Author Topic: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.  (Read 1849489 times)

Luke 5:32

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2059
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #8880 on: December 07, 2017, 07:42:48 AM »
https://twitter.com/Moelis/status/938793581778800642
 Moelis & Company‏ @Moelis
9m9 minutes ago

Donít miss Chairman and CEO, Ken Moelis on @BloombergTV with @ErikSchatzker today during the 11am ET hour. Heíll be talking tax reform, M&A, and more.
You are willing to give your life, if necessary, to protect a stranger... me, my bride, each one of our children. For that I thank you every single day, veterans. And I consider you a friend. "Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends." John 15:13


rros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 353
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #8881 on: December 07, 2017, 07:43:25 AM »
Looks like screenshots from a bill (pulled from Twitter so can't verify it). See attached...

hmmm. lots to think about here.  especially since we don't know what mnuchin wants.

on one hand, he thinks extending jumpstart for a year is fine since he really does want to work with congress and avoid friction with the Republicans.

on the other hand, he could recoil from this, realizing he loses leverage in negotiations in 2018, and play chicken with Congress if they resist completing the govt funding or tax reform over this. he might also want to settle lawsuits with a 4th amendment, and this could scuttle that plan.

there's not a lot of volume in the lower price preferreds which tells me that the mkt doesn't fully buy this joe light article.

Lets see what the end of the day volume is on the preferred. Put in an order for the less liquid preferred and extremely hard to come by. Who would be selling with this news at these prices?

I try to think at things from multiple angles.

what if the joe light article was simply a way to grease through the jumpstart extension, and ultimately means little?

or what if the corker plan pays back preferreds but only over many years, which reduces the NPV?

I wouldn't be writing this if conveniently the jumpstart renewal didn't appear 12 hours after the Bloomberg article.
Did you even read that bill that was posted? It appears as an extension of 1 year BUT it actually tries to stop paying out money for the housing trust funds while assuming dividends will stop as well. What this bill (Corker/Warner) is trying to achieve is prevent Admin to nuke the Srs. because... my view, they want to do that in the housing reform bill and this little bill is a prelude to allow recapitalization and build up of capital. The original jumpstart was two lines. It only referred to tying up Treasury's hands. Had no language on anything else. This is much more than just an extension. It is already meddling with potentially a 4th amendment that will stop dividends.

There are still funds/retail that use any rally to unload. A bit disheartening.

@ Orthopa
that wayne comment wasn't nice. And we still don't know the end to this movie.

My view why Mnuchin is implicitly okeing all this. He said any reform comes after build up of capital. The above bill appears to:

a) give congress 1 more year for reform
b) strongly suggests fixing the coming zero net worth capital as it includes language of "not paying dividends".
« Last Edit: December 07, 2017, 07:54:52 AM by rros »

waynepolsonAtoZ

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 209
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #8882 on: December 07, 2017, 08:11:51 AM »
I was only good at market timing once, buying heavily in the July to Dec 2010 period. I just wanted to give "fair warning" to the extent anyone was interested in a different opinion. I do think the stocks I swapped into also have good if not better prospects in the next couple years. Still, I'll be looking at this stuff this weekend to try to see what's what.

orthopa

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 452
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #8883 on: December 07, 2017, 08:21:52 AM »
Looks like screenshots from a bill (pulled from Twitter so can't verify it). See attached...

hmmm. lots to think about here.  especially since we don't know what mnuchin wants.

on one hand, he thinks extending jumpstart for a year is fine since he really does want to work with congress and avoid friction with the Republicans.

on the other hand, he could recoil from this, realizing he loses leverage in negotiations in 2018, and play chicken with Congress if they resist completing the govt funding or tax reform over this. he might also want to settle lawsuits with a 4th amendment, and this could scuttle that plan.

there's not a lot of volume in the lower price preferreds which tells me that the mkt doesn't fully buy this joe light article.

Lets see what the end of the day volume is on the preferred. Put in an order for the less liquid preferred and extremely hard to come by. Who would be selling with this news at these prices?

I try to think at things from multiple angles.

what if the joe light article was simply a way to grease through the jumpstart extension, and ultimately means little?

or what if the corker plan pays back preferreds but only over many years, which reduces the NPV?

