TightCoil
3 시간 전
Now 15 Days Above $5!
FNMA
Date - PPS - Volume
Jan 31 - $5.49 - 5,825,993
Jan 30 -$5.65 - 5,238,534
Jan 29 - $ 5.66 - 11,557,830
Jan 28 - $5.74 - 11,902,328
Jan 27 $5.46 - 17,666,323
Jan 24 $5.74 32,035,179
Jan 23- $6.50 - 9,201,548
Jan 22 - $6.85 -18,576,012
Jan 21 - 7.01 35,380,100
Jan 17 - 6.91 36,487,200
Jan 16 - 5.40 41,137,700
Jan 15 - 6.21 46,566,200
Jan 14 - 7.04 53,693,000
Jan 13 - 5.49 16,501,000
Jan 10- 5.26 24,269,000
navycmdr
4 시간 전
Fannie Mae admits multifamily loan fraud losses in SEC filing
By Erik Sherman, globest.com -
January 31, 202573
https://yieldpro.com/2025/01/fannie-mae-admits-multifamily-loan-fraud-losses-in-sec-filing/
The signs were there. Reports of instances of alleged multifamily loan fraud through Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. The latter finally offered an admission of the problem in its latest 10-Q filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
“We have discovered instances of multifamily lending transactions in which one or more of the parties involved engaged in mortgage fraud or possible mortgage fraud, and we continue to investigate additional multifamily lending transactions in which we suspect fraud may have occurred,” they wrote.
In June 2024, the Department of Justice prosecuted Aron Puretz, who “pleaded guilty today to engaging in an extensive, multi-year conspiracy to fraudulently obtain over $54.7 million in loans and to fraudulently acquire multifamily and commercial properties.” Freddie Mac was one of the targets.
Last year, Boruch Drillman pleaded guilty to “an extensive multi-year conspiracy to fraudulently obtain over $165 million in loans and fraudulently acquire multifamily and commercial properties.” Fannie Mae was a target.
In the Under Risk Factors of its new filing, Fannie Mae said it had experienced financial losses due to mortgage fraud and could experience more. The company had identified “certain gaps” in how it processes multifamily fraud risk and oversees multifamily seller/servicer counter parties.
Fannie Mae said in answer to the shortcomings it had “implemented changes to reinforce and clarify our requirements for multifamily sellers and servicers” and continued to “further reduce the risk we face from fraudulent practices.” They are also pursuing “contractual remedies against multifamily lenders where we find breaches of the selling representations that lenders are required to provide on loans they sell to us, as well as against multifamily borrowers and sponsors.”
Reportedly, Fannie Mae ceased doing business with some in the industry like title insurers Riverside Abstract and Madison Title, although the two firms hadn’t been charged with wrongdoing, according to The Real Deal.
“Until we complete our work to improve our processes for managing multifamily loan origination fraud risk and oversight of multifamily seller/servicer counterparties, we may face a higher risk that we will be unable to detect or prevent fraudulent multifamily lending transactions, which could negatively affect our financial results and condition,” they added.
This isn’t the first time Fannie Mae has assessed fraud, though previous times typically were warnings to consumers, like the existence of identity theft rings or potential red flags for mortgage fraud.
Guido2
4 시간 전
Once again, you were right and I was wrong. She was mentioned as "VICE" Director not Deputy.
As someone here looked it up, the Vice XXXX gets to act on behalf of XXXX during XXXX's absence. Hence, my enthusiasm for a re-listing, SPS write down and exit from conservatorship. As you correctly deduced, she won't do anything on her own. It's up to President Trump who decided to appoint her to now order her to act.
kthomp19
6 시간 전
Yes, a vast majority of the posts on this board actually.
You just can't get enough argumentum ad populum, can you?
The vast majority of the posts on this board are utterly useless when it comes to making investment decisions, which is supposed to be the whole purpose of its existence. Quantity is not the same as quality.
I'm under no obligation to give you a mathematical probability, especially since that's not how my method works.
How can you estimate a future share price using your purported scenarios without using probabilities? I am genuinely curious to hear the details of this type of strategy.
You just throw out a 85% probability based on "XYZ", but your probability is just like every other one - created out of your own assumptions. Completely meaningless.
