FFH share price

[StubbleJumper]

I suspect that they're under pressure as rates are falling again - U.S. rates are at 2017 lows.

 

While Fairfax itself doesn't own any bonds to book losses from, it does limit the income generation outlook for them. When Fairfax exited it's hedges and fixed income investments, it moved itself from being a hedging bet on the global economy to a pure investment/insurance exposure. While the insurance side is firing on all cylinders, the investment side is largely in cash. 

 

With investment income/gains impaired by low rates (can't have BBRY/Eurobank/Tembec going up 60% every quarter...), the current earnings outlook is limited beyond the first two quarters.

 

While income potential relative to share price does seem high - particularly after accounting for a blowout quarter in gains - it isn't going to be continuously high without hitting homeruns in equities every quarter OR higher rates. I might be content to buy the shares now and wait, but I can understand why others aren't.

 

I suspect the interest rates are the main reason.

 

It's both...the number of shares that will need to be issued for Allied and the fed raising rates slightly.  Funny thing is that Fairfax has over $10B cash in the portfolio which is sitting in 75% cash and bonds.  It doesn't matter what Fairfax's price does as stocks fall or rates rise...they will be able to buy when everyone else is selling and looking for cash. 

 

As PI said, you are essentially buying Fairfax at nominally higher than book value now.  Their insurance businesses are now world-class and fully profitable across the board.  The number of non-insurance businesses has increased dramatically and by region.  Like Berkshire, as they add better and better insurance and non-insurance businesses, intrinsic value will start to increase faster than book value due to GAAP and IFRS.  It is already a business that should be valued at 1.5 times book based on the cash flow of the underlying businesses and return on the investments per share. 

 

The one area that I think they should remain cautious is their debt load.  While still very manageable and staggered well, I hope they remain conscious and vigilant on this front.  One of Berkshire's advantages is that they are beholden to none.  I really would like Prem and Fairfax to follow that culture and model.  Cheers!

 

Would Watsa consider a share buyback? If FFH has >$10B in cash, is looking for opportunity to deploy and it's own stock is trading at a substantial discount to where Parsad says it should be trading at (1.5x BV), does it make sense to do a buyback/set a floor on the stock price?

 

It is important not to confuse the FFH holdco cash with the operating subsidiary cash balances.  FFH holdco doesn't have $10B cash. The cash is at the operating insurance subsidiary (ie. C&F, Northbridge, Odyssey Re, etc.) and those funds are part of the insurance reserves.  It's not like FFH has that $10B of their reserves (future claims) to buyback their own stock for investment purposes.  Holdco usually has about $1B which is what FFH basically considers as their minimum desired amt of Holdco cash set aside for financial emergencies/flexibility. So they basically have minimal liquidity that they want to readily part with unless they continue to lever up. More likely $20M here and $20M there, as they flow excess reserves from operating subs to holdco.  In the past, they have said they generally leave excess funds at the operating subs so they can write additional premiums when the time is right (a hard market). 

 

 

What's to stop the subs from buying FFH's stock on the open market?  As far as I can tell, the major subs are all overcapitalized and could buy holdco shares without drawing down their reserves excessively.  Presumably the regulators have authorized far more dividend capacity for those subs than FFH has actually used?

 

 

SJ

[Parsad]

I suspect that they're under pressure as rates are falling again - U.S. rates are at 2017 lows.

 

While Fairfax itself doesn't own any bonds to book losses from, it does limit the income generation outlook for them. When Fairfax exited it's hedges and fixed income investments, it moved itself from being a hedging bet on the global economy to a pure investment/insurance exposure. While the insurance side is firing on all cylinders, the investment side is largely in cash. 

 

With investment income/gains impaired by low rates (can't have BBRY/Eurobank/Tembec going up 60% every quarter...), the current earnings outlook is limited beyond the first two quarters.

 

While income potential relative to share price does seem high - particularly after accounting for a blowout quarter in gains - it isn't going to be continuously high without hitting homeruns in equities every quarter OR higher rates. I might be content to buy the shares now and wait, but I can understand why others aren't.

 

I suspect the interest rates are the main reason.

 

It's both...the number of shares that will need to be issued for Allied and the fed raising rates slightly.  Funny thing is that Fairfax has over $10B cash in the portfolio which is sitting in 75% cash and bonds.  It doesn't matter what Fairfax's price does as stocks fall or rates rise...they will be able to buy when everyone else is selling and looking for cash. 

 

As PI said, you are essentially buying Fairfax at nominally higher than book value now.  Their insurance businesses are now world-class and fully profitable across the board.  The number of non-insurance businesses has increased dramatically and by region.  Like Berkshire, as they add better and better insurance and non-insurance businesses, intrinsic value will start to increase faster than book value due to GAAP and IFRS.  It is already a business that should be valued at 1.5 times book based on the cash flow of the underlying businesses and return on the investments per share. 

 

The one area that I think they should remain cautious is their debt load.  While still very manageable and staggered well, I hope they remain conscious and vigilant on this front.  One of Berkshire's advantages is that they are beholden to none.  I really would like Prem and Fairfax to follow that culture and model.  Cheers!

 

Would Watsa consider a share buyback? If FFH has >$10B in cash, is looking for opportunity to deploy and it's own stock is trading at a substantial discount to where Parsad says it should be trading at (1.5x BV), does it make sense to do a buyback/set a floor on the stock price?

