I bought Freddie Mac stock, under this new Conservatorship, am I completely screwed?

September 6, 2008 4:52 AM

I am invested in Freddie Mac, what does the diluting/dissolving of shares mean for me?

I purchased the stock at $11 recently and now, after reading this post about Freddie Mac being placed under conservatorship, I don't know what to do.

Will I lose all of my value (a few hundred shares) when it is federalized? Or will I have some chance of redeeming my new, diluted shares and making some money in 'the long turn'.

I'm new to investing and would like to guidance about what to do.

posted by anonymous to work & money (14 comments total)

From the reporting, you will, yes, lose all of the value of the shares of your stock now that the company has been nationalized. The shareholders who are protected are those who have millions of shares of these two 'companies'. It's outrageous, I know. And I'm sorry that this has happened to you and a lot of others. It's a catastrophic collapse that, unfortunately, American taxpayers like myself will have to pay to deal with for years to come.
posted by parmanparman at 5:15 AM on September 6, 2008

Here is an FAQ-of-sorts the New York Times has compiled.

Even so, it is almost certain that some of the biggest losers will be shareholders who own more than $10 billion worth of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac common stock. At the end of last year, those shares, which are widely held by individuals, pension funds and mutual funds, were worth nearly $100 billion. Now those investments could be virtually wiped out. Fannie Mae shares fell nearly 22 percent, to $5.50 in after-hours trading; Freddie Mac was down nearly 21 percent, to $4.04.

Investors who own some $36 billion of the preferred shares could also take a big hit. Preferred shares of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were little changed in after-hours trading on Friday evening. The shares are down more than 45 percent since the end of last year. JPMorgan Chase, for example, has already slashed by half the value of its $1.2 billion holdings of the preferred shares.
posted by parmanparman at 5:24 AM on September 6, 2008

You and all shareholders will be treated equally regardless of size of holdings. Y'all will lose virtually all your equity. From what I have read, it is being treated as if it were a prepackaged bankruptcy filing. The capitalists lose their equity but the company will survive and start with a lot less capital impairment. As the two are responsible for about 70% of the mortgages in the US, this will help stabilize the RE market and the capital markets. In theory of course.
posted by JohnnyGunn at 5:39 AM on September 6, 2008

The details of the conservatorship are not yet public, so it's unclear how much, exactly, the common stock will be affected. As I understand it, the common shares will likely continue to trade, but will be diluted significantly by the government ownership. Some possibility of government takeover was already priced in by the market, so it's not at all clear how much more the share price will fall. As you are probably aware, Freddie shares fell after hours on Friday. The press seems to think there are more losses coming for the shareholders, perhaps even the very worst case of being completely wiped out... but then again, it's conceivable that the press is wrong, and the haircut will be less drastic than anticipated. Hopefully it will be clearer by the time the markets open.

Personally, if I held Freddie common stock (I don't), I probably would not sell Monday. The way I see it, now that the worst-case scenario has essentially occurred for the shareholders, there may not be that much downside left, whatever price the shares end up at.

The shareholders who are protected are those who have millions of shares of these two 'companies'.

I don't think this is true. It would be unprecedented to treat shareholders differently based on the size of their holdings. Obviously, different classes of shares may be treated differently (preferred vs. common).
posted by blue mustard at 5:49 AM on September 6, 2008

Preferred shares will be treated differently than common stockholders. Common stockholders will have their shares diluted down to whatever level is necessary to raise the assets necessary to clear their balance sheets. Conservatorship in this sense is generally considered equal to forced chapter-11 bankruptcy.

Unfortunately, this is what happens when publicly traded companies act as, for all intents and purposes, hedge funds. Freddie and Frannie are WAY over-leveraged, to a point that's illegal under their operating charter, bylaws, and federal law. They took a gamble with your money. You may not have invested if you had read between the lines of their financial statements, especially their recent 10Qs. Unfortunately, they (and now you) lost.

I wouldn't sell on Monday, because that would only serve to realize their loss. However, I would position myself for the bottom dropping out of the market (especially the financial sector) on Monday. Frannie and Freddie were one of the few things holding other seriously over-leveraged financial firms (among which you'll find big banks like WaMu and Wachovia) from either declaring bankruptcy, writing down their portfolios of debt to an honest value, or being federalized. NO ONE is buying this debt for the value that's on the books.
posted by SpecialK at 6:09 AM on September 6, 2008

I'm trying to stay out of the FNM and FRE threads, but in this case I can't resist. SpecialK your statement:

Freddie and Frannie are WAY over-leveraged, to a point that's illegal under their operating charter, bylaws, and federal law. They took a gamble with your money. You may not have invested if you had read between the lines of their financial statements, especially their recent 10Qs. Unfortunately, they (and now you) lost.

Is factually incorrect. They have not violated their capital requirements, nor are they overleveraged according to traditional measures of bank leverage. In fact relative to the amount of capital a traditional bank would have to hold against assets similar to those held by the GSEs they are underlevered. In order for the feds to put them into receivership congress will have to pass a law changing the capital requirements. Which it appears is what is happening.

