Fannie Mae (QB) (FNMA) Share Price

Ano
@Ano3020100
FHFA Size of Work Force
2006 135
2007 134
2008 136
2009 420
2011 618
2019 731
2023 793
2024 1578
2025 1893
@DOGE
Image
12:45 PM · Jan 31, 2025
·
3,839
Views

Nico
@nicosintichakis
Open Letter to Bill Pulte: Addressing FHFA’s Bloated Salaries and Workforce with respect to Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac $fnma $fmcc

Mr. Pulte
@pulte


As you step into the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), we urge you to take a hard look at the excessive salaries and redundant positions that burden American taxpayers.

Employees such as John Mullaney ($272,258), Suzanne Burk ($274,130), Kelly Siobhan ($266,051), and Tami Smith ($270,830) are just a few examples of individuals receiving outsized compensation—not including bonuses, pensions, and additional expenses.

Furthermore and upon closer examination, it becomes clear that many of these roles are either unnecessary or duplicative, with taxpayer funds and employees of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac effectively paying for the same work twice. A reduction in the FHFA's workforce, which currently hovers around 2,000 employees, would be a step toward greater efficiency, accountability, and fiscal responsibility. Moreover it would ensure a healthier Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as unnecessary expenses would be reduced drastically allowing the companies to maintain their mission in safety and soundness.

The American people deserve an agency that operates with transparency and prudence, ensuring that resources are directed where they are truly needed.

We urge you to take action to reform this system and bring real change to the FHFA. No more waste.

Do not be afraid to Make America Great Again 🇺🇸 during this Golden Age of opportunity. Now is the time to reduce the role of the FHFA by 90% or more as President Trump has earlier said a much smaller oversight committee of 8-10 people would be adequate post Conservatorship.

God Bless and good luck in your upcoming endeavor at the FHFA. I’m sure you will put Fannie / Freddie first, two of the most important companies in the world.
9:17 PM · Jan 31, 2025
·
2,024
Views

No I will not. You first should learn how to embed posts on here then maybe you will get more legitimacy.

Video Interview with Calabria - In the spirit of "what you see if what you get" this is the same Calabria we have seen all along. He has been, near as I can tell, always honest and transparent re his position on the GSEs. He is, in the classical sense, a Libertarian economist. If you would ask him to describe himself in two words, this is exactly what he would say. This means less Government and more private ownership - and more competition. His job as FHFA Director was to prepare them for exit, while ensuring that they were safe and sound and that there was no disruption to the MBS market. And so, one the the first things he did was to suspend the NWS to build capital. The capital requirements were set high for 2 reasons - one stated, and one unstated (at least this is the way I see it): (1) Safety and soundness and (2) encourage competition with the private MBS market when they exited. The second was no secret because, his whole human existence is based on being a Libertarian economist. So he hasn't been hiding - anywhere or anything. And his comments in the video were largely nothing new except for one important thing:

The studies. Yeah - what ever happened to all these exit studies that we paid for? They were supposed to provide choices and options for our path to exit. I even emailed FHFA at the time and requested a copy and got no response. Then I considered the FOIA route - and yes, despite what he said, they were subject to FOIA even though you could argue that anything FHFA does is funded with non-appropriated funds. And I know they cost a lot. But when they were never mentioned again I thought maybe FHFA dropped the whole idea. BUT THEY DID NOT. So our options are laid out and a lot has been going on behind the scenes with Wall Street over the last 4 years. I don't know about anyone else on this Board - but, to me its a BIG DEAL. Of course there is always a few people that will say this study stuff was a Commie conspiracy or something like that.

One other thought on the video where I thought he was off base and has always been off base. I know everyone was waiting and waiting for him to respond with questions from the shareholders - like "Hey what about us!!" "When do we go to PAR?" "When do I get my $300 a share?" Yeah, right! And he responded with, "I take the 5th!" which is the response you could expect. However, he again stressed the fact that although he considers such folks as the EMBA and other lobby groups "Stakeholders," he considers the stockholders "Bagholders". And, as a stockholder, I consider myself a little biased, and maybe even a little offended, in this regard. However, we are still the owners of these companies ("Beneficial Ownership" is not legal ownership). And he does not, and never did, consider us Stakeholders. Who has a bigger stake?? But he is a Libertarian, through and through, and, like I said in regards to Mark - what you see is what you get.

Nats

I’m sure u and u follower agree on this.

