FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.

[DocSnowball]

we know from the leaked remarks made by Acting Director Otting to the FHFA staff in mid-January that there was an administrative proposal set be announced “in two to four weeks” that “really sets a direction for what the future of housing will be in the U.S.,” and that would require raising “probably somewhere, based upon their business models today, [in the range of] $150 to $200 billion.” Something happened to derail that plan, and I believe it was a swift and fierce show of opposition by the banks and their supporters

imo craig's abrupt resignation has to be interpreted in this context. occams razor explanation is that whatever happened to derail the original plan caused him to resign. what happens now, i dont think anyone has a clue...

Other possibilities:
- handing off the role to Calabria or another person after completing his piece of the work
- considering more lucrative positions in industry

I'm not disagreeing with you; just putting out a broader range of possibilities. Calabria's statements are not consistent with a scuttled plan, although they do indicate that the timeline of events is  longer and more variable/dependent on meeting certain pre-established conditions.

[allnatural]

For what its worth, WSJ confirmed those meetings took place on June 7th in their article yesterday. So maybe the ABS article is more credible than it appears.

We also know Phillips stepped down after the plan was finished and deliverer to the WH, where its now sitting with the White House staff before being handed off the Trump (hopefully in the coming weeks). I think Phillips more likely left b/c his literal job of drafting the reform plan was completed (confirmed after it was handed in to the White House) and he is now reported to be seeking a wall street job related to the IPO of the GSEs (shocker).

I guess we will find out in the next few weeks once the plan is released to the public.

[DocSnowball]

how much are you willing to bank on an article that says "Most of the actions could be resolved by making preferred shareholders whole, potentially via a mass “sweep” of profits"?

edit: it also says investors are ecstatic about calabria's statements, ie his speeches, media interviews, etc. obviously this is no new insight

edit2: its amazing to me how strong confirmation bias is on this thread...

+1
That is why following this saga is so much fun and highly educational as a value investor...

[hardincap]

the plan was not finished, it was drafted. the draft is now being reviewed by the white house. again, in the context of otting's statement that a plan will be out in 2-4 weeks, a draft many months later doesn't make sense. craig's resignation at the same time, before the plan is past "draft" status, is not a good sign.

also, you're making another unwarranted assumption that the plan will be released in weeks. we dont know if it'll be released at all to the public, let alone in weeks.

[allnatural]

FWIW, my assumption re: plan being released in a few weeks is simply listening to Calabrias comment from ~2 weeks ago ("hopefully by the end of June"), reading the most recent reporting from credible news sources such as WSJ (they said in July yesterday), and speaking to industry insiders who have indicated at recent conferences I attended that they expect it to be released by mid July latest. All these sources could be wrong, but they are all lining up around same time period.

[Luke 5:32]

how much are you willing to bank on an article that says "Most of the actions could be resolved by making preferred shareholders whole, potentially via a mass “sweep” of profits"?

See cherzeca's previous comments about ABA's expertise (and lack thereof in some areas) and his comments on your point in particular.

edit: it also says investors are ecstatic about calabria's statements, ie his speeches, media interviews, etc. obviously this is no new insight

Talking directly with Calabria was new insight...
"Fannie and Freddie shareholders who spoke to FHFA head Mark Calabria this week..."

[muscleman]

we know from the leaked remarks made by Acting Director Otting to the FHFA staff in mid-January that there was an administrative proposal set be announced “in two to four weeks” that “really sets a direction for what the future of housing will be in the U.S.,” and that would require raising “probably somewhere, based upon their business models today, [in the range of] $150 to $200 billion.” Something happened to derail that plan, and I believe it was a swift and fierce show of opposition by the banks and their supporters

imo craig's abrupt resignation has to be interpreted in this context. occams razor explanation is that whatever happened to derail the original plan caused him to resign. what happens now, i dont think anyone has a clue...