I wouldn't be writing this if conveniently the jumpstart renewal didn't appear 12 hours after the Bloomberg article.
Did you even read that bill that was posted? It appears as an extension of 1 year BUT it actually tries to stop paying out money for the housing trust funds while assuming dividends will stop as well. What this bill (Corker/Warner) is trying to achieve is prevent Admin to nuke the Srs. because... my view, they want to do that in the housing reform bill and this little bill is a prelude to allow recapitalization and build up of capital. The original jumpstart was two lines. It only referred to tying up Treasury's hands. Had no language on anything else. This is much more than just an extension. It is already meddling with potentially a 4th amendment that will stop dividends.

There are still funds/retail that use any rally to unload. A bit disheartening.

@ Orthopa
that wayne comment wasn't nice. And we still don't know the end to this movie.

My view why Mnuchin is implicitly okeing all this. He said any reform comes after build up of capital. The above bill appears to:

a) give congress 1 more year for reform
b) strongly suggests fixing the coming zero net worth capital as it includes language of "not paying dividends".

Comment to Wayne wasn't derogatory, just looked back in the thread and noticed he was out 2 days before, thats all.

Also any bill needs to be signed by Trump (mnuchin) of course. I dont see congress going to far off he rails here but always possible of course.

rros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 353
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #8884 on: December 07, 2017, 08:29:28 AM »
That's fine. I did not think it was derogatory... just trying not to throw more coal into the fire in case he was unhappy about his decision. But it looks he has no regrets.

investorG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 359
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #8885 on: December 07, 2017, 08:37:29 AM »
Looks like screenshots from a bill (pulled from Twitter so can't verify it). See attached...

hmmm. lots to think about here.  especially since we don't know what mnuchin wants.

on one hand, he thinks extending jumpstart for a year is fine since he really does want to work with congress and avoid friction with the Republicans.

on the other hand, he could recoil from this, realizing he loses leverage in negotiations in 2018, and play chicken with Congress if they resist completing the govt funding or tax reform over this. he might also want to settle lawsuits with a 4th amendment, and this could scuttle that plan.

there's not a lot of volume in the lower price preferreds which tells me that the mkt doesn't fully buy this joe light article.

Lets see what the end of the day volume is on the preferred. Put in an order for the less liquid preferred and extremely hard to come by. Who would be selling with this news at these prices?

I try to think at things from multiple angles.

what if the joe light article was simply a way to grease through the jumpstart extension, and ultimately means little?

or what if the corker plan pays back preferreds but only over many years, which reduces the NPV?

I wouldn't be writing this if conveniently the jumpstart renewal didn't appear 12 hours after the Bloomberg article.
Did you even read that bill that was posted? It appears as an extension of 1 year BUT it actually tries to stop paying out money for the housing trust funds while assuming dividends will stop as well. What this bill (Corker/Warner) is trying to achieve is prevent Admin to nuke the Srs. because... my view, they want to do that in the housing reform bill and this little bill is a prelude to allow recapitalization and build up of capital. The original jumpstart was two lines. It only referred to tying up Treasury's hands. Had no language on anything else. This is much more than just an extension. It is already meddling with potentially a 4th amendment that will stop dividends.

There are still funds/retail that use any rally to unload. A bit disheartening.

@ Orthopa
that wayne comment wasn't nice. And we still don't know the end to this movie.

My view why Mnuchin is implicitly okeing all this. He said any reform comes after build up of capital. The above bill appears to:

a) give congress 1 more year for reform
b) strongly suggests fixing the coming zero net worth capital as it includes language of "not paying dividends".

we're not seeing this the same.

do you think mel watt is eager to stop funds to affordable housing if he withholds sweep dividends?  I don't.

I see this as an attempt to thwart any 4th amendment and continue the sweep until Congress acts, if they do.

merkhet

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2927
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #8886 on: December 07, 2017, 08:42:11 AM »
why would treasury be cool with a plan that does not redound to common when it owns 80% of common?

Remember, they do not own 80% of the common. They have a provision that allows them to choose the timing of their dilution, which can come before or after a capital raise -- so it's a bit more nuanced than just owning 80% of the common. They own 80% of the common of NewCo, not 80% of the common of OldCo. There could be many steps between OldCo & NewCo.

Moreover, it's possible that OldCo common does okay while OldCo preferreds are made whole at par -- i.e. it's possible for Treasury to do well on its NewCo common while OldCo Common holders merely do okay.

rros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 353
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #8887 on: December 07, 2017, 08:59:33 AM »
Looks like screenshots from a bill (pulled from Twitter so can't verify it). See attached...

hmmm. lots to think about here.  especially since we don't know what mnuchin wants.

on one hand, he thinks extending jumpstart for a year is fine since he really does want to work with congress and avoid friction with the Republicans.

on the other hand, he could recoil from this, realizing he loses leverage in negotiations in 2018, and play chicken with Congress if they resist completing the govt funding or tax reform over this. he might also want to settle lawsuits with a 4th amendment, and this could scuttle that plan.

there's not a lot of volume in the lower price preferreds which tells me that the mkt doesn't fully buy this joe light article.

