is

FOLLOWING the LAW !

- coming from the GUY who helped WRITE the LAW !



👍️ 3
ron_66271 ron_66271 57 minutes ago
Filing Whales.
👍️0
mrfence mrfence 58 minutes ago
Now THAT'S what's LAUGHABLE Click Clack. Warrants are for Bankruptcy/Receivership. So NOT happening 😅🤣😂
😘 1
Viking61 Viking61 59 minutes ago
Waiting for Calabria to apologize to all shareholders!
👍️ 1
Viking61 Viking61 59 minutes ago
Waiting for Calabria to apologize to all shareholders!
👍️ 2 🤣 1
Clark6290 Clark6290 1 hour ago
Bobo Amigo, perhaps you are unaware the government owns 80%. Massive dilution if ever released
👍️0
Aunt Jemima Aunt Jemima 1 hour ago
You are down more than Linda Lovelace and Joe Frazier put together
👍️ 1
Wingsjr Wingsjr 1 hour ago
There will never be any new commons, there will only be more current commons in worse case scenario. You can only wipeout current commons by bankruptcy or receivership, which would be political suicide when the National Debt spikes 7+ Trillion as soon as the pen is pressed to paper. Not to mention the 10-15 year class action lawsuit that will halt everything.
👍️ 1
skeptic7 skeptic7 1 hour ago
I thought pre NEW interest payments were just that, because post NWS there was no longer "interest". It's a scam either way.
👍️0
nagoya1 nagoya1 1 hour ago
Catman can start licking himself and munchkin before he has anything to do with the GSEs. Fnma
👍️ 2
skeptic7 skeptic7 1 hour ago
Yeah! How dare you question his intent for the GSE's by putting unrealistic and inexplicable capital retention limits on them to ensure they remained in c-ship for a decade longer than necessary if he hadn't. Calabria is great!
👍️0
blownaccount9 blownaccount9 2 hours ago
No one is going to buy a company that can be nationalized at the drop of a hat to be forced to buy shitty loans from every other bagholder holding toxic mortgages. There will have to be concessions from the government to show some good faith to validate their future existence. If not no one will give a fuck about buying like right this moment. Almost no one cares because they don’t see a light at the end of the tunnel after this problem has carried on for 16 years. Between the 2 there are $30 billion in preferred shares meaning there was a lot of bag holders when this happened in 2008, in 2014 when Ackman and Co. tried to force them out of conservatorship with threats of lawsuits, and again when trump was elected in 2016. No one aside from retail investors had any interest up until now and even now the boutique funds are pretty small as price hasn’t exactly rocketed up for commons. There is likely more institutional interest in preferred though based on price action.
👍️ 3
mrfence mrfence 2 hours ago
Whaaa 👶WhaaaA 👨‍🍼 WHAAAAA!
👍️ 1
pauljon4 pauljon4 2 hours ago
If you love waiting, you have come to the right place.
👍️ 2 😆 1
mrfence mrfence 2 hours ago
MM's quietly 🤫 covering the Naked Shorts they created @ the $3.50 wall. It's their job to tame volatile trading.
👍️ 1 🤪 1
FFFacts FFFacts 2 hours ago
Waiting for all you scumbags to apologize to Calabria.
💤 1 🙄 1
pauljon4 pauljon4 2 hours ago
New shareholders will not give one squirt of piss about our losses, unless those with millions of shares, bring further lawsuits. Just being real.
👍️0
Guido2 Guido2 2 hours ago
Transfer between related entities?
👍️ 1
mrfence mrfence 2 hours ago
Simple Fundamental Facts Click Clack Clark

👍️ 2
RickNagra RickNagra 3 hours ago
Barr has talked to Bessent.  Huge.

Rep. Andy Barr, who is running to lead the House Financial Services Committee next year, is bullish on the idea: “There's more work to do to recapitalize the GSEs before they can be released,” he told our Eleanor Mueller. “But the point is, if you can get the GSEs into better financial shape, then it could be a substantial pay-for for the tax legislation, and it can deliver a more sustainable housing finance system.”Barr said he has discussed the GSEs with Scott Bessent, Trump’s nominee to lead the Treasury Department.
👍️ 2 💤 1 💥 2 🙄 1
mrfence mrfence 3 hours ago
FnF were profitable despite the forced fed bad papers until they puked that shit up.
👍️ 1
mrfence mrfence 3 hours ago
The Fisher case is a derivative Takings case as opposed to a direct challange of the seizure and Conservatorship because if all the other suits fail, it's a Taking by default. We're the last in line.

$FMCC~ $FNMA~
👍️ 2
blownaccount9 blownaccount9 3 hours ago
New capital isn’t going to take the risk of this happening again if they see previous shareholders hosed a final time after 16 years. There is going to be significant hesitation anyway. Wouldn’t surprise me to see FnF trade at a 3-5 p/e for awhile because of the government stink. But if they treat current holders fair and shareholders whoop it up a little it would create a far better investing environment and elicit more interest than if we all are screaming this is fing BS.
👍️ 2 💯 1
RickNagra RickNagra 3 hours ago
There was a rather large buy order for 1.1 million shares at around 12:20 pm EST.  It showed up as two large green ticks on the tape.  However the price did not go shooting up.  Did anyone else notice ?  Thoughts ?
👍️ 2 🙄 1
JOoa0ky JOoa0ky 4 hours ago
Howard is about to lose his shirt thinking that commons need to be treated fairly for outside capital to invest... These two parties' interests are literally on opposite sides of the negotiating table.
👍️0

Your Recent History

Delayed Upgrade Clock