Fannie Mae Looks Like Hell
Fannie Mae's fuzzy math: Fortune magazine reported that the lender changed the way it discloses bad loans, which could be masking rising credit losses.
"Investors might want to take a closer look at Fannie Mae's latest earnings report. Lost in the unsurprising news of the mortgage lender's heavy losses was a critical change in the way the company discloses its bad loans -- a move that could mask that credit losses that are rising above levels that the company predicted just three months ago.
Without the change in disclosure, an important yardstick for credit losses that Fannie Mae provides to investors would have looked much worse than it did in financials filed last week.
Fannie Mae's potentially misleading disclosure comes at a crucial time for the company. Fannie Mae was severely penalized last year for overstating earnings and for a lack of oversight. As part of its punishment, the amount of home loans that Fannie Mae can make was limited."
There’s a quick and dirty look at Fannie Mae at the chart below.
Early Friday, Fannie Mae (FNM) shares were little changed; (UPDATE: On Thursday after Fortune magazine reported site disclosed this info, and the stock tanked). This morning, it was down as much as 10%.
The charts looks eerily similar to Tyco (TYC) back int he days pre-disaster -– and where there is smoke, there is often fire.
>
graphic courtesy of Kevin Lane, Fusion IQ
>
Source:
Fannie Mae's fuzzy math
Peter Eavis
Fortune, November 15 2007: 9:29 AM EST
http://money.cnn.com/2007/11/15/magazines/fortune/fannie_losses.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2007111509
Friday, November 16, 2007 | 11:30 AM | Permalink
| Comments (23)
| TrackBack (2)
add to de.li.cious | 
digg this! | 
add to technorati | 
email this post
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/763/23413788
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Fannie Mae Looks Like Hell:
» Comparing Online Reports: The Case of Fannie Mae from A Dash of Insight
One of our missions at A Dash is helping investors find their way through the maze of online information. In particular, it is often the case that a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. Mainstream media sources now have [Read More]
Tracked on Nov 19, 2007 11:07:22 PM
» Fannie Mae: Ouch! from The Big Picture
On Friday, we noted that Fannie Mae Looks Like Hell. In the weekend linkfest, we noted the Fortune article about Fannie Mae, as well as out own Sell on the stock. The emails from numerous readers were fascinating. I learned some things about my ancestr... [Read More]
Tracked on Nov 20, 2007 10:20:07 AM
Comments
why would a govt supported enterprise lie? that goes against everything our gov't stands for?
Posted by: UrbanDigs | Nov 16, 2007 11:35:47 AM
The CEO of Wells Fargo, John Stumpf:
"We have not seen a nationwide decline in housing like this since the Great Depression," Stumpf said at a Merrill Lynch banking conference in New York. "I don't think we're in the ninth inning of unwinding this," he continued. "If we are, it's an extra-inning game."
Stumpf's comments came hours after Barclays announced a $2.7 billion write-down for losses on securities linked to U.S. subprime mortgages. Other banks to announce write-downs topping $1 billion this month include Bank of America, Bear Stearns, Citigroup, HSBC Holdings, Morgan Stanley and Wachovia. Merrill Lynch and Washington Mutual have also seen results suffer from losses tied to mortgages.
Posted by: VJ | Nov 16, 2007 11:55:20 AM
There is no alternative to the GSE's within the current mortgage lending model. Without Fannie and Freddie providing the gov't warranty of good lending nobody will buy the paper. So either the gov't steps in and continues to support these entities and actually ups the funding or we go back to a pre FDR type mortgage lending model with only banks and private individuals providing financing. I don't have to paint a picture what that would do to the overall value of US SFH real estate valued today by the FED at over 20 trillion dollars.
