Jump to content

beerbaron

Member
  • Posts

    1,487
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by beerbaron

  1. The table shows you how our reserves have developed for the ten accident years prior to 2012. Northbridge has

    had an average redundancy of 8.2% – i.e., if reserves had been set at $100 for any year between 2002 and 2011,

    they would have come down on average to $91.80, showing redundant reserves of $8.20. On a comparable basis,

    Crum & Forster had an average reserve redundancy of 5.8%, OdysseyRe 9.8% and Fairfax Asia 8.8% (First Capital

    alone was 12.0%). We are very pleased with this reserving record, but given the inherent uncertainty in setting

    reserves in the property casualty business, we continue to be focused on being conservative in our reserving process. More on our reserves in the MD&A.

     

    If a insurance has higher redundancy, does it reduce taxes by deferring them?

     

    BeerBaron

  2. What do you think he thinks about when he says:

     

    If float is both costless and long-enduring, which I believe Berkshire’s will be, the true value of this liability is

    dramatically less than the accounting liability

     

    My logic tells me that an endless revolving load is worth 100%. What do you guys think?

     

    BeerBaron

  3. I'll sell when it makes sense tax wise, that is when:

     

    -Berkshire does not create a dollar of value for each dollar retained.

    -And when it pays dividends.

     

    Besides that I'm very happy to get the tax free equivalent of a retirement account.

     

    BeerBaron

  4. I believe it is unrealized but its still Marked-to-Market.

     

    Yes, it is marked to market.  Cheers!

     

    Yeah affects BV but and operating profit I believe. Luckily most of the bonds are MTM too since they are classified as short term investment so it's easy to value FFH. I find it amazing that they lost 1 billion dollars in hedges and still managed to grow BV by quite a bit. They are taking a defensive approach and I can't blame them for it.

     

    BeerBaron

     

     

  5. Respectively - this is not an effective pairs trade.  Businesses don't line up at all...  Drivers are vastly different at each business

     

    You are completely right on this one, that it why pair trade is not the strategy:

    -We have a fairly good idea of the BV of Fairfax.

    -This value is not represented in the stock price at the moment.

     

    The strategy would not be to a pair trade but long only up until FFH value goes toward BV. Not a risk free investment but an asymmetric risk/reward.

     

    BeerBaron

     

    *Note, I don't think the gains on are big enough to warrant an arbitrage

  6. Thanks for posting that, I noticed that he had the most recent Japan Company Handbook on his desk, I know because I have the same copy I've been working through here.  I guess he just can't get away from paging through those books looking for bargains…!

     

    How much did you end up paying for the Japan company handbook with shipping?

     

    BeerBaron

  7. Ok, I'm a little lost now. What exactly are people in this thread referring to when they mention "Warren's put"? I just see the 1.2BV level as a resistance point, but I am lost as to what "put" means in this context.

     

    The theory is simple.

     

    Buyback at 1.2xBV on a stock that has a daily volume of about 300 Millions $/day. The company has about 20 Billions of extra money in the bank and generates about 10B a year. If it ever goes under 1.2xBV BRK can therefore buy substantial amount of it's own stock and sustain it's price.

     

    BeerBaron

×
×
  • Create New...