Seeking Alpha


Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View philipmax's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • BofA and U.S. Bancorp face another mortgage suit [View news story]
    8 years on (12 years from crime date) still... no culprit has been prosecuted.
    The banks pay their fines with shareholders' money - to god-knows which government agency that keeps it - and the music goes on.
    Dec 17, 2014. 03:40 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Citi fined $15M by Finra over research [View news story]
    C does it again.
    I can understand "neither admitting or denying" agreements to settle. But, don't these stipulations include prohibitions on repeat offenses that include civil and criminal penalties?
    How does this bank, a notoriously recidivist offender, get off so often without ever having to face criminal charges? What's $15M to this model of an organized crime entity? A smaller institution would be shut down and its officers prosecuted to the full extent of the law (10 to 20 years).
    Nov 24, 2014. 01:32 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Fannie Mae: Let's Not End The Conservatorship Just Yet [View article]
    Mr. Harrison, I fail to understand your logic. It may be a misunderstanding on my part, but I gather that you are proposing that by delaying the release from Conservartorship until mid-2017 the shareholders would benefit from a new administration more in sympathy with them. I beg to differ.

    Firstly, it was under President Bush that the C'ship started, so both D or R administrations are co-conspirators in subjugating the F&F to their present state. Therefore, an administration change will not be the determining factor in the disposition of the GSEs.

    Secondly, Treasury has an ingrained cultural disdain for the GSE (they are competitors) that will endure any administration changes.

    Thirdly, were the GSE's released from the C'ship it would have to imply the nullification of Article 3, which is the monstrous sweep agreement.

    Fourthly, there remains the matter of the Senior Preferred and the Warrants. There will have to be a major shift in Treasury's position regarding either or both of these, or the lawsuits will still haunt them.

    The impetus for releasing the institutions from the C'ship will be to stop the intrusive discovery (embarrassing, if not indictable stuff)for the government, and eliminate the legal costs (perhaps $250M) to the plaintiffs. This will only come about when shareholders are given a fair shake!

    Bottom line, asking me to wait 3 years for the same result is not an option.
    Nov 23, 2014. 02:00 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Citigroup booted from ECB forex group [View news story]
    Why is CITI's chicanery not a surprise?
    Nov 21, 2014. 09:44 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • GSEs slip after earnings [View news story]
    It's pretty disgusting.
    Why bother reporting income? Only losses would make headlines, as Treasury could use the excuse to secure a total stranglehold on Fanny's shareholders and confiscate the whole damn game.

    If someone described this story, without naming the players, whoever would hear it would instantly conclude that this is how the Bolsheviks nationalized all private property in Soviet Russia in 1918.

    Nov 6, 2014. 03:54 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Fannie And Freddie: It Was Never An Issue Of Solvency [View article]
    Wait a minute! The author is 100% correct.
    F&F did not need cash from Treasury.
    There was ample cash flow to service debt. Why would they need the cash?
    They needed an entry on the BALANCE SHEET to offset the enormous write-offs that were imposed on them. A non-cash "guarantee" dress as a 137+ Loan.

    PS: That is my real name on the moniker.
    Oct 31, 2014. 05:39 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • FHFA to loosen mortgage rules [View news story]
    Let the FHFA and Treasury know that, as a shareholder of F&F, I am resolutely against a hype that gives guarantees to reckless lending.

    I don't want Treasury to later claim that the upcoming bubble in mortgage lending was done with "approval" of the shareholder. IT WAS NOT APPROVED!
    Oct 21, 2014. 09:51 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Ackman Bets On $100+ For Fannie And Freddie - New All-Time Highs [View article]
    Who says the Government can't take 100% of your income as a "dividend" and never allow you to grow, or pay out earnings to stockholders?

    There is ample precedent for this behavior.

    This kind of action is being performed every day by our local street hoodlums.

    Our Treasury is just adapting to an existing economic model.

    Uncle Sam is pretty much close to adopting this wonderful system to every W-2 income earner in this nation.
    Oct 20, 2014. 05:49 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Fannie And Freddie: It Was Never An Issue Of Solvency [View article]
    Nice job. I've noted the same on previous Comments , but never as clearly as you. Thumbs up.
    Oct 7, 2014. 09:59 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Fannie Mae Legal Ruling Expedites Endgame [View article]
    Good article because we are both in agreement. But... are detractors convinced?
    A few additional points to consider.

    1- Did Treasury ever deposit money in either of F&F entities?
    These was never a cash drain on either. So, in essence, Treasury took a 79.9% interest without ever shelling out $1 for this confiscation of private property.

