Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac FNMA / FMCC
The three reasons
- 1
Reformed GSEs worth $23-$47/share vs $3.98 today — 6x to 12x upside
- 2
No viable private-sector replacement: $400bn+ capital need dwarfs largest IPO ($20bn Visa)
- 3
Reform delivers $240-$420bn more to taxpayers than wind-down proposals
Primary demands
- Reform Fannie and Freddie rather than wind them down
- End the Net Worth Sweep that diverts 100% of GSE earnings to Treasury
- Allow GSEs to retain earnings and rebuild ~$180bn of capital to a 2.5% capital ratio
- Wind down the Fixed-Income Arbitrage (FIA) portfolio business and cap warehouse loans at $100bn
- Eliminate guarantees of subprime/Alt-A loans, focus solely on conventional 30-yr fixed-rate prepayable mortgages
- Improve compensation, governance, and regulatory oversight (independent directors, restricted-stock bonuses, stress tests)
- Treasury should monetize its 79.9% warrant position once GSEs are recapitalized rather than liquidate the franchises
KPIs cited
Pattern membership
Where this document fits across the library's 12 rhetorical / structural patterns.
Notable slides (9)
Notes
Bill Ackman's Ira Sohn 2014 presentation arguing AGAINST government wind-down of Fannie/Freddie. Unusual posture: Pershing is long the common, but the 'opponent' is U.S. Treasury/Congress/FHFA policy (the Third Amendment Net Worth Sweep) rather than corporate management. Therefore no traditional CEO villain or peer-gap framing. Uses ally quotes (Sen. Pat Toomey, credit-union groups) instead of management contradictions. Sum-of-parts is implicit: guarantee business valued separately from runoff FIA portfolio. Heavy on historical/policy education in early sections (history of GSEs, 30-yr mortgage), then SCQA-style argument on why private alternatives fail, ending with future-value table ($23-$47 per share) and taxpayer scorecard. Classic Pershing template — clean blue/burgundy/green color-coded message boxes, large bar charts.