Author Topic: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.  (Read 2941954 times)

Midas79

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 386
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #11210 on: January 12, 2019, 07:22:32 PM »
as I posted a bit earlier, I doubt this will result in a meeker fhfa brief.  but I am sure this has fhfa counsel (Arnold & porter) shitting in their pants.  all prior briefs were likely delivered on a courtesy copy basis to watt who never read them.  they sent over a courtesy copy this time to Otting and Otting asked how long do I have to read this.  and counsel said, excuse me, you want to read it? and Otting said, of course, it is being filed under my name as acting director. then counsel said, gee, well, um, it is due today.  and then Otting likely ripped counsel a new one.

maybe this happened, maybe it didn't. but if I were a betting man....

I'll admit, this made me chuckle some. But should we really believe that Otting didn't know anything about the cases or briefing deadlines before he took office? Was he really caught by surprise when Arnold and Porter showed him a copy of their brief yesterday? That seems a stretch to me.

If we see a different tone in FHFA's briefing on Monday, it might be because Otting asked to see the brief last Monday or Tuesday, then spent part of the week with Arnold and Porter trying to change it to fit his (Otting's) views; when they couldn't finish the changes by Friday they asked for an extension to work over this weekend.


cherzeca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1726
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #11211 on: January 12, 2019, 08:37:18 PM »
as I posted a bit earlier, I doubt this will result in a meeker fhfa brief.  but I am sure this has fhfa counsel (Arnold & porter) shitting in their pants.  all prior briefs were likely delivered on a courtesy copy basis to watt who never read them.  they sent over a courtesy copy this time to Otting and Otting asked how long do I have to read this.  and counsel said, excuse me, you want to read it? and Otting said, of course, it is being filed under my name as acting director. then counsel said, gee, well, um, it is due today.  and then Otting likely ripped counsel a new one.

maybe this happened, maybe it didn't. but if I were a betting man....

I'll admit, this made me chuckle some. But should we really believe that Otting didn't know anything about the cases or briefing deadlines before he took office? Was he really caught by surprise when Arnold and Porter showed him a copy of their brief yesterday? That seems a stretch to me.

If we see a different tone in FHFA's briefing on Monday, it might be because Otting asked to see the brief last Monday or Tuesday, then spent part of the week with Arnold and Porter trying to change it to fit his (Otting's) views; when they couldn't finish the changes by Friday they asked for an extension to work over this weekend.

could be.

remember treasury argues in its brief that the single director removable for cause provision is unconstitutional, it only argued against retroactive relief (void NWS).  we shall see what the fhfa brief says about this

muscleman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #11212 on: January 13, 2019, 06:40:25 AM »
as I posted a bit earlier, I doubt this will result in a meeker fhfa brief.  but I am sure this has fhfa counsel (Arnold & porter) shitting in their pants.  all prior briefs were likely delivered on a courtesy copy basis to watt who never read them.  they sent over a courtesy copy this time to Otting and Otting asked how long do I have to read this.  and counsel said, excuse me, you want to read it? and Otting said, of course, it is being filed under my name as acting director. then counsel said, gee, well, um, it is due today.  and then Otting likely ripped counsel a new one.

maybe this happened, maybe it didn't. but if I were a betting man....

I'll admit, this made me chuckle some. But should we really believe that Otting didn't know anything about the cases or briefing deadlines before he took office? Was he really caught by surprise when Arnold and Porter showed him a copy of their brief yesterday? That seems a stretch to me.

If we see a different tone in FHFA's briefing on Monday, it might be because Otting asked to see the brief last Monday or Tuesday, then spent part of the week with Arnold and Porter trying to change it to fit his (Otting's) views; when they couldn't finish the changes by Friday they asked for an extension to work over this weekend.


Donít forget similar things happened to the CFPB en banc, and DOJ sent in lawyers to say they actually agree with plaintiff.

https://www.insidearm.com/news/00042722-doj-brief-opposing-cfpb-brings-more-uncer/

Tim Howard also said in his blog that Otting knows many plantiffs and knows this NWS nonsense well.

cherzeca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1726
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #11213 on: January 13, 2019, 07:05:55 AM »
as I posted a bit earlier, I doubt this will result in a meeker fhfa brief.  but I am sure this has fhfa counsel (Arnold & porter) shitting in their pants.  all prior briefs were likely delivered on a courtesy copy basis to watt who never read them.  they sent over a courtesy copy this time to Otting and Otting asked how long do I have to read this.  and counsel said, excuse me, you want to read it? and Otting said, of course, it is being filed under my name as acting director. then counsel said, gee, well, um, it is due today.  and then Otting likely ripped counsel a new one.

maybe this happened, maybe it didn't. but if I were a betting man....

I'll admit, this made me chuckle some. But should we really believe that Otting didn't know anything about the cases or briefing deadlines before he took office? Was he really caught by surprise when Arnold and Porter showed him a copy of their brief yesterday? That seems a stretch to me.

If we see a different tone in FHFA's briefing on Monday, it might be because Otting asked to see the brief last Monday or Tuesday, then spent part of the week with Arnold and Porter trying to change it to fit his (Otting's) views; when they couldn't finish the changes by Friday they asked for an extension to work over this weekend.


Donít forget similar things happened to the CFPB en banc, and DOJ sent in lawyers to say they actually agree with plaintiff.

https://www.insidearm.com/news/00042722-doj-brief-opposing-cfpb-brings-more-uncer/

Tim Howard also said in his blog that Otting knows many plantiffs and knows this NWS nonsense well.

DOJ has already filed a brief in collins en banc agreeing there is a separation of powers violation but denying that relief should be given Ps.  the violation is meaningless unless relief is granted vacating NWS

emily

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 385
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #11214 on: January 13, 2019, 07:46:55 AM »
Can someone recommend a preferred stock?  I would like to invest some money so that dividends can cover tuition every semester. if you donít have any specific recommendations, how can I go about looking for one (where to look and what to look for).  Thank you.

ValueMaven

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 271
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #11215 on: January 13, 2019, 11:57:25 AM »
u can read previous board posts on this matter - there is everything from $25 par to $100,000 par securities should do well.  You can also play the common too which have now blown out wider to the prefs (ie: cheaper) right now...

rros

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 856
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #11216 on: January 13, 2019, 02:25:47 PM »
Can someone recommend a preferred stock?  I would like to invest some money so that dividends can cover tuition every semester. if you donít have any specific recommendations, how can I go about looking for one (where to look and what to look for).  Thank you.
Just take into account that one of the scenarios could be 50% of the amount of any preferred you may own could be converted to common. Which may not be a bad thing. Also, if you believe you may hold unto the preferreds for 5 to 10 years perhaps the ones with variable rates are better. We may be in the last 10 years of the 45 year inflation super-cycle, equivalent to 1965-1975.

onyx1

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 797
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #11217 on: January 13, 2019, 02:26:04 PM »
@SnarkyPuppy

Thanks for sharing your extensive work the above post.  Very informational!

no_free_lunch

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1430
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #11218 on: January 14, 2019, 08:11:32 AM »
I am out.   I wish you best of luck with it.  I just can't handle the uncertainty and the politics behind it.  The market offered me a chance to bail with a small profit and this position has actually outperformed S&P500.  Good enough.

DRValue

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 263
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #11219 on: January 14, 2019, 08:22:46 AM »
I am out.   I wish you best of luck with it.  I just can't handle the uncertainty and the politics behind it.  The market offered me a chance to bail with a small profit and this position has actually outperformed S&P500.  Good enough.

We're on the home straight bud. Good much though.
Not Investment Advice. Do Your Own Research.