Katherine Thompson is available, just have to put up with shareholder and GSE hate

She is not anti-GSE or anti-shareholder - much the opposite. I think what upsets some of the board is that she seems to be advocating more for the juniors. Or it could be just because she likes to refute some of the more "out there" pps claims of some of the common shareholders. (Hey - at his point, anything is possible - say cancel Seniors, Warrants, turn on dividends, relist - and you are definitely off to the races - works for me - but I would agree that the perfect scenario is very unlikely).

I am not on this board for validation of my opinion (which is basically, as a holder of juniors and common, is PAR/ballpark Ackman's target price). Just because a poster may not tell you what you want to hear - its helpful to fully read the post and try to understand the reasoning. It may not change your mind on anything, but it may get you to thinking. I find her posts interesting and thought provoking. And the fact that they may be pissing off a lot of folks on this Board is an indication to me that she may be right on a lot of points. Because, again, as the last 16 years have proved - anything goes.

I just wanted to add another thought. I was watching a video the other day where one of the commentors said that, to predict what Trump is going to do next is very hard in that his basic negotiation tactic is to say and/or do things that are totally unexpected. (This is sort of like what Reagan did in dealing with the Soviets). We have certainly seen elements of that 2 weeks in. So in terms of the GSEs we could wake up tomorrow released or a complete and final Government takeover. Seems the more outrageous the better. I just don't see him screwing over Ackman and Paulson (but, of course, that would be the unexpected thing to do). I thought we would get some kind of EO in the first few months or so. But did not anticipate it may take so long to get Pulte confirmed - so it may be longer as you want to wait to get both the main players onboard. But - he may do the unexpected and we may see some action sooner. Wow - as I said before, this may not be the most profitable investment I ever made, but it is certainly the most interesting.

Nats

They are not in otc becoz of price but pushed down coz of conservatorship..  

If it was coz of price, it would have been moved up already. I have seen so many stocks move up once rules were satisfied

This one need fhfa permission

I doubt Trump has given a moment's thought to F&F.

He doesn't have to - No one ever said it was going to be priority 1. He's been a little busy over the last 2 weeks. However, he has already set the wheels in motion - he's pretty much done all he needs to do. I think his only involvement from here on out would be to put the squash on release if he wanted to. And none of us see that happening - but all things are still possible.

The one thing I would like to see from him is for someone to ask him directly - at a press conference or whatever - about his feelings on the GSE situation.

For those who say he doesn't care, wouldn't know what GSE stands for even if you spotted him 4 letters, etc. - this is someone who has spent almost 80 years as a developer (from birth as his dad was in the business). In terms of the situation turning in favor of the long suffering stockholders - I can't possibly see how it can set up any better than this. Who would have imagined this 16 years ago? Almost surreal. As they say - you can't make this crap up.

Nats

Katherine Thompson is available, just have to put up with shareholder and GSE hate

What are the minimum requirements for listing on the NYSE?
NYSE Listing Requirements
Distribution Standards Rule 102.01A-B IPOs, Spin-offs, Carve-outs All other listings
Shareholders 400 round lot 400 round lot
Publicly held shares 1.1 million 1.1 million
Market Value of Publicly Held Shares $40 million $100 million
Minimum Share Price $4.00 $4.00


who knows the minimum days above $4.00

Preplan . . . go ahead and pack a bag and when that time comes, all will not be lost. You will have a clean pair of drawers and a toothbrush.

Great advice! Will do!

Nats

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO OUR COUNTRY !! A true Hero saving lives.

Excellent!

Another expert put on ignore

Following the confirmation of Treasury Secretary Scott, Bessent devoted all his time to purchasing a luxurious house in DC. Here is his $12.5 million villa.


Hope he has time for us.

Navy you’re the Best ! It was very disappointing reading the AH’s post. I wish it was directed at me, thanks for your service!

I forgot, convert the warrants.

Please read and repost both:
https://x.com/Ano3020100/status/1885399083281490095
https://x.com/nicosintichakis/status/1885527865846096032

Actually, I checked the FHFA website and there is no news release that Sandra resigned.

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

Thank you!! For all you have done for this great country! People like you( so many like you) make America the greatest country in the world! God Bless you and thanks again!

Thank god for the FHFA monitoring everything and making sure Fannie is safe. Someone drag Sandra before Congress and ask her what the hell she was doing when she was the head??? Her and the other 400 people let’s freaking hear it.

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.

The Ps pivot and make new worthless points with watered down facts daily. They are experts at deception and influencing very weak minded.

