onyx1 Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 As long as efforts to settle the shareholder litigation are happening concurrently, I don't see re-proposing the capital rule as a source of meaningful delay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rros Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 Muscleman -- I'm guessing you're out there -- well done. you kept your composure and call in the face of unnecessary hostility and were proven correct. The team appears to have lazily punted. The summer articles about this issue being too-hot-to-handle politically pre-election were likely correct. I believe the shares represent great value. but it's not our time for a positive resolution. good luck! We are actually at a buying point. Similar to Nov 2017 and 3 more instances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cherzeca Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 Muscleman -- I'm guessing you're out there -- well done. you kept your composure and call in the face of unnecessary hostility and were proven correct. The team appears to have lazily punted. The summer articles about this issue being too-hot-to-handle politically pre-election were likely correct. I believe the shares represent great value. but it's not our time for a positive resolution. good luck! We are actually at a buying point. Similar to Nov 2017 and 3 more instances. just wish I hadn't bumped up to my risk limit.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke 532 Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 FHFA will re-propose capital rule for Fannie, Freddie https://www.americanbanker.com/news/fhfa-will-re-propose-capital-rule-for-fannie-mae-freddie-mac ACGA believes this does not change the #GSEs exiting conservatorship in 2020 under a consent decree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
investorG Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 Muscleman -- I'm guessing you're out there -- well done. you kept your composure and call in the face of unnecessary hostility and were proven correct. The team appears to have lazily punted. The summer articles about this issue being too-hot-to-handle politically pre-election were likely correct. I believe the shares represent great value. but it's not our time for a positive resolution. good luck! We are actually at a buying point. Similar to Nov 2017 and 3 more instances. Possibly but likely will take a lot more shareholder turnover before any confidence in a bottom. There are plenty of hedge fund holders who probably aren't interested in waiting on the new timeline and/or courts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cherzeca Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 Muscleman -- I'm guessing you're out there -- well done. you kept your composure and call in the face of unnecessary hostility and were proven correct. The team appears to have lazily punted. The summer articles about this issue being too-hot-to-handle politically pre-election were likely correct. I believe the shares represent great value. but it's not our time for a positive resolution. good luck! We are actually at a buying point. Similar to Nov 2017 and 3 more instances. Possibly but likely will take a lot more shareholder turnover before any confidence in a bottom. There are plenty of hedge fund holders who probably aren't interested in waiting on the new timeline and/or courts. some HFs are long and strong, though impatient. some HFs who are looking for a quickie are bailing. price will be choppy but you are either steady as she goes or you cant take the heat. timeframe may or may not have shifted but thesis/merits haven't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onyx1 Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 FWIW Tim Howard called this weeks ago. And for those who may have missed it, at a speech Calabria made on Monday at a conference put on by the Structured Finance Association he said he would “soon be announcing whether the capital rule will be re-proposed and under what terms.” If FHFA weren’t intending to re-prepose at least part of the rule, there would have been no reason for Calabria to have mentioned terms. -- Nov 6 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnarkyPuppy Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 Everyone needs to calm down. - If capital rules come out in Q1 nothing about the timelines change. It’s highly likely Calabria knows what the rule looks like already. - it’s been known for a month now that the risk-based requirements would be re proposed. How was the market not aware of this...? Thesis hasn’t changed. Practical constraints involved in setting capital requirements, resolving liquidation preference to raise private capital, outstanding shareholder litigation, etc Maybe some year end selling for those who wanted P&L on their year end statements from a PSPA amendment but for those playing a different game- no change and potentially positive news if to cherz point there is a financial advisor involved in affirming to practicality of capital requirements Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoCitiesCapital Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 Muscleman -- I'm guessing you're out there -- well done. you kept your composure and call in the face of unnecessary hostility and were proven correct. The team appears to have lazily punted. The summer articles about this issue being too-hot-to-handle politically pre-election were likely correct. I believe the shares represent great value. but it's not our time for a positive resolution. good luck! We are actually at a buying point. Similar to Nov 2017 and 3 more instances. Possibly but likely will take a lot more shareholder turnover before any confidence in a bottom. There are plenty of hedge fund holders who probably aren't interested in waiting on the new timeline and/or courts. On this note, I added today. Not a ton - but increased my position by ~ 5% @ $16 for FMCCJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rros Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 Muscleman -- I'm guessing you're out there -- well done. you kept your composure and call in the face of unnecessary hostility and were proven correct. The team appears to have lazily punted. The summer articles about this issue being too-hot-to-handle politically pre-election were likely correct. I believe the shares represent great value. but it's not our time for a positive resolution. good luck! We are actually at a buying point. Similar to Nov 2017 and 3 more instances. Possibly but likely will take a lot more shareholder turnover before any confidence in a bottom. There are plenty of hedge fund holders who probably aren't interested in waiting on the new timeline and/or courts. In reality, it's all a moving target. Been that for as long as I can remember and things can change in a dime. They did with Obama. They will with Trump. With Watt and Calabria and with Geithner and Mnuchin, same thing. Don't despair. Could be a double by March/April next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onyx1 Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 Muscleman -- I'm guessing you're out there -- well done. you kept your composure and call in the face of unnecessary hostility and were proven correct. The team appears to have lazily punted. The summer articles about this issue being too-hot-to-handle politically pre-election were likely correct. I believe the shares represent great value. but it's not our time for a positive resolution. good luck! We are actually at a buying point. Similar to Nov 2017 and 3 more instances. Possibly but likely will take a lot more shareholder turnover before any confidence in a bottom. There are plenty of hedge fund holders who probably aren't interested in waiting on the new timeline and/or courts. In reality, it's all a moving target. Been that for as long as I can remember and things can change in a dime. They did with Obama. They will with Trump. With Watt and Calabria and with Geithner and Mnuchin, same thing. Don't despair. Could be a double by March/April next year. I've owned continuously since 2011 and my observation is GSE investors overreact to all government developments, good and bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cherzeca Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 this is a rip van winkle stock. best to wake up this time next year unless you think you can read tea leaves like mr. MM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRValue Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 this is a rip van winkle stock. best to wake up this time next year unless you think you can read tea leaves like mr. MM Realistic timeline on sweeney ruling and appeals etc.