Daniel

@FreedomDayna I'll buy then lol I'll miss the first 15%

@DanielSyck You had to wait a week and a half for your theory to almost work. Then I won't hear from you when the GSE's are uplisted and released because that's how you jealous haters work.

$FNMA $fmcc for the rookies

@FreedomDayna You should have taken my advice. Dead cat bounce. Ackman bought us one day on the charts. 3.80 then 1.40 after midterms

@DanielSyck Douchebag.

@firewill65 @BillAckman Just the pace we are bleeding out

@DanielSyck @BillAckman Why 15 days...what's its significance?

For all the F2 shareholders and our friend @BillAckman $FNMA $FMCC youtu.be/ErvgV4P6Fzc?si…

@le37828 @nicosintichakis @DirectorPulte @pulte It's not stuck trust me. One to Two more days of bleeding and we've just confirmed a dead cat bounce. 3.40 in 15 days again than 1.70 in 60 days. Admin is not making any announcement anytime soon so might as well cement that idea in the trash

@nicosintichakis @DirectorPulte @pulte Price is stuck between 5.47 bid and 5.48. … large in flow of money from XL and L block today bit price is not moving … interesting

Let’s see what @DirectorPulte @pulte does? $FMCC $FNMA #FreddieMac #FannieMae #GSEs #Housing #F2 furmancenter.org/publication/pr…

@pulte @realDonaldTrump @MariaBartiromo

@pulte So you rip 200 mill from F2 to buy MBS, rates go from 7 to 6, GREAT but WAIT then they go back to 7 not even a month later. Then your co. shares go down 7O% , your out 200 mill. & kill any ipo from the Obama steal. Help everyone understand? @realDonaldTrump @MariaBartiromo

@TRothell62855 @firewill65 @pulte Check back in 2030 after midterms and new election

@pulte You owe $FNMA $FMCC shareholder’s an update

Swalwell ends Privacy Act case against FHFA, Pulte housingwire.com/articles/swalw…

@GroveNeal @pulte 2 years out and possibly 2 more presidents

@pulte What about Fannie Mae Shareholders! Anything?

@KKeebss @revgalerivs Valid point lol

@DanielSyck @revgalerivs False data? You’re relying on grok to feed you information.

$FNMA multiple ~100k sell blocks, but little to no price movement. Interesting.

@trades2g Ty good insight. I ain't the best at reading but I ain't the worst

@DanielSyck currently inside a scallop formation. As long it doesn't break below a certain % number it's a continuation pattern. *FOR NOW*

$FNMA :

@trades2g What's your thoughts on a dead cat bounce based on the charts? Or do you just look at it like daily?

@trades2g Ahh I see. On a 3-month chart I was really seeing a dead cat bounce with FNMA.

Idea! Make IPO F2 shares redeemable up to 10k for DPA, 1st time home buyers w/ income limits. Or useable for Trump retirement account / SWF. @BillAckman @realDonaldTrump $fnma 1. SPS repaid 2. Exercise warrants 3. DPA/Trump & SWF account eligible (supports housing) 4. Re-list on NYSE or TXSE

Bravo

@KKeebss @revgalerivs both of you need to get your s*** together on speculation post & false data

@KKeebss @grok was there multiple 100K buy limit orders or sell limit orders regarding FNMA today?

@TylerEHand @firewill65 @michaeljburry Valid point

@DanielSyck @firewill65 @michaeljburry Burry told you the level he would buy back in, and when it hit that level, he bought. I don't think he's waiting for it to tank.

🚨@michaeljburry just went "Lights Out" on X. His "going dark" episodes often coincide with frothy periods and precede volatility or corrections (most clearly 2021 to 2022 bear market; crypto collapse), but his timing is frequently early. Burry went dark right before the 2022 sell-off and before the pre-COVID crash. These often coincide with major buys in sectors set to benefit. He believes something big is brewing, and likely doesn't want the barrage of commentary, questions, and prefers to use his Substack instead. That said, 3 of his final 8 posts on X are in full support of buying $FNMA and $FMCC as the government prepares for uplist and eventual release from conservatorship, each of which will significantly increase share price. Discounting his non-market/stock posts before going dark (including music videos), his THREE FINAL POSTS throw his weight behind Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac purchases and double down on his agreement with @BillAckman that "treating shareholders fairly here is about much, much more than these two companies." I'm encouraged. x.com/michaeljburry/… x.com/michaeljburry/… x.com/michaeljburry/… @JonOksenholt

@BillAckman No announcement from the White House and we are about to enter a dead cat bounce. Need to keep the momentum going. $fnma

A number of press reports have characterized our and other shareholders’ efforts on behalf of Fannie and Freddie (F2) as seeking a ‘gift’ or ‘handout’ from the government. We, the shareholders of F2, seek no such thing. Hundreds of financial institutions were bailed out during the GFC by the U.S. Treasury. Nearly all of the financial institution bailouts during the GFC involved an injection of capital in the form of senior preferred stock by Treasury at an interest rate of 5%, plus warrants to acquire common stock in an amount equal to 15% of the face amount of the preferred with an exercise price at the then-current stock price of the rescued institution. For example, Treasury’s preferred stock investment in Goldman Sachs was in an amount of $10 billion and, in addition, Treasury received warrants on $1.5 billion of GS' common stock at its then market price. The bailout terms for F2 were materially more burdensome and expensive, with a higher interest rate and substantially more warrant coverage, than that of every other financial institution (other than those of AIG whose terms were similar). Despite the F2 bailouts’ massively more burdensome terms, shareholders are not complaining about the original terms. Treasury invested $193 billion in F2 in the form of senior preferred stock (SPS), including funding for $2 billion of commitment fees, with a 10% coupon (twice that of the banks). Treasury also received warrants on 79.9% of both companies’ outstanding shares. Fannie and Freddie have since repaid Treasury $301 billion, which includes interest on the SPS at a blended rate of 11.6%, an interest rate which is 160 basis points more per annum, and have returned the entire $193 billion of outstanding principal, $25 billion in excess of what was contractually owed. In summary, the F2 SPS has been fully repaid according to its original contractual terms plus an extra $25 billion. Despite the fact that the SPS has been more than repaid in full, Fannie and Freddie have not accounted for these payments on their respective balance sheets, and the $193 billion of SPS remains an outstanding liability as if no principal payments had ever been made. How can it be, you might ask, if indeed F2 have repaid $301 billion to Treasury when only $276 billion was due could there be any remaining balance of the SPS on the F2 balance sheets? The answer relates to something called the ‘Net Worth Sweep (NWS).’ During the second term of the Obama administration, on August 12, 2012, two quarters after F2 returned to profitability, Treasury announced that it was unilaterally amending the terms of the SPS stock to provide that Treasury would take 100% of the profits of F2 each quarter in lieu of the 10% annual dividend rate. This was not a negotiated resolution with F2. It was a unilateral amendment of the original terms of the SPS that was done in bad faith. The supposed rationale for the amended terms of the SPS was akin to the IRS garnishing the wages of someone who will never be able to pay the taxes that they owe. That is, the Treasury said F2 will never be able to pay the 10% coupon, let alone the SPS’ $193 billion principal balance, so it decided instead to ‘settle’ for 100% of F2’s profits forever. In discovery, shareholders learned that the stated justification for the amendment was false. In mid 2012, the Obama administration had come to learn that both companies would soon be reversing tens of billions of reserves on their balance sheets as housing values had increased and the reserves taken during the GFC had been excessive. The NWS was instituted by Obama to forestall F2 from forever being able to recapitalize and be released from conservatorship. The NWS was not a ‘settlement’ for a lesser amount of future payments. It was the outright theft of the forever profits of both companies. Never before or since has the government ‘swept’ 100% of the profits of any company, let alone a financial institution in conservatorship, a form of government intervention where the goal is rehabilitation of the institution, and where the hierarchy of corporate claims has always been respected. The accounting for the NWS payments while it was in effect (until Secretary Mnuchin terminated the NWS in Trump’s first term) was also unusual. The NWS was treated by F2 as a quarterly adjustment to the dividend rate on the SPS such that the dividend amount owed was made equal to the after-tax profits of F2 for that quarter with no limitation. In other words, regardless of the amount of profit F2 generated for the quarter – whether or not it was in excess of the original 10% annual dividend – the dividend payable under the NWS was made equal to the quarterly profit. The absurd terms of the NWS sweep therefore made it impossible for any partial or full repayment of the SPS to take place as every dollar paid to the Treasury on the amended terms of the SPS was considered a dividend payment, even if the amount was massively in excess of the original contractual SPS terms. The absurdity of the NWS was made clear just two quarters after the NWS went into effect. Fannie Mae generated a profit of $59 billion in the first quarter of 2013, and the SPS dividend rate for that quarter was set at $59 billion so the entire amount was swept to the government, more than 10 times the contractual dividend rate. I had the opportunity to discuss F2 and the NWS with Warren Buffett about a decade ago and he said that he “couldn’t believe what the government had done.” In short, the shareholders of F2 are simply asking the government to respect the original and highly burdensome terms of the SPS. There is no dispute that Treasury has received more than the original 10% coupon and full repayment of principal of the SPS, that is, an extra $25 billion. We and the millions of other shareholders of F2 are simply asking the administration to honor the original SPS terms and properly account for the $301 billion of payments, thereby eliminating the SPS liability from both companies’ balance sheets. Shareholders have not asked for the extra $25 billion to be returned to the two companies. Treasury can decide whether to keep those funds or return them to the companies. Accounting for the repayment of the SPS has other important implications. Namely, it is critically important that conservatorships respect the rule of law, in particular, the contractual terms of corporate instruments and the hierarchy of claims. Otherwise, no financial institution that gets into trouble will be able to raise rescue capital in the private markets. Notably, the treatment of F2 in conservatorship explains why Silicon Valley Bank and other recent large bank failures since the GFC were unable to raise private capital and avoid government intervention or a forced sale to J.P. Morgan. If the government with the stroke of a pen during conservatorship can at a whim wipe out common and preferred shareholders, no one is going to step in to try to save a financial institution that gets into trouble, and only the top few banks will be possible rescuers of big banks that fail. Furthermore, because of F2’s history, their reputation in the capital markets has been greatly damaged. F2 raised $22 billion of preferred stock in the year or so prior to conservatorship as the government pressed both companies to raise capital. Institutions were willing to invest billions of dollars of capital into both institutions before they failed because, based on all precedent conservatorships, the contractual terms of all financial instruments and the hierarchy of claims had been preserved. Unfortunately, in light of the precedent of the net worth sweep, no investor can be confident that they won’t be wiped out in a future conservatorship so none has been willing to take the risk. Some have proposed that Treasury simply convert the SPS into junior preferred and common stock and massively dilute shareholders. Putting aside the potential legal challenges to this approach, the result will be that Treasury will at best own something approaching 95% of both companies rather than 79.9%. While the government’s percentage ownership stake would be larger in the SPS conversion approach, the value of the government’s larger stake would be considerably lower as the companies would become un-investable. Who would invest in F2 alongside the government when they just wiped out the previous owners? In the SPS conversion scenario, the government’s stake, at best, if it could be sold, would trade at a massively discounted valuation, well below the value of the government's stake if Treasury retained only its contracted for 79.9% stake and respected the original terms of the SPS. In other words, a slightly smaller ownership stake of much more highly valued companies would equate to considerably more value for Treasury and taxpayers. In a public letter to Rand Paul after his first term in November of 2021, President Trump recognized that the net worth sweep was theft from the shareholders of Fannie and Freddie. He wrote: “Another Obama/Biden scam in legal trouble was when they allowed the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) to steal the retirement savings of hardworking Americans who had invested in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac…The idea that the government can steal money from its citizens is socialism and is a travesty brought to you by the Obama/Biden administration. My Administration was denied the time it needed to fix this problem because of the unconstitutional restriction on firing Mel Watt. It has to come to an end and courts must protect our citizens.” I couldn’t have said it better than President Trump. Now that you have the time, Mr. President, let’s Stop the Steal!