Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

American Capital Agency Corp. Message Board

sme20_98 79 posts  |  Last Activity: Apr 28, 2016 3:46 PM Member since: May 10, 1999
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • According to ETRADE, large block ownership increased significantly in the last few weeks to almost 66% of the outstanding shares or over 60 million shares. Was just under 60% several weeks ago. Mostly value and index funds, but the sub $5 price has not kept them away as i thought it might. Waiting for earnings at the end of the month to see signs that earnings have stabilized or continued to lag. Still well below my earlier exit, so nothing gained or lost at this point in the waiting game. good luck to all.

  • Reply to

    Large block Owners

    by sme20_98 Feb 2, 2016 1:18 PM
    sme20_98 sme20_98 Feb 2, 2016 5:25 PM Flag

    I think it has to do with the price move from $2 to $2.52 these last few weeks. In terms of percentages, that's quite a move up.

  • Reply to

    Large block Owners

    by sme20_98 Feb 2, 2016 1:18 PM
    sme20_98 sme20_98 Feb 3, 2016 7:42 AM Flag

    If anyone scares into selling because of something they read on this message board they shouldn't be investing at all--CD's for those individuals. You have to do your own homework and have an understanding for financials or if not, use funds/ETF's to accomplish your goals.

  • Reply to

    How RAS did in 3Q excluding IRT

    by davisfoulger Jan 28, 2016 12:42 PM
    sme20_98 sme20_98 Feb 3, 2016 7:59 AM Flag

    Davis, don't forget to include the 64 million dollar gain they showed from the TRSE transaction against those expenses--it takes practically all the losses/costs out of the picture. That said, it would not make any sense to strip out IRT operations to "see how RAS is doing". IRT is an important investment RAS has made and created and IS part of their operating model, good or bad--stripping it out would not be fair to RAS management for all of their efforts to create the entity.I think after the TRSE acquisition, RAS still owns approx. 15% of IRT, thus the consolidation requirements.

  • Reply to

    I WANT TO SCREAM

    by drzorba66 Feb 3, 2016 9:32 AM
    sme20_98 sme20_98 Feb 3, 2016 10:16 AM Flag

    I had made an earlier reference to Camden Properties as a very successful property REIT--no CAD, just good old fashion strongly positive FFO--easy to see where they stand from an operations stand point including all costs.

  • Reply to

    I WANT TO SCREAM

    by drzorba66 Feb 3, 2016 9:32 AM
    sme20_98 sme20_98 Feb 3, 2016 11:26 AM Flag

    I guess my point was that the property side of RAS was fine, but they continue to pour new investment into the loan program and leveraged securitizations that were not very successful to date. I would like to see them stay with what is working rather than return to failed practices of the past. And before Davis tells me how much money they are making, i point out the need for a 50% cut in the dividend--that need didn't come from a failed real estate portfolio-in fact it is that portfolio which is probably supporting the 9 cent dividend RAS is still able to pay.

  • Reply to

    I WANT TO SCREAM

    by drzorba66 Feb 3, 2016 9:32 AM
    sme20_98 sme20_98 Feb 3, 2016 2:00 PM Flag

    Davis, i will continue to correct your first two paragraph statements as absolutely incorrect by every accounting standard in existence. To ignore non-cash expenses as actual costs of doing business without any regard is simply inappropriate. CAD is simply what it says-Cash available for distribution--it has nothing to do with earnings. Because a cost is non cash, especially amortization, does not mean it can be ignored.

  • Reply to

    I WANT TO SCREAM

    by drzorba66 Feb 3, 2016 9:32 AM
    sme20_98 sme20_98 Feb 3, 2016 2:09 PM Flag

    You also continue to ignore the gains from the acquisition transaction that is consolidated from IRT to RAS's income statement--they helped to increase income and BV and offset most of the consolidated costs related to the transaction. Show everything, not just what works for your mind set.

  • Reply to

    I WANT TO SCREAM

    by drzorba66 Feb 3, 2016 9:32 AM
    sme20_98 sme20_98 Feb 3, 2016 2:41 PM Flag

    Current loan program that sucked up $40 million in secondary funds and funds from half of my dividend is certainly not history my friend--that's what i am concerned about, all this new loan money and no bottom line improvement. Hopefully the future will not repeat the history of this management or it's predecessors. Good luck--earnings should be interesting.

  • Reply to

    I WANT TO SCREAM

    by drzorba66 Feb 3, 2016 9:32 AM
    sme20_98 sme20_98 Feb 3, 2016 3:40 PM Flag

    I will just leave it at the fact that there is absolutely no way you have read more about depreciation and amortization than me--i assure you of that. Good luck.

  • Reply to

    I WANT TO SCREAM

    by drzorba66 Feb 3, 2016 9:32 AM
    sme20_98 sme20_98 Feb 3, 2016 3:48 PM Flag

    You back out the 12 million and say everything is ok--RAS making money, but the fact of the matter is that the $64 million creates a lot of that gain that you call earnings and not the operations of RAS management. While we are on it, it is also the major driver in the increase to BV in the quarter, hiding the FFO loss. Don't get me wrong--I hope they right the ship and start getting the loan program going in the right direction(problems are not with the real estate ops), but I'm not going to make things up to get them there. Let's hope the fourth quarter shows improved FFO and contributions from the loan side--were hoping for the same thing here--just going to get there a different way.(hopefully)

  • Reply to

    I WANT TO SCREAM

    by drzorba66 Feb 3, 2016 9:32 AM
    sme20_98 sme20_98 Feb 4, 2016 7:49 AM Flag

    And yet somehow i was able to pass the exam that measures my ability to do so. And you have done what?