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cherzeca Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 this is a rip van winkle stock. best to wake up this time next year unless you think you can read tea leaves like mr. MM Realistic timeline on sweeney ruling and appeals etc.? I want to listen to the mp3 of the arg first Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRValue Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 this is a rip van winkle stock. best to wake up this time next year unless you think you can read tea leaves like mr. MM Realistic timeline on sweeney ruling and appeals etc.? I want to listen to the mp3 of the arg first Oh nice forgot about that. Will be a good listen. If you find a link can you post please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
investorG Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 For those still excited about the near term outlook -- what specific catalyst do you see? The only ones I can identify are a) valuation and b) the SC response (which could be good or bad I guess). I see no visible 1H 2020 positive solution on: Capital plan finalization (long process), sr pref adjustment, Sweeney / lamberth. If the SC doesn't take Collins then any potential positive from Atlas seems headed for appeals delay. Base case, to me: everything slow played until election. Trump wins, execute a plan in 2021. Trump loses, hope for some lame duck action on consent decree or PSPA adjustment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cherzeca Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 For those still excited about the near term outlook -- what specific catalyst do you see? The only ones I can identify are a) valuation and b) the SC response (which could be good or bad I guess). I see no visible 1H 2020 positive solution on: Capital plan finalization (long process), sr pref adjustment, Sweeney / lamberth. If the SC doesn't take Collins then any potential positive from Atlas seems headed for appeals delay. Base case, to me: everything slow played until election. Trump wins, execute a plan in 2021. Trump loses, hope for some lame duck action on consent decree or PSPA adjustment. you are overthinking it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyG Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 F and F still need sufficient capital on their books before raising equity. Even if this pushes the rule until spring 2020 they weren't going to market most likely before then while still building equity capital. So I see it as no harm no foul and let's them get the right capital amount (hopefully) It is slightly annoying though that Calabria could have re-proposed this a few months ago instead of going to a different conference once a week Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnarkyPuppy Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 Moments like this make it explicitly clear why this opportunity exists and why there is a mispricing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke 532 Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 For those still excited about the near term outlook -- what specific catalyst do you see? The catalyst I see is the only one that really matters to pref holders: settlement. Can happen at any moment without warning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jcmeg35 Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 It is slightly annoying though that Calabria could have re-proposed this a few months ago instead of going to a different conference once a week I also find it a bit odd given how Calabria has been talking for weeks now - hinting that there will be tweaks rather than a full new rule. In my mind, this would make sense if they had already selected an advisor. One could then imply that they were told that it needs to be lower in order to get this thing done. @cherzeca has discussed this a bit. Perhaps it is wishful thinking to think that this process has been completed but not yet announced, and FHFA was told to bring down the capital level? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cherzeca Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 there are a lot of issues at play, legal, finance, govtal/regulatory policy, valuation, etc. so we have a system of multiple variables and, as usual with such systems, nonlinear rationality. if you step back a step you will see that nothing has happened today (except perhaps in Sweeney's courtroom...we await the mp3). and so a price drop is welcome if you have more to allocate to the name. if you are fully invested in name, then nothing happened today. and as Luke intimates, anything can happen at anytime. though I am betting later rather than sooner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyG Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 I promised myself that I would stay at the position level I was at for the rest of this trade but man is it ever tempting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cherzeca Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 I promised myself that I would stay at the position level I was at for the rest of this trade but man is it ever tempting there is far more uncertainty than risk here...meaning you can try to measure variables (risk), but there is a lot of unpredictable resistant to measurement (uncertainty). so it is wise to limit exposure to something tolerable in the event of loss. to really abstract at 30,000 feet however, we learned what happened when the banks all went to single digits in GFC....they retraced back up because they were essential. in 2017-202(3?), I expect the same thing will happen to GSEs, which are also essential and, finally, we have govtal actors who understand that they are (as opposed to the Obama/corker fools). but this is a long game, which is why I resisted investorG and his short term inquiry. if you cant play the long game (for whatever reason) then this is the wrong game. and while calabria gives too many talks and is too slow, doing a recalibration of the capital rule with a financial advisor on board makes a whole lot of sense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midas79 Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 and while calabria gives too many talks and is too slow, doing a recalibration of the capital rule with a financial advisor on board makes a whole lot of sense Has FHFA hired its financial advisor yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now