Is this more of the "no predictions are fully correct therefore all are equally useless" bullshit?
Assumptions are everything when it comes to deciding whether to buy/own/hold/sell shares. Everyone makes assumptions when investing, whether they are conscious of it or not.
You keep asking for probabilities, lawsuits, or for people to shut up if they can't back their position to your satisfaction. But they don't. Sensing a trend yet?
Yes, a trend of hypocrisy.
If that mission no longer exists, the likelihood of shareholders getting some money has theoretically increased.
Quantifying that increase via an estimation of its probability is the only way that information is of any use when it comes to making investment decisions regarding the commons and juniors.
Hence, the increase in share price. The market is aware, even if you are not.
This carries the implicit assumption that the market is always correct and/or rational. If high prices are seen as a confirmation of an investment thesis then low prices should be seen as a repudiation of it, and yet I have found that almost nobody holds both of those views.
For what it's worth, I don't believe either of those is true.
kthomp19
6 시간 전
Calabria's book is the most recent reference you can use?
No. Calabria reiterated in a podcast interview from a couple weeks ago that Treasury's lawyers won't allow a full writedown.
In addition, John Paulson saying that Treasury will end up with either 90% (according to this article) or 90-95% (according to this interview) of the common is far more recent.
Political fallout is based on who is politically in charge, has the majority, and/or has leverage, and what their goals are. It's not static over time. It did not change the instant Mnunchin took his position either. Political winds can take time to shift, and what was once a headwind can become a tailwind.
For the millionth time you're only talking about possibilities and not probabilities.
What are the chances that Treasury's goals shift in a way that is favorable to common shareholders? I have it at 15%. How about you?
I don't see why they would care about leaving $50B or any amount that happens to remain. Especially if it helps get the deal done smoothly. The best reason to not leave anything behind would be intentionally trying to screw shareholders. That was so last decade.
I disagree. I think the best reason to not leave anything behind would be so that Treasury gets more money. That would avoid the political fallout of the perception of a giveaway to shareholders.
I don't think Treasury will try to take every single penny possible, but I see no reason to think that the compromise will happen north of or even anywhere near $50B. It's a huge amount of money in absolute terms.
kthomp19
6 시간 전
I agree that Treasury works with the Federal Reserve, particularly on banking or financial bailouts. I disagree that either the Treasury or Fed is mandated to reap an excessive return. They would only do it if they are being told to do it. The Fed is literally set up as a NON-profit. Treasury is not in the profit game at all.
Treasury's return on FnF alone is already over 50% and they still haven't written off the seniors or cancelled the warrants. That contradicts your argument.
When the mission changes, then what will be the required Treasury return? That's the question that nobody has the answer to yet. We are all awaiting official statements.
Anything lower than 57% would require Treasury to write down the seniors, cancel the warrants, and return cash to the companies. I don't see any universe in which all three of those (and not even the last one in isolation) happen.
If your 8% target is an overall return then Treasury has already far exceeded it. And if it's an annual figure then Treasury would have to at least exercise the warrants to reach it.
Sure, I agree a PE of 8 is in the realm of possibility. So is 15, so is 6. Are you giving a probability to each number between zero and 200?
It's certainly possible to consider too many scenarios; doing 200 is a waste of time compared to 5-10 because the amount of time spent doesn't justify the small increase in accuracy.
Something like 10% chance of 6, 30% of 8, 50% of 10, 10% of 12 is close enough. That comes out to an average of 9.2. I think Ackman's 15 is far too high: it could be accurate in 2027 but if the juniors are converted and capital is raised, those would occur sooner and thus at lower multiples.
kthomp19
6 시간 전
The easiest way to deal with the SPS is for Treasury, FHFA, and Trump to declare that the Net Worth Sweep and the Increase in liquidation Preference in the fourth amendment overstepped the legal bounds of the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement and therefore is declared null and void. Then re-due the books as if they never happened. The 10% interest on the loaned amount would stay in affect until paid-off, then a .0065% fee would remain on the $200 billion explicit gov. Guarantee, and release the twins.
I would call that simple, but most certainly not easy.
The resolution to the conservatorships is going to be ruled by politics, and I cannot imagine your scenario happening at all.
1) Why would FHFA and Treasury say the NWS is illegal after (successfully) defending it as legal in the Collins case?