  • Reply to

    I WANT TO SCREAM

    by drzorba66 Feb 3, 2016 9:32 AM
    sme20_98 sme20_98 Feb 4, 2016 7:52 AM Flag

    Obviously by the dividend cut and a secondary that cut the stock in half, the market would disagree with your position, and at the end of the day, that's all that matters.

  • sme20_98 sme20_98 Feb 4, 2016 7:56 AM Flag

    CAD is not a gain--it is merely cash available to distribute--has absolutely nothing to do with earnings. Stop misleading people--your are either extremely ignorant to accounting and business or you are just trying to hide the facts. I tend to think the latter which makes your "CAD is earnings" statements even worse.

  • sme20_98 sme20_98 Feb 5, 2016 8:25 AM Flag

    Davis , you can't possibly believe what you are writing. I'm ending this here, you clearly are manipulating CAD for your purposes, I just hope no one is stupid enough to believe you. My hope is still that FFO will turn positive again this quarter, and for me , that's all i care about because that will signal real earnings from operations--period!

  • Reply to

    CAD THE BIG LIE

    by drzorba66 Feb 4, 2016 12:10 PM
    sme20_98 sme20_98 Feb 7, 2016 11:47 AM Flag

    Ethison - I'm not so mad that they are not paying out the max that they can. I am disappointed that the loan programs are failing to make the earnings stream they boast about. You say they are painted into a corner, but how. They just did a capital raise in November. Where is the positive results from that move--loan program I believe was the answer I got from management. Where are all the principal repayments from RAITs 1 and 2 --you are saying those loans have been repaid--where did those principal amounts go? The problem remains that real FFO operating earnings don't exist on a consistent basis yet--otherwise they would not have had to cut the dividend in half--a very serious move for a REIT of any kind. So yeah, i am very disapponted in a management that continues to boast that all is well and CAD is on target all the while they need to cut my dividend 50% to survive and continue doing business. I do hope they used it to buy back shares--as long as they don't cut the dividend further, it would provide for a good and measurable investment. Still hoping they surprise us all with positive FFO --but not likely given the dividend decision that has already been made--just wouldn't make sense.

  • Reply to

    Oh why CAD

    by ethison Feb 9, 2016 7:04 AM
    sme20_98 sme20_98 Feb 9, 2016 7:58 AM Flag

    You continue to make the same mistake that Davis does. Even the company, in the notes to their current financial statements describes FFO as the measure of OPERATING performance. CAD is merely what it says--because some operating expenses are non-cash, it is a measure of cash available for distribution, but it is in no way a measure of whether said company can afford, based upon normal operations to pay one--as is evidenced with RAS and their 50% dividend cut. If they were to routinely make capital gain sales part of their income stream going forward, CAD may be useful, but that is not the loan program or real estate operations. I'm hoping FFO rebounds this quarter--that would be a great signal that RAS is under priced right now, but quite frankly, CAD has so many adjustments to it--whatever the company sees fit to include--it is useless to me. The noted to the financials also states that as well--the companies calculation of CAD may differ from other companies interpretations and calculations,so it is never a comparable number. FFO is still the company's measure of operations--their financial statements confirm this.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    Oh why CAD

    by ethison Feb 9, 2016 7:04 AM
    sme20_98 sme20_98 Feb 9, 2016 12:38 PM Flag

    Pal-no one is talking about losing money--where do you get that? My comments do describe why you should look more to FFO for RAS success and less at CAD, whatever the reason was for them beginning to use it. Get off your CAD soap box! My statement had nothing to do with my losing money--or anyone else for that matter!! Learn to read.

  • Reply to

    Oh why CAD

    by ethison Feb 9, 2016 7:04 AM
    sme20_98 sme20_98 Feb 9, 2016 3:24 PM Flag

    Davis, your first sentence is correct and exactly what i stated. Your second statement is a matter of opinion as , as the company states--not me, CAD can be calculated many different ways depending upon the companies views as to what to include and what not to--very subjective--as stated by the company in their financial statement disclosures.

  • Reply to

    Oh why CAD

    by ethison Feb 9, 2016 7:04 AM
    sme20_98 sme20_98 Feb 10, 2016 1:43 AM Flag

    But CAD can be subjective--it is not the same metric company to company depending upon what adjustments the company reporting it choose to use--all they have to do is disclose the components as is stated in RAS's financial statement disclosures. FFO is not subjective--that's why it is a much better read of success. Davis--I sold well north of $2.30 and with the price lower and institutional buying occurring rather than selling, I have bought back in, as I said, hoping for 0 to positive FFO and maybe a spike back to the three's, at which point I will sell and move on. As long as the institutions don't run for the hills as I had feared originally, I don't see much downside risk here--but this is far from a great long term investment. If I didn't own again, you wouldn't be hearing from me--I don't just hang around to bug people--as I have always said, I am still and always pulling for the longs here--always will--doesn't change the facts between FFO and CAD.

AGNC
18.37+0.15(+0.82%)Apr 29 4:00 PMEDT