Fannie Mae (QB) (FNMAI) 시세

I have listed the Senators who signed the letter sent to Scott Turner. They're opposed to Fannie Mae being released.

https://x.com/GuidoPerei/status/1896355772113850757

Well there are many new posters for sure. I like to think it's because people are learning about it but maybe I'm just being optimistic. I sure have been spreading the word on boards.

https://x.com/nicosintichakis/status/1896555429548970459?s=46&t=L_hszGlrG7Qfo9Ksmln_mQ

I have equal number of both but not sure that Law suit means diddley squat in the end really.

If they took more than 80% the lawsuits would be never ending. It would be ugly. Hell I think if they take the 80% there will still be lawsuits.

I am not referencing well thought arguments for any Bull or Bear scenario but that is not usually the case either way really.

I consider a basher anyone who lies about the Twins and how we got here as well as anyone who states we will get very little in the end. If you think about it why would someone be here to say that? They certainly would not be invested so why say it for any other reason but to be deluded enough to think their opinion makes a damn bit of difference.

You got your hard bashers and your soft bashers who try and seed doubt. And everything in-between really. Some days longs and myself included just get frustrated and rightly so, and make a negative comment. That is not bashing either as it's just an off day.

Anyway it was just an off the cuff remark because nothing is an absolute here in the Twins saga IMO.

the retirement Home resident up for early Oatmeal ...



Trolls and newly formed aliases are active - they could be

worried a serious short squeeze is coming ...

Jonathan McKernan & Bill Pulte discuss the future of CFPB and FHFA

Sunday, Mar 2, 2025 - David M. Dworkin
Republicans have nearly unanimously
confirmed all of President Trump’s nominees to date.

While it is unclear how many Democrats will be willing
to vote for any Trump nominee

given the daily reports on the DOGE wrecking
ball, it is certainly in their – and our – interest to see McKernan
and Pulte confirmed as quickly as possible.

In April 2021, then House Financial Services Committee
Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.) & Member of the Subcommittee on
Housing, Community Development, & Insurance Steve Stivers
(R-Ohio) requested a Government Accountability Office (GAO)
audit of the HTF, citing concerns that it was not meeting its objectives.

They noted that despite receiving over $1.19 BILLION

since 2016, more than two-thirds of the funds remained undisbursed,
(DOGE needs to FULLY EXPOSE this and CORRECT IT )
and the program had only completed 800 units of housing, equating

to about $1.5 MILLION per unit. McHenry
( BILL PULTE will SLASH the COST & SPEED UP the
use of Manufactured Housing )

and Stivers expressed concern that “even when the cost per unit is
calculated in the light most favorable to HUD, the HTF still appears to
compare poorly to the private sector housing production in terms of
cost per unit. In addition to federal funds, the HTF can be used, in some
cases, to leverage additional funding from various sources such as state
and local real estate taxes and fees. When those leveraged funds are
included in the production calculation, the total dollars for completed
HTF units was approximately $882 million—still more than $1 million
per completed unit of housing.”

A later analysis by the Congressional Budget Office
reported that by October 2022, projects funded with $317 million in
HTF grants had produced 2,989 completed rental units,

with an average HTF cost per unit of approximately $106,000.

For newly constructed units, the average cost was about

$122,000, and for rehabilitations, it was about $84,000.



The future of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Federal Housing Finance Agency
was the focal point of the U.S. Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee’s hearing
on President Trump’s candidates to run the two agencies, which are both vital to the safety, soundness,
and stability of the housing finance markets. This is true for lenders and consumers alike. CFPB
protects consumers from the bad actors in the financial sector, and it protects good lenders from
having to compete for market share with those same bad actors. When operated well, it plays an
essential role in the U.S. financial system. When it is turned into a political tool, it undercuts its
own authority and its mission. FHFA is essential to the availability of, as Senator Bill Hagerty
(R-Tenn.) succinctly put it, “reliable sources of liquidity and funding for housing, finance and
community investment.” When available to all Americans, that liquidity and funding strengthens
our nation and preserves the American Dream.

If Jonathan McKernan, President Trump’s choice to lead the Bureau, is quickly confirmed
and allowed to be his own person, I expect we will see a major realignment within the
parameters intended by Congress. Not everyone will be happy, but the Bureau should
continue to function as it was intended. But given actions and statements by the Director
of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Russell Vought and White House
“Special Government Employee” Elon Musk, it’s unclear how much of the Bureau will
be left once McKernan is confirmed, or how much OMB will interfere with his leadership.
I believe McKernan will bring CFPB back to its appropriate role, if he is permitted to
follow the law.