    2- Treasury kicked Fanny out of its nest in 1970 in order to reduce the outstanding National Debt at the time. It sold its interest to the public and pocketed the proceeds. Yes, it was a mistake, as Fannie indeed had special powers to "create money", but, that should have been dealt with in 1970. It now belongs to shareholders.

    3- Conservertorship is a rarely used modality in financial distress. Although, in many cases, a choice of Conservertorship would have actually saved the FDIC, depositors, and investors Billions of Dollars over the years, the FDIC -which is the perfect forum for such a device - shuns this format, opting instead, for a more draconian choice of Liquidation.

    4- In previous takeovers of profitable businesses, the Government returned these businesses to the stockholders at very generous terms.

    I will give the example of WWI, when military material to Europe was severely hampered by the haphazard non-conformity of carriages of the US Railroad industry. The Government took over about 150 private railroads. During the course of the war, millions of Dollars were spent on new rail equipment and enhancements, in order to unify the rail system of this Nation. At the end of the war, the railroads were returned to the original stockholders in a much improved condition. that was as close as a Conservertoship as any enterprise run by the government.

    I hope that this will fortify the shareholder's claims.
    Oct 6, 2014. 09:32 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Frannie Folly [View article]
    I'd like to pose a question that's been bothering me for 6 years.
    Why did Fanny Mae need $187B from the gov't? It was solvent throughout the period.

    Perhaps, during the initial period, 2007-2008, the public needed the assurance that the Government was there as a back-up. There was no no need for cash, and I believe that none was tendered.

    I read that Treasury "lent" F&F money to pay the "interest" during the interim years 2008-2012, but, that to was unnecessary as there was ample cash in the till.

    So, for the use of a back-up line of credit, the Treasury was able to steal this company?

    Someone please respond. I am confused.
    Oct 3, 2014. 12:48 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Fannie Mae: Round One To The Government [View article]
    I like your presentation. Consider this an invitation to write more. Thanks.
    Oct 3, 2014. 08:39 AM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Carney: Don't buy the dip in Frannie [View news story]
    As I read several of Carney's pronouncement , it becomes clear that he is a paid patsy for Treasury and other vested interests who are out to destroy F&F.

    The comments that are generated here, in response, are where the nuggets of truth lies. Thank you all for your contribution to sanity and justice (if , and when, it will strike).

    Let us all remember that that this is a CONSERVATORSHIP and not RECEIVERSHIP. There is a fiduciary obligation on the part of FHFA to protect the interest of F&F, namely the owners (shareholders) and not anyone else. Treasury cannot self deal. These are private institutions, owned by shareholders. There is sufficient case law to guarantee the shareholders rights.

    U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth has effectively decreed that "Congress giveth and Congress can taketh away" so that whatever Treasury did was legal and binding based on Congressional authority.

    I thought that the Judiciary was the arbiter of what was legal for Congress to enact. The judge has jeopardized the entire investment community, and specifically, the banking industry, by subjecting it to the whims of political expediency. Lamberth's decision is an insult to the entire Judiciary.

    In any case the contested "Third Amendment" can be easily superseded by another, less draconian Amendment that takes into account the interest of the shareholders.

    Lest I sound too Polly-Anni ish, I've seen dumb Judges dumb decisions allowed to stand.

    Disclosure:Long and going longer on F&F.
    Oct 2, 2014. 05:23 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Federal judge rejects U.S. bid to dismiss AIG lawsuit [View news story]
    Great for Hanc Greenberg!
    Great for justice!
    Great implication for Fannie Mae shareholders vis-a-vis Treasury action!
    All in all, a good day for America
    Aug 27, 2014. 08:59 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Carney: Fannie and Freddie investors should surrender [View news story]
    Here's another irritant to shareholders. Litigators, take notice!
    I blogged this info at the time Freddie issue earnings report.

    Treasury confiscates net income of the company(OTCQB:FMCC) as a "dividend", thereby, depriving the company of deducting this "tax" from its reported income and thus forcing Freddie to pay INCOME TAX on the Gross Net Income to the tune of an additional $700,000 Million. Total payoff to this blackmail $2.6 Billion, this quarter alone.

    This doesn't make sense, as banks and other institutions who had to pay "restitution" were able to effectively reduce the sting of such payment by deducting the fines from their reported income.

    If 10% of $2.6 Billion is Chump change, $260Mil, than call me Mr. Chump!

    There is a major crime being perpetrated here by the Treasury. This is a national tragedy unfolding before our very eyes.
    Aug 11, 2014. 06:43 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment