EMQQ The Emerging Markets Internet ETF (EMQQ) Opções

OK, OK, fair. I should have been clear that I was saying that I like the musician, not the politician!

https://www.billboard.com/music/music-news/rocker-joe-walsh-takes-on-namesake-politician-1212237/

Long$ deserve to get rich $weet$$ all the way to 1000$

Everyone has all the answers. They just aren't necessarily the right answers.

Warriors,  what's with this April 2nd date?TIA

Now, now. You thought it was brilliant when the discussion was about the Crimean War.

What? The "presupposition" your opaque comment leads to (??) is that English is not one of your first five languages.

Kthomp - you were wrong about the status of the Bryndon Fisher lawsuit. Any comments for being wrong?

Yup, I was wrong about that.

I don't understand how he was able to appeal since his case was dismissed by the CAFC along with Cacciapelle and the other NWS takings case

Yes, more than 79%. That's what Paulson said the government would take 90% or more of the FNMA & FMCC stocks.

Exactly.

For an individual like me, I am satisfied with PPs at $30 regardless of what and how much they take.

You might have missed the point he

Hopefully Barron is ready to go with his lawsuit.

🤣

I'd be surprised if page 1 has been written yet.

If GOV owns more than 80% of the GSEs, their MBS of $5T will be counted as GOV liability. Hence, the national debt will increase immediately by $5T. That's what I heard 10-12 years ago, as to why 79.99% of warrants.

Nope. This is false. https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg

Happy to let the government buy my shares at the price i am willing to sell them at.

Otherwise... there would be some theft involved.

It finally comes out. Your definition of "theft" is any action that results in the share price being lower than your exit point. How co

Has anyone substantiated the comment related to required CET1 levels only being satisfied via retained earnings? The comment was supposedly made during the Urban Institute roundtable.

Do you have a quote? I haven't heard about that comment.

Been looking but cannot find

I don't like this precedent. Pulte naming himself chairman is in direct contravention of the law, even though it doesn't functionally matter because he controls the decisions of all FnF employees as FHFA director.

I don't know who would be willing to challenge this in court, though. W

Hmmmm....I wonder what he means by BIG stake.

Just look at the way Treasury values the seniors and the warrants. The former is a huge number (over $200B), the latter a rounding error. https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=175862284 Our former FHFA director a

Are you saying that every buyer of common stock is unreasonable?

I'm saying that there is no reasonable expectation for any buyer of FnF stock after the NWS, even now with the jury verdict and subsequent LP ratchet letter agreements, to have any economic rights given the current statu

Sure, as a temporary measure to give Treasury time to sell off the shares, and they relinquished any common voting rights in the meantime. But does Treasury own any publicly traded companies in perpetuity? That would be news to me.

The SWF's ownership of FnF wouldn't have to remain gr

Yes, as far as I recall, they sold off their assets - mostly real estate holdings, and used the proceeds to pay down debt, and buy back all of the common stock. I don't know if they paid off all debtors, or just the ones that required them to do so. There were some assets left over, but not enough t

I think you mean Chairman/men of both Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac, not CEO.

Yes, you're right. Thanks for the correction.

Big difference, right between Chairman & CEO?

Technically but not functionally. Neither the Chairman or CEO of either Fannie or Freddie

So "Seniors" = SPS + LP and thus you treat SPS + LP as pari passu (i.e. with equal claim/footing, no distinction).

SPS = Senior Preferred Shares
LP = Liquidation Preference

They aren't separate things. The LP of the seniors stands at around $350B for FnF combine

First, Treasury and FHFA must agree to cancel the net worth sweep (NWS increase dollar for dollar on retained earnings) eliminate Treasury’s liquidation preference, and cancellation of the Senior Preferred.

"Must"?! Or else what? You're going to tell your mommy?

It's cl

Then take it up with them. I understand this……

board is popular on Ihub, but I’m not sure the DNC comes here for advice.

If you have all the answers, then your efforts here is probably just sideways energy for a brilliant mind like yours.

FnF do not need any more capital if SPS are used as a backstop.

Wrong. This table is from Fannie's 2024 10-K. Notice the huge negative numbers, which represent how far below their regulatory capital levels they are. If FnF truly did not need any more capital those numbers would be ze

Why would any one wants to buy common shares of such companies?

Why would anyone want to buy them now? If people would be stupid to buy commons under those circumstances (post massive dilution), they would be even more stupid to own them right now.

The easy and simple