At FHFA, President Trump’s pick to lead the agency, Bill Pulte, is a passionate advocate
of affordable housing with a track record that includes working in one of the toughest
neighborhoods in Detroit. He has an open mind and, as evidenced at the hearing last
Thursday, has developed some solid relationships on both sides of the committee.

FHFA plays a crucial role regulating the activities of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
(the Enterprises) and the Federal Home Loan Banks. Pulte asserted that his
“mission will be to strengthen and safeguard the housing finance system, safe and
sound housing markets are the foundation of American homeownership.” He also
noted “any exit from conservatorship must be carefully planned to ensure the safety
and soundness of the housing market without upward pressure on mortgage rates.”
Pulte comfortably fielded a brief range of questions from members of the Committee.
Senator Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) emphasized the importance of the Credit Risk
Transfer (CRT) market while Senator Jack Reed (D-R.I.) pressed Pulte on the
Housing Trust Fund (HTF) and Capital Magnet Fund. Pulte agreed on the importance
of a healthy CRT market and affirmed that he would follow the law, which established
the Housing Trust Fund and Capital Magnet Fund.

In his response to Senator Reed, Pulte affirmed he would follow the law that
created the funds, but asked, “are we using the money as wisely as we can?”
As an experienced houser, he committed to “going in and seeing where that
money is being spent and making sure that as many homes are being built
as possible through these funds.” In the past, the Housing Trust Fund has
been questioned by some over its effectiveness and efficiency in creating
affordable housing. These comments may signal an interest in further
exploring these concerns.

In April 2021, then House Financial Services Committee Ranking Member
Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.) and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on
Housing, Community Development, and Insurance Steve Stivers (R-Ohio)
requested a Government Accountability Office (GAO) audit of the HTF,
citing concerns that it was not meeting its objectives. They noted that
despite receiving over $1.19 billion since 2016, more than two-thirds of
the funds remained undisbursed, and the program had only completed
800 units of housing, equating to about $1.5 million per unit. McHenry
and Stivers expressed concern that “even when the cost per unit is
calculated in the light most favorable to HUD, the HTF still appears to
compare poorly to the private sector housing production in terms of
cost per unit. In addition to federal funds, the HTF can be used, in some
cases, to leverage additional funding from various sources such as state
and local real estate taxes and fees. When those leveraged funds are
included in the production calculation, the total dollars for completed
HTF units was approximately $882 million—still more than $1 million
per completed unit of housing.”

The GAO didn’t directly address the cost per unit in its report, likely due
to the fact that the timeline it takes to develop affordable housing
extends beyond the annual HTF funding cycle. A later analysis by the
Congressional Budget Office reported that by October 2022, projects
funded with $317 million in HTF grants had produced 2,989 completed
rental units, with an average HTF cost per unit of approximately
$106,000. For newly constructed units, the average cost was about
$122,000, and for rehabilitations, it was about $84,000.

Senator Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) raised the Federal Home
Loan Banks’ (FHLBanks) contribution to the Affordable Housing
Program, urging Pulte to require the banks to provide more than
20% of their net income for affordable housing and community
development. The statutory requirement is 10%, though most of
the FHLBanks contribute 15% or more. Pulte committed to follow
the law but said he would be “open minded with anything, including
ideas that you have on this matter” once he is inside the FHFA.

Pulte also raised the importance of ensuring accurate appraisals
and lending for manufactured homes. “I believe that there are
really some great opportunities between my friend and colleague
at HUD, Scott Turner in terms of manufactured housing as well
as on the mortgage side at FHFA,” he said.

The bulk of the hearing, however, focused on CFPB. Reed told
McKernan he was afraid the CFPB is doomed regardless of
McKernan’s intentions, saying “I have the sinking feeling you’re
departing Liverpool on the Titanic, so good luck.” Given the
aggressive actions by Musk and Vought to fire as many people
at CFPB as possible before McKernan is confirmed, it’s entirely
possible that Reed will be proved right.

Ranking Member Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) ran through
“13 questions in five minutes,” as Chairman Tim Scott (R-S.C.)
noted, to which McKernan repeatedly answered, that he would
follow the law. “The North Star here is, you got to follow the
law fully and faithfully execute the statute,” McKernan said.
“I’m going to make sure the CFPB performs each of its statutory”
functions. Warren concluded by saying, “If you follow the law
we’ll all be good.” McKernan had a tougher exchange with
Senator Mark Warner (D-Va.) over $20 billion returned to
consumers by CFPB actions. Warner tried to get McKernan
to acknowledge that the money the CFPB has returned to
about 195 million harmed consumers since its inception
was a good thing. McKernan responded that “I don’t think
we should evaluate the success of the CFPB based on dollar
numbers or enforcement count.” Instead, he said “we should
evaluate the CFPB director based on whether we have fair”
rules for the market.