Posted by: ron | Nov 16, 2007 12:04:38 PM
There was a booming private label market for a while, but, well, yeah. Greenspan utilized Fannie and Freddie to save the day in 98, only to realize years later that he'd created a monster. Now, whether it's their huge credit risk exposure (trillions teetering on a razor thin slice of capital), or their hedging of mass destruction derivative portfolio, (which they're taking losses on as well), they represent the biggest systemic risk to a financial system replete with these. I would say that the government would be remiss to step in and grow their gargantuan balance sheets yet more- the whole, "the longer you let it go on, the worse the damage" bit- but the boat on capping damages left quite a while ago. As it is, I would recommend perpetuating these Ponzi schemes as long as they can- there's probably not much downside to doing so...
PS It's govt sponsored enterprises, not supported enterprises.
Posted by: Majorajam | Nov 16, 2007 1:44:52 PM
>>It's govt sponsored enterprises, not supported enterprises.
When the bail outs commense sponsorship will morph into support and the Government support truth be told will be Tax-Payer support. Its all semantics, no guarantees no clarity, just crony capitalism at work.
Posted by: Stormrunner | Nov 16, 2007 2:00:58 PM
as you know barry I've been waiting/looking for the black swan event
maybe it happened and was simply that no one on wall street, govt related institutions or govt expected mortgage defaults to potential reach unprecendented multi standard deviations into the forseeable future
their "models" and strategies hopelessly underestimated super low interest rates (as a teaser) igniting the free enterprise nesting instinct of the human being for his/her family far outweighing future financial and economic reality and historically lulled by a credit mgt philosophy of multi card availability to all with the associated rollover and juggle
rgds pcm
Posted by: peter from oz | Nov 16, 2007 2:25:50 PM
"why would a govt supported enterprise lie? that goes against everything our gov't stands for?"
Posted by: UrbanDigs | Nov 16, 2007 11:35:47 AM
____________________________
I hope this is sarcasm. If so, in the future, please indicate that this is so with a /snark off/, or some other device, so that the reader understands.
If your post isn't sarcasm, you need to put the Kool-aid down and do a little open-minded research into exactly what haqs been happening to our government over the past 7 years.
For example, you are aware that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, and that your share of the National debt for this fiasco is currently $2,000 (approx.). This amount applies to every man, woman, and child in our country. You're posting on a finance/economics blog, might I ask what you expect as ROI for this considerable sum?
Never let a businessman - especially a repeatedly failed businessman - run your government. What we are seeing is the Enronization of our government.
Posted by: Marcus Aurelius | Nov 16, 2007 2:41:39 PM
peter from oz
Off topic and its likely you already knew this, it was news to me and for those who didn't
http://www.webofdebt.com/excerpts/chapter-1.php
It would seem that the Wizard of Oz is purported to have been anallegory for the populist movement toward sound money.
Posted by: Stormrunner | Nov 16, 2007 2:48:49 PM
stormrunner had seen that
most of our traditional nursery rhymes began as political ditties disguised to avoid ruinous libel and slander suits in 18/19th century
anyhow back to the topic
lenders and their "models" and politicians are faced with huge problem/opportunity in presidential year of 2008
who is going to arrive with the "New Deal" for the bankrupted and marginalised (but voter majority)and address the financial solvency of Banks and other institutions?
estragon is waiting for godot!
rgds pcm
Posted by: peter from oz | Nov 16, 2007 3:08:24 PM
"who is going to arrive with the "New Deal" for the bankrupted and marginalised (but voter majority)and address the financial solvency of Banks and other institutions?"
Ron Paul in '08!!!
Posted by: The Dirty Mac | Nov 16, 2007 3:40:59 PM
"who is going to arrive with the "New Deal" for the bankrupted and marginalised (but voter majority)and address the financial solvency of Banks and other institutions?"
Ron Paul in '08!!!
Posted by: The Dirty Mac | Nov 16, 2007 3:41:23 PM
how phat was that sell opportunity on the bounce from 38 in '05 to 69 earlier this year??????
Posted by: SINGER | Nov 16, 2007 4:23:08 PM
It seems like the public sector tries to find the best man to run Merril, GS, C, etc. Who are the ass clowns who run FNM?
