MannSinger
26 minutes ago
No reporting needed if bond is exchanged to shares
From Deepseek:
When a bond is exchanged for common shares, it typically involves a conversion feature that was originally part of the bond's terms. This is common in convertible bonds, where the bondholder has the option to convert the bond into a predetermined number of common shares of the issuing company.
Key Points:
No Immediate Reporting for the Company:
When the bond is converted into common shares, the company does not need to report this as a new issuance of debt or equity in its financial statements. Instead, the conversion is accounted for as a reclassification from liability (the bond) to equity (the common shares).
The company will adjust its balance sheet by reducing the bond liability and increasing the equity account (common stock and additional paid-in capital).
Disclosure in Financial Statements:
While no separate reporting is required for the conversion itself, the company must disclose the conversion in the notes to its financial statements. This includes details such as the number of shares issued, the conversion terms, and the impact on equity.
Tax Implications:
For the bondholder, converting bonds into common shares may have tax implications, depending on the jurisdiction. The bondholder might need to report the conversion as a taxable event if there is a gain or loss realized.
Regulatory Filings:
If the company is publicly traded, it may need to file a Form 8-K (in the U.S.) or an equivalent filing in other jurisdictions to disclose material events, including significant conversions of debt into equity.
No Cash Transaction:
Since the conversion involves an exchange of bonds for shares, no cash changes hands. This is different from issuing new shares for cash, which would require different reporting.
Summary:
No separate reporting is needed for the conversion of bonds into common shares, but the transaction must be properly accounted for in the financial statements and disclosed in the notes. The company should ensure compliance with relevant accounting standards (e.g., IFRS or GAAP) and regulatory requirements.
NeoSunTzu
1 hour ago
Dingle's purchase and other FNMA issues:
What Dingle purchased are fixed income securities backed by a pool of FNMA mortgages. The prefix "MA" stands for Government Long-term, level-payment Project Mortgages; Multifamily, fully-amortized over 40 years.
-- much of the confusion here comes from financial journalists who have no idea what they are reporting on, much like what we have seen over the past 15 years with the GSE saga - it's too complex for the basic journalist. Some of it is even AI, yes, AI is writing articles, ads, and many other things we are seeing and interacting with online. I saw one article that even inserted the FNMA stock symbol, AND BELIEVE IT OR NOT, inserted the stock symbol POOL, not being able to properly decipher the full description line of the security:
Federal National Mortgage Association Pool MA5471.
So the article printed it as Federal National Mortgage Association ($FNMA) Pool ($POOL) MA5471. And, yes, there is a Pool Corporation with that symbol. No journalist worth his salt would or should have made that mistake - likely AI edits to insert stock symbols based on its poorly programmed algorithm.
-- AI is totally misunderstood, misapplied, and abused almost everywhere it is used without some very specific context-related knowledge; this board is one place you can witness it weekly, if not daily. Understanding AI results (one must realize it is ARTIFICIAL) requires the VERY HUMAN GENERAL INTELLIGENCE that AI creators are trying to mimic. And here, use of the term "general" oddly enough has a pretty specific meaning that must be understood as well or you end up nothing more than the monkey behind the machine gun when you misapply AI.
Current trading and pricing results: If it's any consolation to all of us here, just remember, Paulson and Ackman, although their wealths do NOT depend on the twins, are witnessing the same BS with the OTC and government "inaction" that we are, and I for one think that's good news.
Everything is pretty much a blackbox to us, but not them (other than OTC movements). Getting off the OTC WILL SOLVE what I term as the baseless large price volatility - associated with short-term traders, manipulators, and OTC MM games, but not the true volatility based on the uncertainty with how the end-result is worked out, but it WILL certainly decrease, at least in frequency.
If Ackman and Paulson indeed will be consulting for, or working with Pulte and Bessent, which I believe they are/will be, you can rest assured they will kill this OTC nonsense with re-listing. A big part of this volatility still exists because we do NOT as of yet have Pulte in place and solid word from Trump this is a "100-day" or early first term priority. But I, for one, think that both Ackman and Bessent have given their proxy on this which is a placeholder for the Trump admins official blessing. Once those are in place the full spectrum of manipulation will get run over by a freight train - best to hop on board QUICKLY once it starts moving.
jog49
1 hour ago
"Sounds like a plan to get rid of these warrants, they don't want to address it now, and face push back, RR first then cancel the warrants down the road."
As long as the warrants exist, a weight hangs over the heads of the GSEs, and the TBTFs, who wanted the GSEs dead and buried, are still in the game.
chessmaster315
2 hours ago
Time "in the market" beats market timing. I bought Best Buy around $10 bucks a number of years ago, and thought "I was a stud", for selling the shares for $16 a few months later. (60 percent gain)
So, I managed to "market Timing" myself out of a 8 bagger, because it's about $86 dollars today.
Im sure glad I did not "market timing" my FNMA shares I bought under $2, just a few months ago, or a few pennies gain.
chessmaster315
2 hours ago
Sorry, it makes no sense to sell "with every nickel" pop, on multiple levels.
1. Risk/Reward ratio, especially short term. You are risking big dollars to make pennies. I prefer risking pennies to make dollars than the other way around.
2. Taxes are killer on short term, and, if you sell and buy back, you have to further put up with wash sale rules, which further increases risk, "unless" you are trading it in IRA's or Roth's or other tax shelter.
3. The biggest risk, IMHO, is "risk of being left behind". Example: You buy shares at 5.70, sell em at 5.75, and find out in the morning that the government has ended cship and the price goes to $20 almost immediately.
stockanalyze
3 hours ago
lol. "at least not anytime soon". it is also well documented he scrubs his tweets. his goals seems to be go after shareholders as he never writes about housing, housing affordability, housing crisis. people will learn to ignore him as he is trying to support fellow travelers, mba, bank lobby or personal agenda or whatever, but he will lose. right always prevails. ignore like i never pay attention to kt. same category. pure entertainment.
chessmaster315
3 hours ago
Government profiting at shareholder's expense is another way of government confiscation, and, while the government needs the money, stealing it from shareholders is neither the way to get it, and, worse, the government wants to end lawsuits not increase them by FURTHER profit on the backs of shareholders. You need to remember Fannie and Freddie are profitable, not in bankruptcy and we have never been in or near bankruptcy. The new administration is not about confiscation of shareholder funds to enrich or enlarge the government, which is already too large and steps have been taken to reduce the size of government.
As an example, about 2 million Federal workers are being offered a buyout, which will certainly help reduce the size and waste of our federal government. Of course, millions of people with cushy government jobs who do very little, will be opposed, along with unions to protect those jobs. The Federal government has been too large, and the tax burden too large for too long.