2) Why would your 12-figure giveaway by the government not be politically toxic, especially as the government looks for cuts to spending?
kthomp19
6 시간 전
What is your basis for the 85% probability that the SPS will be converted?
In order:
1) The Supreme Court's Collins decision, which essentially shut the door on any court forcing Treasury to write down the seniors
2) John Paulson's recent comments that Treasury will end up with at least 90% of FnF common (combined with his proximity to the President; he was seated in row 2 at the inauguration and is a longtime huge donor)
3) Calabria's book, where he said that he was told by Treasury a senior pref writedown would be illegal and involve undesirable political fallout
4) Treasury values the seniors at over $240B and writing them off for nothing in return could blow an enormous hole in the budget
5) The AIG precedent, where they converted their preferred shares into the biggest common stake that they thought they could get (92%) without prompting breach of duty lawsuits by the shareholders against the BOD (which isn't a concern with FnF due to their BODs' lack of fiduciary duty to shareholders)
Before John Paulson's comments I had it at 75%.
How can you assign any probability?
The most robust way I know to estimate the future share price, and thus decide if buying/holding right now is a good idea, is an expected value calculation.
1) Create a future scenario by making some assumptions (with FnF common important ones are whether or not the seniors are converted, a future P/E multiple, capital raise size, etc)
2) Estimate the resulting share price in that scenario
3) Estimate a probability for that scenario
4) Multiply the numbers from steps 2 and 3
5) Repeat steps 1-4 until you have done as many scenarios as you deem reasonable
6) Make sure your probabilities all add to 100%
7) Add the numbers in step 4 for each scenario to get the future expected value
8) Discount that value back to the present
Step 3 is extremely important, but it has to be an estimate because it involves predicting the future.
navycmdr
7 시간 전
March 14, 1980 awarded the Golden Wings of a Navy pilot -
Flying ALL WEATHER operations
between underway NAVY Ships at Night
I completed Naval Postgraduate school Monterry CA - Aviation Safety OFFICER
30 Yrs - 4,423 accident free flight hrs flying between Navy ships - H46, UH-1N
underway at sea at NIGHT - moving external Weapons, Cargo, passenger transfer
doing Search and Rescue & MEDEVAC flights - numerous Life-saving Rescues
Navy Flight Instructor, Instrument instructor (special card to take-off weather 0-0)
click Link then the picture after it Loads to see
Flight Ops Vertical Replenishment ( VERTREP) :
https://www.facebook.com/ronald.luhmann/posts/pfbid0v1Dt25GUU4YLDAz9vA6AajEdoGqTZWheJvjEpMba7azSNgyekt1VUbpa9LeGQZKZl?mibextid=pjQu9i
I was hired after 30yrs Navy Retirement by the owner to "fix" his flight academy
safety after previous 13 accidents & 3 fatalities - He was paying $375,000/month
in liability insurance - I told the owner I wanted to fly but agreed to be Safety Director
for 6 months and Fix his Academy then - if I wasn't flying as an instructor I would QUIT !
I completely revamped the academy with RULES, policies, required Flight Safety Brief
Safety posters in the flight briefing rooms & even bathrooms - During the next 6 month
they had NO ACCIDENTS NO INJURIES - I was flown to Atlanta by Insurance underwriters
because they wanted to know how I did the Safety Job so quickly and efficiently
I was written up in this safety magazine after we did a Safety Stand down
in Las Vegas - I was Director of Safety for 41 Helicopter Flight Academy
locations in U.S. flying 15,000 hrs per month - on 250 helicopters
Golfbum22
9 시간 전
thx-G, more questions
Is there an FHFA head right now? I think not, IDK.
why wait for confirmation that could take months?
Is Sandra confirmed still there as a deputy? I seriously doubt it
what haven't they appointed an interim director like they did with the evil Demarco who was there 3 years and did incredible damage to us? the spot is vacant and important if they want to release the gse's
FHFA is not as big as a deal as US treasury, so appoint someone interim and get moving already would be the best way, yes/no??
I get it, only been in office 10 days and have some patience but this plan to release needs to move in the first hundred days to get ahead of 2 deadline for possible change of power. IMO
the more questions we figure out, the better. LOL
Go FnF