Both candidates received relatively fair and balanced treatment
from both sides of the aisle. Republicans have nearly unanimously
confirmed all of President Trump’s nominees to date. While it
is unclear how many Democrats will be willing to vote for any
Trump nominee given the daily reports on the DOGE wrecking
ball, it is certainly in their – and our – interest to see McKernan
and Pulte confirmed as quickly as possible. It’s in everyone’s
interest to get the CFPB off of Reed’s Titanic metaphor,
before it leaves Liverpool.

Can't believe I fell for this pump, fam. My internet is stuck. Last I saw, FNMA was battling up to 3.50 but that wall kept kicking her back. Oh well, I still got that meeting with BoB Investments. PLease help a brother out.

Hey Clark, can I borrow some money fam? Whatever you can spare. I'm losing all my money here with commons and I did not do well in my meeting with Benjamins Captial.

Can’t believe you wasted your time on a new account that is being paid to mislead you. We must be getting close to an announcement.

You missed the $$BOOM! Navy alias. Just as clueless with that fictional pps.

There is zero Risk that bashers will ever stop bashing be it blatant or not.

Ain't that the truth.

But bashers are in the eye of the beholder. To me, a basher would be someone who says there is no chance of release over the next 4 years. On the other hand, someone who says that the stock price could get wiped out over the next 4 years is not a basher - hopefully not Nostradamus - but not a basher. This is even though that great Libertarian Economist Mark Calabria says the stockholders will end up with "something" - which is better than nothing.

But if I thought it even had a snowball's chance of wipeout - I would have exited long ago - and probably would not have bought in the first place. My only regret so far is selling my Freddie common and using it to buy more Fannie common. I would have been better off doing the opposite because of the lawsuit. But, overall, I am not an unhappy camper - so far.

Nats

"There's never zero risk to anything."

I respectfully disagree.

There is zero Risk that bashers will ever stop bashing be it blatant or not.

$2000 a share at least! Maybe even $20,000

Works for me - you might as well go for the record.

Look - The question you raised is what risk do you assign to the GSEs not being released in the next 4 years. Of course the risk is not zero - everyone knows that. There's never zero risk to anything. What people are saying (and everyone has an opinion) is that the risk is so small as to be inconsequential. I may be foolish, but I am in that camp.

As to the potential stock price - that's something else altogether. I can see a reasonable range from anywhere from near wipeout if the the seniors are fully exercised to north of $300 if the companies are fully restored to the stockholders. You can argue a lot of scenarios. I don't think we will end up anywhere near 100% ownership again - but the chance of that happening is not zero - and its not unreasonable or "pumping the stock" to argue otherwise. Unrealistic, maybe - but not unreasonable or completely unforeseeable.

Nats

Wake me at 25

you wrote "friend's," which is the possessive

The only thing possessive around here is the US Govt.

Nats

Just an FYI for what it's worth. RSI 51 and 46 for the Twins now.

Nah...trump and Elon maybe but for best results trump on both sides. He doesn't like to share.

Lmfao. These articles or maybe just the titles keep getting recycled

I see where you are coming from - but this is different and no laughing matter. This is one of the most important articles put out re the whole Fannie cycle and may (I think will) have a large bearing on where we end up. To repeat this article from 5/20/20 now is very timely as it references THE STUDY. The one that determines our fate, that we paid for, and that we are not allowed to see. Very frustrating.

Its worth a few minutes to take a look.

Nats

I will write "release the GSEs" on the back of a twenty dollar bill and mail it off

Make it a $100 bill and paste a picture of Trump on the front and Vance on the back and you are on to something.
I did this during Trump I but now I am stuck with a bunch of bills with Pence on the back for the ones I could not get off on time.

Nats

you wrote "friend's," which is the possessive
form of the word, "friend." You should have written, "friends," - the plural form of
the word friend. Did you ever even go to school?

Just Kiddin' Around - You are important - Your life is important
and your work is important

Come on , lil more lil boy, surely you got more batteries for your PS5, you should be playing with your lil friend’s on line. Like a good lil(little) boy. Sweetheart, love you , sweet dreams baby!lol

You just said!

