Author Topic: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.  (Read 3566918 times)

cherzeca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2286
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #12980 on: July 16, 2019, 09:17:46 AM »
to be clear when I was referring to GSEs as an event driven investment, I wasn't referring to events such as if maloni writes something stupid in a blog or gasp in a tweet


Luke 5:32

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2581
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #12981 on: July 16, 2019, 09:19:37 AM »
to be clear when I was referring to GSEs as an event driven investment, I wasn't referring to events such as if maloni writes something stupid in a blog or gasp in a tweet

 ;D
Take 4 minutes and listen to it. "Stars" by Skillet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbLJyjfyACM

muscleman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3176
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #12982 on: July 16, 2019, 09:25:23 AM »
to be clear when I was referring to GSEs as an event driven investment, I wasn't referring to events such as if maloni writes something stupid in a blog or gasp in a tweet

I know what you meant. You are a great attorney and you focus on real events like Collins and admin reform.
I handle it differently though. My guess is that Maloni wrote that blog message for a reason. Either someone who wanted to sell baited him with such false information to pump the stock up so they can get out without bashing down the price, or Maloni is part of that game directly. Otherwise how could he just wake up one day and started day dreaming about Collins decision coming that afternoon? Unless he is a psychic, there is no way this could happen.
The gasp tweet is also important to me. When big players are bullish, they will pay such guys to spread bad news to scare people out so they can load up the position without raising the price. While these events may be non-sense to pure FA investors, they are very important to TA traders like me.


I am muslceman. I have more muscle than brain!


cherzeca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2286
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #12984 on: July 16, 2019, 10:07:02 AM »
maloni I cant speak to, but gaspo is playing a game that we all know about, trying to make a bigger bonus by moving the stock quoting unnamed sources (like Bloomberg "journalists"), and so who is going to play that game with gaspo? correct, assholes!  so why should I trade or invest based upon a self-interested nitwit who is willing to let himself be used by assholes?

sorry MM, I respect everyone on this board (well almost), but I ascribe no signaling value whatsoever to gaspo (or maloni)

cherzeca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2286
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #12985 on: July 16, 2019, 10:31:31 AM »
https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/blog/why-is-the-administration-not-talking-about-utility-style-regulation-of-g-fees/

nice post allnatural.  you really cant argue with Layton's reasoning, and while the art of utility regulation of price to ensure adequate return is not something that is easy to achieve, Layton points out that fhfa has in fact been working towards that goal during conservatorship.

so why is calabria speaking about competition before he rolls up his sleeves and finds out what his agency is actually doing?  as Taleb would say, IYI

investorG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 683
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #12986 on: July 16, 2019, 01:26:20 PM »
hey cherzeca, would you mind if I had a few questions,

do we know what judges actually sat for the collins en banc?   All 16 regulars?  In the other en banc case it appears they added a 17th, one of the senior judges - is that to make a tie less likely, and is typical?  finally, can a judge abstain or do they have to pick a side? 


thank you. 

cherzeca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2286
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #12987 on: July 16, 2019, 01:51:55 PM »
hey cherzeca, would you mind if I had a few questions,

do we know what judges actually sat for the collins en banc?   All 16 regulars?  In the other en banc case it appears they added a 17th, one of the senior judges - is that to make a tie less likely, and is typical?  finally, can a judge abstain or do they have to pick a side? 


thank you.

from the docket:  EN BANC ORAL ARGUMENT HEARD Stewart, Jones, Smith, Dennis, Owen, Elrod, Southwick, Haynes, Graves, Higginson, Costa, Willett, Ho, Duncan, Engelhardt, Oldham En Banc;

dont know about 17th judge though I seem to recall there was an unfilled vacancy on 1/23.

9 or more judges will have to vote for some form of reversal, whether all 9 or more joining in the majority opinion or concurring in the judgment. judges dont abstain 

cherzeca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2286
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #12988 on: July 17, 2019, 09:26:17 AM »
some writing to see what I think re Collins en banc timing

it has been 5 months and three weeks since oral argument.  we should receive the decision "soon".  some speculation:

1.  it would appear that both the APA and constitutional claims will be addressed.  one may think that if the APA claim was won by Ps the court might not have addressed the constitutional claim (as the APA relief would be all that Ps are seeking).  if this is true one might think the decision would have been delivered by now. does this mean the Ps lost on the APA claim?  not necessarily.  I suspect this court wanted to address the constitutional claim in any event, and importantly the relief available to Ps in connection with a constitutional violation.  there is a 5th C merits panel that has already heard another nearly identical separation of powers claim (CFPB and All American case), so there is no ducking the constitutional question by the 5th C, and its better to rule en banc than let the merits panel handle it.

2.  writing opinions and getting consensus is time consuming with 16 judges.  there are 3 substantial majority opinions to be written, APA claim, constitutional claim, and relief if court finds a violation of separation of powers constitutional claim, which means there are 3 substantial dissents to be written as well.  if P wins either claim, then all judges will know that SCOTUS will likely grant cert, and will read all 6 opinions with care...which means all 6 opinions will be written with care en banc.  this takes time, and if there are disagreements of emphasis, wording or analysis within each cohort of judges who agree with a particular majority opinion or dissent, you might see concurring opinions laying out those differences of view while concurring in the judgment.  so there may well be more than 6 opinions.  while not trying to put any 5th C judge on the couch, as Bush 41 used to say, if trump is in a position to nominate another SCOTUS justice, it could well come from the 5th C, so these judges (say, Willett in particular) will have a professional reason to write the best opinion they could possible write.  indeed, Justice Kavanugh grew to even larger prominence before his nomination based upon his bravura opinion in PHH (yes, a CFPB separation of powers case).

3.  is the admin waiting on collins before releasing its reform plans?  if so, this implies that the admin is in contact with one or more "friends" on the 5th C to monitor the decision timing.  this is possible.  I suppose it gives the admin some "cover" to push for admin reform if a court has struck down some aspect of the current GSE conservatorship status quo.  can you imagine if some other judges suspect that one or more of them is in back-channel conversation, and decide to slow walk their own work flow? 

4.  neither "side" on the 5th C will want a split 8-8 vote, although one side likely wants it less than the other.  so again, on the three major claims, there may be politicking, for lack of a better word, to get a decision reached.  this may result, for example with the APA claim, to a vacating of the district court order to dismiss Ps claim with instruction to hold a trial on some fact question(s), as opposed to reversing the order and granting summary judgment for Ps.  the latter result may be a bridge too far for some judge who may extract the lesser holding as the price for his concurrence
« Last Edit: July 17, 2019, 09:30:39 AM by cherzeca »

james22

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 464
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #12989 on: July 17, 2019, 11:19:05 AM »
is the admin waiting on collins before releasing its reform plans? 

Sure seems like it.
BRK, BAM l SV, EM l Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac l Stable Value, Cash Value