Posted by: Snarky | Nov 16, 2007 4:26:20 PM
So should we be worried about our MMF's yet?
Posted by: KB | Nov 16, 2007 4:38:05 PM
OMG! Enron flashback!!! A story breaks in Fortune magazine. Accounting questions raised. Stock price drops through support. And then...?
But with a GSE??? Nah... couldn't happen...
Posted by: Sherman McCoy | Nov 16, 2007 8:34:44 PM
WOW,
now I know we are in trouble.... I actually agree with one of V.J.'s "selective" posts...I was a loan officer as I have stated before, and there will be much more pain before it gets even close to better.. becareful out there...
Posted by: Brian B. | Nov 17, 2007 2:50:12 AM
finally, Fannie is in trouble, be waiting for this for the last 8 yrs.
Great news.
The idiots that invest in this kind of
american mortgage crap should lose their pants.
Posted by: rickrude | Nov 17, 2007 7:34:21 AM
finally, Fannie is in trouble, be waiting for this for the last 8 yrs.
Great news.
The idiots that invest in this kind of
american mortgage crap should lose their pants.
Posted by: rickrude | Nov 17, 2007 7:35:29 AM
http://calculatedrisk.blogspot.com/2007/11/fannie-maes-credit-loss-ratio-fuzzy.html
Fannie Mae's Credit Loss Ratio: Fuzzy Math or Fuzzy Reporter?
This is going to be a long post. It is going to attempt to answer the question stated in the post title. It is also going to function as further proof of the old axiom that you can create quite a ruckus in 150 badly-chosen words, but it takes ten times that many words (at least) to return some sanity to the discussion.
rt
Posted by: rich | Nov 17, 2007 12:05:30 PM
This blog post and the reaction to the CNN story is an example of how bad reporting can affect a sound company. THERE IS NOT A PROBLEM WITH FANNIE MAE.
Read the CR article above. The CNN writer is a sensationalist twit with an axe to grind who doesn't want to understand accounting details.
Posted by: Unsympathetic | Nov 17, 2007 12:49:45 PM
This blog post and the reaction to the CNN story is an example of how bad reporting can affect a sound company. THERE IS NOT A PROBLEM WITH FANNIE MAE.
Read the CR article above. The CNN writer is a sensationalist twit with an axe to grind who doesn't want to understand accounting details.
Posted by: Unsympathetic | Nov 17, 2007 12:50:11 PM
I just circled back to this post after reviewing CR with the intent of bringing to light here the Great Tanta's dissection of yet another piece of mis-informed reporting by someone too ill-informed or lazy to do the classical spadework. Fortunately Unsymp and rich bet me too it earlier - read the CR post. It's long, painful and deeply informative.
There is, at the end of the day, no substitute for performance and therefore for substitute for understanding how the buzz saw works if you're going to make lumber.
Posted by: dblwyo | Nov 17, 2007 5:25:03 PM
Ok, what part of this don't you get; the GSE's were developed to provide liquidity to the market so lenders could continue to lend. If you look at the long history of these institutions they have done more than a great job. Most of you have your homes based on these fundamental facts.
The politics of today, i.e. our illustrious President and some holier than thou polititians have all but put thier thumb on the only way to clean this situation up. It is not an Enron type situation it is a government plot to hold these two corporations hostage. Yes they had accounting situations; if you truly understood the whole picture you would be less inclined to judge them and more inclined to take a long look at our current political climate.
If Fannie and Freddie were held to the accounting standands of a bank and regulated by the OCC this would be a complete different situation. We instead have regulators that have their own agenda's and that is what we should really be looking at.
These are privtely held and publically traded companies NOT an organization like FHA that requires your tax dollars.
Wake up people this IS the way out of this mess; get the caps raised at Fannnie and Freddie and start helping people stay in their homes and stop all of these foreclosures. Put some quality back into the American securities that they are raging about. When it comes down to it isn't that what should be most important?
Posted by: lastchance | Nov 27, 2007 10:08:46 AM
