Author Topic: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.  (Read 3316115 times)

orthopa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 696
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #12760 on: June 14, 2019, 11:52:21 AM »
Barclays GSE event from yesterday - https://imgur.com/VrqjZkb

thanks for the link.

Maybe Calabria thinks/knows that anything he may request from congress for more power for FHFA doesn't get passed either. Maybe the competition request is just a show too.


cherzeca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2103
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #12761 on: June 14, 2019, 12:35:45 PM »
@Luke

I think treasury/fhfa/large junior holders/litigants all realize that a settlement is necessary, and I think it is no secret that junior holders generally will be satisfied with par, likely converting par into the common at re-IPO price.  since the litigation ask is to kill the seniors, and killing the seniors just so happens to be necessary to re-IPO, it would seem that this settlement would be not a heavy lift. 

so introducing the concept of damages beyond par is not incorrect, just not that relevant imo
« Last Edit: June 14, 2019, 12:46:37 PM by cherzeca »

Luke 5:32

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2472
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #12762 on: June 14, 2019, 12:48:00 PM »
Thanks, Christian.

The two comments below work perfectly together (seniors being fully paid back)...
since the litigation ask is to kill the seniors, and killing the seniors just so happens to be necessary to re-IPO, it would seem that this settlement would be not a heavy lift.

Barclays GSE event from yesterday - https://imgur.com/VrqjZkb
Take 4 minutes and listen to it. "Stars" by Skillet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbLJyjfyACM

muscleman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3120
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #12763 on: June 15, 2019, 08:02:04 AM »
For those who believe after all the industry wide talks with Craig Philips, who is supposed to keep a poker face, don't forget one thing: Craig Philips finished his work and currently seeking for a job on Wall Street. Guess what interview questions people on WS are gonna ask him? And what would he say to get the biggest offer package?  ::)
I am muslceman. I have more muscle than brain!

cherzeca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2103
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #12764 on: June 15, 2019, 10:57:40 AM »
For those who believe after all the industry wide talks with Craig Philips, who is supposed to keep a poker face, don't forget one thing: Craig Philips finished his work and currently seeking for a job on Wall Street. Guess what interview questions people on WS are gonna ask him? And what would he say to get the biggest offer package?  ::)

you have it backwards. street firms won't be doing the picking

muscleman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3120
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #12765 on: June 18, 2019, 08:08:05 AM »
A question for Chris. I was puzzled by this table here:
https://twitter.com/HoldenWalker99/status/1140643774512676864

It almost looks like 50-50 to me for affirm/reverse decisions.

Didn't we say it was 14 reversals out of 16 before?  :o
I am muslceman. I have more muscle than brain!

cherzeca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2103
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #12766 on: June 18, 2019, 08:43:44 AM »
A question for Chris. I was puzzled by this table here:
https://twitter.com/HoldenWalker99/status/1140643774512676864

It almost looks like 50-50 to me for affirm/reverse decisions.

Didn't we say it was 14 reversals out of 16 before?  :o

13/16 reversals of merits panel appellate decision.  I guess this tweeter went to rev/aff of original district court decisions.

muscleman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3120
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #12767 on: June 18, 2019, 09:10:35 AM »
A question for Chris. I was puzzled by this table here:
https://twitter.com/HoldenWalker99/status/1140643774512676864

It almost looks like 50-50 to me for affirm/reverse decisions.

Didn't we say it was 14 reversals out of 16 before?  :o

13/16 reversals of merits panel appellate decision.  I guess this tweeter went to rev/aff of original district court decisions.

Got it. Thank you.

Still, the timeline in this tweet is quite interesting. The longest so far is 244 days. Given the complexity of this case, I'd assume it takes that long, which puts us to October ruling.
I am muslceman. I have more muscle than brain!

Jcmeg35

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 35
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #12768 on: June 18, 2019, 09:17:26 AM »
A question for Chris. I was puzzled by this table here:
https://twitter.com/HoldenWalker99/status/1140643774512676864

It almost looks like 50-50 to me for affirm/reverse decisions.

Didn't we say it was 14 reversals out of 16 before?  :o

13/16 reversals of merits panel appellate decision.  I guess this tweeter went to rev/aff of original district court decisions.

Got it. Thank you.

Still, the timeline in this tweet is quite interesting. The longest so far is 244 days. Given the complexity of this case, I'd assume it takes that long, which puts us to October ruling.

Given Calabria's public comments, does anyone else think that the Court is going to hold off as long as possible in issuing a ruling to see if the matter will settle itself with an Admin change to the NWS? I guess the question is if one thinks the mindset of the Judges is to kick the can down the road and see if the case settles itself. Does anyone else have a different view?

cherzeca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2103
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #12769 on: June 18, 2019, 09:28:30 AM »
@J35

you have 2 difficult claims, APA and separation of powers, and with both the merits and remedy of each claim to decide, it is like 4 claims.  you know you will have a dissent on each claim. so you have a lot of opinion writing to do, and responses to the other side once the original draft of each opinion is handed over to the other side.  plus you have 16 judges so you may have some concurring opinions.  plus you are likely to have some negotiations cum arm twisting

so this will take awhile quite apart from the political aspect you mention.  a settlement that would preempt the need for publishing the opinions seems well down the road imo, but some (in the minority) judges in the process may have that as a tactic. I tend to doubt it
« Last Edit: June 18, 2019, 09:58:12 AM by cherzeca »