But way to be condescending to someone who got caught in a bad investment.

To the poster. With a price of 11 you can take an awful lot of dilution, and its not totally clear what if anything is happening. Hold tight and wait to hear what happens then figure out what is left for you post-dilution. Worst case you pay less in taxes this year at least.

Also there is no shame in a bad investment, it happens to EVERYONE. Particularly tough in this case as it seems as though political need is trumping economics, which sucks, but that was certainly the risk in these names. This could be quite interesting, as if you take the view that the GSE's were not zombies, then you could argue a nationalization of them is illegal.
posted by JPD at 7:22 AM on September 6, 2008

Frannie and Freddie were one of the few things holding other seriously over-leveraged financial firms (among which you'll find big banks like WaMu and Wachovia) from either declaring bankruptcy, writing down their portfolios of debt to an honest value, or being federalized.

Not to pile on, but this is also factually incorrect. On a leverage basis, Wachovia is less levered than all of the universals (JPM, C, BAC) and has average leverage compared to large regionals (WFC, BBT).

anonymous, you're asking for financial advice which at this point cannot be accurately dispensed. Will FRE and FNM's common stock goto zero? Maybe. But Bear Stearns was supposed to goto $2, before eventually settling at $10. The market will not be kind to FNM and FRE on Monday, but there are some very large and important shareholders who might threaten to sue the government and/or put up a stink, so the story still has a couple of chapters that need to play out.

Would I sell? Depends on the size of the stake and how big a hit you're prepared to take in the event they goto zero. But without knowing your portfolio, any of us can only give you "free stock advice".
posted by SeizeTheDay at 7:54 AM on September 6, 2008

There's uncertainty at this point:
WaPo - "common stock would be diluted but not wiped out"
NYT - "the common and preferred shares of Fannie and Freddie would be reduced to little or nothing"
posted by milkrate at 8:30 AM on September 6, 2008

Is factually incorrect. They have not violated their capital requirements, nor are they overleveraged according to traditional measures of bank leverage. In fact relative to the amount of capital a traditional bank would have to hold against assets similar to those held by the GSEs they are underlevered. In order for the feds to put them into receivership congress will have to pass a law changing the capital requirements.

From what I'm reading, the change that put Freddie and Frannie into Conservatorship is one of three things listed in that article. Now, admittedly, Denniger is a ravingly conservative tinfoil hat source, but his speculations have been correct in the past, he asks good questions, and his numbers have added up where I've fact-checked them.

Now, as far as Wachovia's 10-Q goes .. the reason they had such a staggering pre-tax loss this past quarter was because they had to increase their reserves to account for 15.5 Billion (with a B) in debt that is essentially worthless. Go look at this quarter's 10Q. Dig deeper. No, deeper, way down in the management exhibits. They have HOW much hedged out of their total assets?! Now, read between the lines of the financial statements. Note which portions of they debt they claim is AAA rated and which portions they're only willing to split into "Highly Rated" and "Mezzanine" ... and then YOU do the math.
posted by SpecialK at 10:07 AM on September 6, 2008

Also a crime is Wall Street insiders who sold short gobs of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, and have made millions on their greed as the stock share prices tanked. They are now covering or have covered their short sells, which is why the share price on these has not gone to zero.

I don't know at what point you got in, or how many shares you own, but at this point it is sad for many many investors who have basically gotten screwed by the crooks who sold the bad loans that ended up in freddie and fannies portfoilios.

Very tough call, but at any level, your downside is basically zero, so I would hold it, it has nowhere to go but up if it can hang on.

Plus, our next President will be very important. This election has a lot riding on it.
posted by cvoixjames at 11:50 AM on September 6, 2008

Ok sorry I missed it in your post. In long at 11/share. So you are down 6 points. My advice, sell 40% of your position using a sell stop right beneath the opening Monday price.

http://www.thestreet.com/story/10436132/1/cramer-fannie-freddie-takeover-changes-the-game.html?puc=_htmlbtb
posted by cvoixjames at 12:02 PM on September 6, 2008

sorry, broken link

www.thestreet.com

search from there
posted by cvoixjames at 12:08 PM on September 6, 2008

Will I lose all of my value (a few hundred shares) when it is federalized? Or will I have some chance of redeeming my new, diluted shares and making some money in 'the long turn'.


Yep, probably most of it. When I have been on the receiving end of similar financial spankings I have chosen to look at the money not as lost, but rather as spent on tuition. The course you unknowingly signed up for is:

It's Dangerous To Try To Catch a Falling Knife 101
posted by Rafaelloello at 7:11 AM on September 7, 2008 [1 favorite]

The shares will be worth a nominal amount, less than $1. This according to the description of the government takeover today. The government has the right to buy 80% of the common at this price. The rest of it won't be worth much more.

Never mind the "sell stop," it's a waste of time. You have two choices: sell at market in the next couple of days as the market debates what the "nominal amount" will be, or wait until the government announces it and sell it then at that price. You've lost more than 90% of your investment, so I don't see it mattering much to you which you choose.
posted by ikkyu2 at 12:53 PM on September 7, 2008