Well, whatever the plan is large investors are "ecstatic" about it as of June 7th.
Fannie and Freddie stockholders were ecstatic at Calabria’s statements. “It’s exactly what we laid out,” one investor said. “The goal of this president is what can be done administratively. You can see there’s a focus on getting it done.”
https://www.abalert.com/search.pl?ARTICLE=183913

The chart tells me a different story. Since that time, the behavior has totally changed on the chart. I don't think ABA is a place where they have a collective interesting to make money for its readers. It is more like other forums like here or seeking alpha for spreading information.
If these "insiders" really know something so "ecstatic", the chart behavior would not look like what we've seen since then.

[allnatural]

You are wrong to compare ABS to a seeking alpha or forum like here. Its a professional industry subscription service that charges ~$4,500+/yr and has very little retail subscribers like ourselves.

we know from the leaked remarks made by Acting Director Otting to the FHFA staff in mid-January that there was an administrative proposal set be announced “in two to four weeks” that “really sets a direction for what the future of housing will be in the U.S.,” and that would require raising “probably somewhere, based upon their business models today, [in the range of] $150 to $200 billion.” Something happened to derail that plan, and I believe it was a swift and fierce show of opposition by the banks and their supporters

imo craig's abrupt resignation has to be interpreted in this context. occams razor explanation is that whatever happened to derail the original plan caused him to resign. what happens now, i dont think anyone has a clue...

Well, whatever the plan is large investors are "ecstatic" about it as of June 7th.
Fannie and Freddie stockholders were ecstatic at Calabria’s statements. “It’s exactly what we laid out,” one investor said. “The goal of this president is what can be done administratively. You can see there’s a focus on getting it done.”
https://www.abalert.com/search.pl?ARTICLE=183913

The chart tells me a different story. Since that time, the behavior has totally changed on the chart. I don't think ABA is a place where they have a collective interesting to make money for its readers. It is more like other forums like here or seeking alpha for spreading information.
If these "insiders" really know something so "ecstatic", the chart behavior would not look like what we've seen since then.

[hardincap]

luke, the "ecstatic" comment doesnt connect with "shareholders who spoke with calabria". this article is very ambiguous and cannot be relied on. even if it were reliable, you still have to explain how we went from "signed off" plan in 2-4 weeks to draft 6 months later, with the key author abruptly resigning before draft is finalizled. basically, you're overreaching. confirmation bias is a b****

edit: this will be my last comment on this matter. my main point is there are much greater risks of plan being derailed than is being talked about here. just my 2c, take it or leave it.

[Luke 5:32]

luke, the "ecstatic" comment doesnt connect with "shareholders who spoke with calabria".

Well, sure seems that way unless the author hasn't taken a basic writing course.  Professional writers don't, or shouldn't, go from one type of subject to another type of subject then back to the original subject without differentiating.  It would be an odd writing style.

Spoke with Calabria:
"Fannie and Freddie shareholders who spoke to FHFA head Mark Calabria this week..."

Later in article... Investors that didn't speak with Calabria, so random investors?
"Fannie and Freddie stockholders were ecstatic at Calabria’s statements. “It’s exactly what we laid out,” one investor said. “The goal of this president is what can be done administratively. You can see there’s a focus on getting it done.”"

Even later in the article... Spoke with Calabria:
"But one shareholder said Calabria was firm that an IPO is feasible."

this article is very ambiguous and cannot be relied on.

Of course one single article alone, in a vacuum, can't be relied upon.

even if it were reliable, you still have to explain how we went from "signed off" plan in 2-4 weeks to draft 6 months later, with the key author abruptly resigning before draft is finalizled. basically, you're overreaching. confirmation bias is a b****

Were Otting's comments on the record?

Did you not read about a month ago when it was said Phillips would leave but not until he was done?  It's not like his leaving was in the middle of the night... it was announced at least a few weeks before he departed.

Sure, confirmation bias is a b****, but mere confirmation from those calling the shots is a beautiful thing.