The Ps pivot and make new worthless points with watered down facts daily. They are experts at deception and influencing very weak minded.

Kt, there’s no winning an argument with you. Even if you’re wrong you will never admit it.

Reminds me of trying to reach an AT&T representative on the phone with an endless maze of confusion, transfer from one hold to another and finally some person answers the phone and states.

“Sir you have reached the wrong department let me transfer you.”

I’m convinced your purpose is to try and hold the Common Stock from gaining any value whatsoever. Not sure who you’re working for and why… Ackman is friends with Trump and that’s our Ace in the hole.

Kt Quote: “There's also no reason to uplist the companies until all the dilution is done too.” End of Quote

TOTAL BULL COOKIES

Please read entire thread and repost:

https://x.com/FnFGateFan/status/1885195100642275787

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.

Peter Lynch wrote in his 1989 best seller, "One Up on Wall Street," that the Greeks used to sit around and debate how many teeth a horse has. Somehow they thought that was a better method than simply counting the teeth in a sampling of horses.

Similarly, many investors sit around and debate whether Thompson is still on the payroll, why not call the FHFA Monday morning and ask?

If she did not resign then she is still director until Pulte takes over.

Give me an F
Give me an N
Give me an M
Give me an A

Very impressive! Thanks for sharing Commander.

And thanks for all you have done on this board and on X for your fellow shareholders. You are the BIG DOG! Please ignore the puppy that barks every time you walk by.

This is what I was thinking as well. On the Senate or White House website it stated that Pulte was nominated in place of (vice) Thompson. However it did not mention that she had resigned. There were other people mentioned who did resign. That means Thompson is still there at the FHFA. My guess is that she now serves as a puppet. I remember her being pro-release. Most likely she is keeping the chair warm for the incoming Pulte. Highly probable she will help with the release process. Clearly the Trump people decided it would be beneficial to retain her. However it is highly doubtful she will do anything drastic on her own before Pulte arrives.

It was shared here a couple of times that she is now Deputy Director. Why? Only logical answer I can come up with is that the Trump administration wants to take some immediate action and not wait for Pulte's confirmation. Would like to hear what others think.

Thanks Rick - this makes sense. Bosland is a lawyer currently the head of regulatory issues and Jones is the General Cousel - Pulte will need both of them. I would imagine this will happen soon.

I don't know why HERA would be an obstacle. 12 USC 4512(f) does specify who can be the acting director, but I don't think Otting was any of those and he was the FHFA acting director in the spring of 2019 anyway.

no SPO can go to market unitil it is public knowledge how many total shares EXIST or ARE PLANNED in the near term

Anyone would be CRAZY to buy shares of an SPO that does not lock in the TOTAL number of shares in the corporation -- as assumed for say five years

Agreed.

There's also no reason to uplist the companies until all the dilution is done too. Not knowing the final share count is at least as big a barrier to large scale ownership as listing on a major exchange.

I like how you used this as your example. Your first word was "Wrong." LOL. Then we go back and forth and I try my best to explain how you are factually incorrect, and you do the same. And eventually, we end up where?

Not where you claimed we would be, which is me only telling you to file a lawsuit or shut up. Note how that didn't actually happen, which proves your accusation that I use my signature line to shut down debate false.

Because you can't stick to the merits of the argument you were presented.

Wrong. You yourself posted examples of me actually debating you on the merits. You not being convinced by my arguments is not at all the same as me not making them in the first place.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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

Here is the Aug 2023 FHFA Org Chart

https://www.fhfa.gov/sites/default/files/2024-02/FHFA-Leadership-Organization.pdf

The big question, if relisted on NYSE or NASDAQ, is how many institutions, etc. would want to buy stock in corporations that our Uncle (Sam) has a stranglehold on their necks?

Huh?

Thanks Rick - this makes sense. Bosland is a lawyer currently the head of regulatory issues and Jones is the General Cousel - Pulte will need both of them. I would imagine this will happen soon.

Jog
I hope the new head of FHFA does stuff that frees F and F and helps our PPS

but - I still believe that the real power is with Treasury - pretty much alone

https://x.com/imfpubs/status/1885420286419292298?s=46&t=xLP2LlWgJrEMUZZ7Fum-nA

Trump out here doing everything except the shit I want. Release the GSEs. Open up the mining!

A minimium share price of $4 is required, not $5.


See page 92
https://pscmevents.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Fannie-Mae-Freddie-Mac-01-16-2025-Presentation.pdf