Angine, under his old ID Aquin, predicted in q4 of 2005 that NFI would do 40% less than it actually did. He then changed his ID a few months later to pdaamort, and now, Angine.
If you believe that what he posts is legitimate in any way, you probably shouldn't be investing in this stock.
Jdawg is fascinating if you believe that completely ignoring the FOIA data, the SIA spreadsheet, and the massive differences between NEW, with no carry forward and banal performance and headed for a dividend cut, in between insults directed at the most credible posters here, makes for a good read.
The problem with the bashers is that they really have been wrong for 4.6 years. Provably. They were wrong in the same way then as they are now. But their posts aren't intended to be correct, merely compelling. They use a combination of garbled or selectively filtered numbers, and outright lies, to create a smokescreen that the less intelligent get trapped in. They also use idiot logic, routinely, and simply disappear for a day or two when shown to be wrong. Their role is not to be proven correct, but rather to clutter the board with negative BS. It's as regular as Tokyo Rose.
Conflicting opinions based in numbers or verifiable data is one thing. FUD is another. We aren't particularly impressed with half-assed short arguments, long debunked, and most of us don't even bother refuting them anymore - once they have been wrong for over 4 years, the likelihood of them being correct in year 5 or 6 is minimal.
Whether a crooked wall street and malevolent hedge fund cabal can drive the price down in spite of the fundamentals is a proved given. Whether they can sustain it at such a high yield is unknown - they have never been able to for an extended period in the past. But there's always a first time.
Is there any reason in the fundamentals to doubt the company paying $5.60 this year? Nope. Next year? Nope. Has there been any reason to doubt their ability for the last 4 years? Nope. History has shown that all the big drops were NOT based in any fundamental problem. Not once. It has always been based upon FUD distributed via media campaigns, class action suits, analysts, and message boards. Always. As in every single time to date.
Is this time different? Is there any reason to believe it is? What, precisely? Nothing in the fundamentals - as always. Now the fraudsters have everyone doubting whether the company will pay, not based on their ability to pay, but on their willingness to pay. They can't attack the ability, so now they attack the desire.
It is novel, but frankly, past arguments have been more compelling. This one, based upon nothing more than the boilerplate warnings in the 10Q and a few half-baked analyst rants, doesn't even qualify in the top 3. The most ludicrous for me this go around are the arguments that NFI should cut, not because of any company or performance related reason, but based upon the price the speculators and crooks in the secondary market are able to drop the stok to. At least in the past there were credible arguments that rising rates would cause a tsunami of defaults and the like. Now we have a few points blip up of some delinquencies, and some of the worst run competitors sucking fumes, and we are supposed to believe the next Great Depression in housing and credit is about to occur. Some can't even comprehend that 1998's LTCM blowup and corresponding elimination of funding for months caused that year's issues, and not anything mortgage performance related.
I'm not going to spend a lot of time on this board over the next weeks. There really isn't anything of note to see. The sky is falling crew punches in and posts their obligatory, poorly reasoned arguments, most of which the NFI-Info.net site debunked in 2003. If you are really curious, go back a year, or two, or three, or four, and cull the yahoo boards for the posts from the "doubters" during the short attacks, and compare them to today's you find interesting. They are the same.
Being right is not a defense against criminals devaluing your investment, while the cops aid and abet. But it is a comfort when trying to ascertain whether you are going to be paid well while they do it.
