sounds like mtg was in the wrong on the pool deals
1. Why would they pay upfront if they have the option to defer over time?
2. They're not 'paying' $100m upfront. They're contributing it. It will be used for payment but as far as the legality of it, it's just shoring up capital and will be used for said defered payments.
3. What is your guessed based on? Even before FM lowered the capital requirement, there was no reason to think costs would be that high. How can you argue that it would now be that large after FM allowed them to contribute just a vastly smaller about of capital?
wintermutev04 - they pay something upfront. And it can be 100 milions. It can be 200 miliions and it can be 50 milions. Nobody knows yet as nothing was inked.
"the majority of these payments to Freddie Mac will be made over a period of four years after the signing of the definitive agreement, with the remainder to be paid AT SIGNING. "
yeah but that's not what the 100m refers to, is all I'm saying
and do you think that the capital requirement would really be less than the initial payment (especially when the inititial payment is a minority of the total sum)?
i mean, technically it could be any value... but based on how dramatically the capital req was decreased, and how the majority will be allowed to be defered, what do you realistically expect it to be?