Lets see what the end of the day volume is on the preferred. Put in an order for the less liquid preferred and extremely hard to come by. Who would be selling with this news at these prices?

I try to think at things from multiple angles.

what if the joe light article was simply a way to grease through the jumpstart extension, and ultimately means little?

or what if the corker plan pays back preferreds but only over many years, which reduces the NPV?

I wouldn't be writing this if conveniently the jumpstart renewal didn't appear 12 hours after the Bloomberg article.
Did you even read that bill that was posted? It appears as an extension of 1 year BUT it actually tries to stop paying out money for the housing trust funds while assuming dividends will stop as well. What this bill (Corker/Warner) is trying to achieve is prevent Admin to nuke the Srs. because... my view, they want to do that in the housing reform bill and this little bill is a prelude to allow recapitalization and build up of capital. The original jumpstart was two lines. It only referred to tying up Treasury's hands. Had no language on anything else. This is much more than just an extension. It is already meddling with potentially a 4th amendment that will stop dividends.

There are still funds/retail that use any rally to unload. A bit disheartening.

@ Orthopa
that wayne comment wasn't nice. And we still don't know the end to this movie.

My view why Mnuchin is implicitly okeing all this. He said any reform comes after build up of capital. The above bill appears to:

a) give congress 1 more year for reform
b) strongly suggests fixing the coming zero net worth capital as it includes language of "not paying dividends".

we're not seeing this the same.

do you think mel watt is eager to stop funds to affordable housing if he withholds sweep dividends?  I don't.

I see this as an attempt to thwart any 4th amendment and continue the sweep until Congress acts, if they do.
It's all speculation at this point so yes, we differ :) My speculation is that there have been lots of talks behind the scenes and that Watt has also ok'd this jumpstart that stops monies to funds because he may believe reform is close at hand. Remember, even Hensarling said that any new bill should include provisions to affordable housing and that may include money sent to housing trusts. Since these are yearly payments, they may not miss any if a bill that includes the referred language is signed into law during 2018. Again, complete speculation based on this new jumpstart.

Based on this bill the scheme may look like this:

1. 4th A stops dividends. (Treasury/FHFA)
2. Reauthorization of jumpstart is signed into law: a) 1 more year for reform, b) no payments to housing trusts.
3. Recap begins and zero net worth is voided.
4. Reform begins: includes competition to FF (Fed Powell), paid-for narrow gov guarantee, eliminates the Sr. shares as paid out, reorganizes FF as reinsurers allowing GM to securitize. Includes affordable housing measures.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2017, 09:05:37 AM by rros »

cherzeca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1139
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #8888 on: December 07, 2017, 09:21:05 AM »
why would treasury be cool with a plan that does not redound to common when it owns 80% of common?

Remember, they do not own 80% of the common. They have a provision that allows them to choose the timing of their dilution, which can come before or after a capital raise -- so it's a bit more nuanced than just owning 80% of the common. They own 80% of the common of NewCo, not 80% of the common of OldCo. There could be many steps between OldCo & NewCo.

Moreover, it's possible that OldCo common does okay while OldCo preferreds are made whole at par -- i.e. it's possible for Treasury to do well on its NewCo common while OldCo Common holders merely do okay.

the warrant ratchet is useful to prevent new issuances, not to facilitate them.  i would only point out that if raising new common is the goal, both the senior preferred outstanding and the warrant ratchet effectively prevent that.  so moving forward, you would think treasury, with experienced bankers at the top re GSE reform, will start to weigh in on what is practical on wall street.  committee staffers are unlikely to have this experience
« Last Edit: December 07, 2017, 09:31:49 AM by cherzeca »

emily

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 275
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #8889 on: December 07, 2017, 10:23:12 AM »
Reauthorization of jumpstart. You all thought Corker is nice all of a sudden. Told you so. If this passes, there is no hope. You can't trust Corker, Warner, Joe, Carney, Stevens, Fellow Travelers, they are all in the same pack. We all know that it has been 9 years, congress will not do anything. That means kicking the can down the road and Mnuchin leaves and all is finished here. Time is now or never.

Looks like screenshots from a bill (pulled from Twitter so can't verify it). See attached...
« Last Edit: December 07, 2017, 10:29:53 AM by emily »