It’s just common sense, you’re welcome! 4,000 by Friday lmao!

You must be an Insider with material non-public information

500 days above 5 don’t make a sh$t! Save your post lil man.

See you at 1,

You said:
"...recover the our losses if you can."

Recover THE OUR LOSSES if YOU can?
Where did you learn English? On the
Leave It To Beaver Show?
What a NutCase

Yep, this run is done! Back to a buck we go . Good time to short and recover the our losses if you can.

Amazing

Lmfao. These articles or maybe just the titles keep getting recycled

Really? Published: May 28, 2020 12:40 pm

You give your own post a thumbs up? That is so lame LOL

$2000 a share at least! Maybe even $20,000

I'm not short. Have never been short FNMA. If anything would be a buyer if hit $5. Don't care if all the pompoms hold, buy more or sell. What I don't like to see are innocent people getting sucked in by a bunch of myopic pimps who have no clue how to properly express true risk-reward and resort to childish accusations and comebacks when faced with thoughtful balanced posts.

You want Fannie/Freddie POM-POM???
We's Goin' To The Moon
We's Goin' To The Moon
Hi-Ho The Merry-O
We's Goin' To The Moon

I didn't know what a shill was, then looked it up:
an accomplice of a hawker, gambler, or swindler who acts as an enthusiastic customer to entice or encourage others.

Oh wow.  I am thinking of sending my representative a quick note for my desire to help us shareholders.  I will write "release the GSEs" on the back of a twenty dollar bill and mail it off.  Simple and to the point.  Sometimes I think I am a genius.

My point to people on this post. There is a 100% chance that there is a greater than 0% chance that GSEs don't exit under Trump. The pompom brigade doesn't care about you or your money. They only want to suck you in to gain instant gratification and help their own wallets. Please all do yourselves a favor and be a bit more systematic in how you think about risk and weighted outcomes. I think the weighted likelihood IS a higher share price than today, but the chances at $200+ is very small imo.

I remind them that SCOTUS told them to stop taking all the money in 2018, I remind them that the Kessler Lawsuit was awarded in August of 2023 and we still have not seen a dime, I remind them that Obama used national security to hide 11,000 documents about the takeover of The twins. I remind them that we have a constitution that protects our property rights.

But did you remind them that we slipped a white envelope under their door? That's the kind of reminding that is going to get us released.

Nats

My very basic risk-reward framework

A. No exit = 30%
Stock $1

B. Srs conv and warrants exercised = 40%
Stock $7-9

C. Srs canceled warrants exercised, new shares issued = 20%
Stock $20

D. Srs and warrants canceled Stock issued = 7%
Stock $30-40

E. Srs and warrants canceled and no new Stock 3%
Stock $225

Under any exit scenario assume jrs are converted.

Taking the above I get to around $15/shares weighted average, with my time-frame being 2+ years until all played out under exit scenario.

Anyone want to weigh in on the chances that we have any outcome during the Trump administration other than exit from conservatorship?

Snowballs chance - the GSEs are as good as out.
But whether the stockholders are in or out is the issue.

Nats

It seems like everyone on the board now is long
and hoping for higher - so much so that i'm
a-wonderin where are the Bash for Cash people?
It kinda Skeeers Me - in fact it REALLY SKEEERS ME,
I think we all outta be Skeeered about hardly any
Bash for Cash people around...WHY?

I've been waiting for the fair, logical, pragmatic government for a very very long time

Me too - since like King George II.

Nats

Try https://doge.gov/

So take your % of no exit under Trump and multiply that by $1. % Exit with srs and warrants exercised x $7-9. % no srs but warrants exercised x $40 (if issue shares in re-ipo closer to $20). % chance of exit with non srs or warrants x $220. Build your risk reward framework appropriately and stop listening to pompom girls.

They can’t delay, we only need one to not delay and that’s 47.

It's 100% up to trump now IMO. So we shall see...

I give it 50-50. We got some big boys on our side. The other side has all the rest of Wall Street. It won't be a fair fight, and I have no certainty at all that we will win. It takes positive action for us to win. All they have to do is delay, delay, delay.

Anyone want to weigh in on the chances that we have any outcome during the Trump administration other than exit from conservatorship? My number is 30%.

Shorties look like they are smart, but in fact they are average Joes.
1, The government likes control. It's normal, otherwise they lose power!

2, Government wants your money, that's Joe Biden who increased taxes.

Wake up, Harris was defeated in the election.