 

It is important not to confuse the FFH holdco cash with the operating subsidiary cash balances.  FFH holdco doesn't have $10B cash. The cash is at the operating insurance subsidiary (ie. C&F, Northbridge, Odyssey Re, etc.) and those funds are part of the insurance reserves.  It's not like FFH has that $10B of their reserves (future claims) to buyback their own stock for investment purposes.  Holdco usually has about $1B which is what FFH basically considers as their minimum desired amt of Holdco cash set aside for financial emergencies/flexibility. So they basically have minimal liquidity that they want to readily part with unless they continue to lever up. More likely $20M here and $20M there, as they flow excess reserves from operating subs to holdco.  In the past, they have said they generally leave excess funds at the operating subs so they can write additional premiums when the time is right (a hard market). 

 

 

What's to stop the subs from buying FFH's stock on the open market?  As far as I can tell, the major subs are all overcapitalized and could buy holdco shares without drawing down their reserves excessively.  Presumably the regulators have authorized far more dividend capacity for those subs than FFH has actually used?

 

 

SJ

 

They could.  You have to be careful though.  If in some circumstance, FFH's stock falls further (two large catastrophic events), then the ability to write business by those subs decreases substantially.  Also, some credit agencies may have a problem in such an event where a sub holds a significant amount of FFH and losses are enormous.

 

The simplest way for them to buy back a large amount of stock would be to issue $1-2B in notes and buy back shares.  I don't think they would do it unless the stock was trading at 0.8 or less of book value.  At that price, buying back their stock is much more attractive than much of what the market offers.  Cheers! 

[Phaceliacapital]

How big is their tech short basket?

 

Anyone an idea?

[Crip1]

For the past half decade, FFH has been quite profitable excluding the loss on the hedges (earnings before bad stuff). Underwriting profitability is consistently solid and, while the investment side has not been stellar, the results there will be really lumpy as shown recently when the "lumps" have been on the good side (again, excluding the loss on the hedges). Now, the term "excluding the hedges" is problematic in that the hedges DID happen and they DID cost the company plenty. But, they're gone now and the drain we saw on financials performance is gone as well. Countering that to a certain extent is the lack of bond exposure which was a substantial tailwind so it's not all peaches and cream, but, when looking at the company in its present form and current price, IMHO, it's attractive. My two issues are:

 

 

• FFH is my second largest holding. It was my largest but the price action has seen that change over the past several months.
  
• Catching a falling knife is dangerous, and this is definitely a falling knife (down more than 12% YTD compared to an 8% increase in the S&P). That's a 20% under-performance compared to the S&P which increases to 30% when considering the past 12 months.
  

Clearly we're closer to a floor on the price now than 6 months ago, but I can't state for sure that this IS the floor or how close we are thereto. I'm of the opinion that the Q2 financials will look pretty good which should cause a bump in price so I'm strongly considering adding more right now. Hopefully for you all, my purchase will have something akin to the cwericb impact allowing all of you to get in at a lower price.

 

 

-Crip

[steph]

It is not really the hedges that are a problem, it is the difference between their stock selection and the hedges that is/was the problem.  If their equities had done as well as the S&p and Russel , it wouldn't have hurt that much.

 

But I am buying now. I do believe they have taken a radical but briliant decision to sell all their bonds a week before Trump. Some positions have gone up strongly in recent months.  What you get is a good insurer with lots of cash , not too far from book anymore.  In these rather expensive markets I believe FFH is one of the better propositions.  And if in the coming years they find good opportunities to reinvest the cash, it could be a very strong performer with book value going up and much higher p/b ratio.

[giofranchi]

It is not really the hedges that are a problem, it is the difference between their stock selection and the hedges that is/was the problem.  If their equities had done as well as the S&p and Russel , it wouldn't have hurt that much.

 

But I am buying now. I do believe they have taken a radical but briliant decision to sell all their bonds a week before Trump. Some positions have gone up strongly in recent months.  What you get is a good insurer with lots of cash , not too far from book anymore.  In these rather expensive markets I believe FFH is one of the better propositions.  And if in the coming years they find good opportunities to reinvest the cash, it could be a very strong performer with book value going up and much higher p/b ratio.

 

+1

 

Cheers,

 

Gio

[Spekulatius]

Same here. If they just invest like any other insurers (mostly bonds ), then the stock should do OK. If they do some smart investments that pay off like they have done in the past and continue to shoe good underwriting, the stock should do very well. F they blow their surplus cash flow and subpar investment, then we probably will look at a stagnating stock going forward.

In other words, it's getting closer to a "heads I win, tails I don't lose much" type of investment. I am in and buying more as the stock goes down.

[TwoCitiesCapital]

Was trying to determine we might get a better deal buying Allied to get Fairfax given the variable rate or share conversion and the decline in Fairfax stock since announced. Turns out, Allied trades rich relative to Fairfax and not cheap (hasn't been dropping like the currency of its acquirer has devalued).

 

Original deal terms:

 

$10 in cash

$14 in shares at fixed rate of 0.030392 Fairfax/ 1 Allied

$30 in shares at variable rate based on price (currently at 0.068862 Fairfax/ 1 Allied)

 

Amended deal terms:

 

$28 in cash

$14 in shares at fixed rate of 0.030392 Fairfax/ 1 Allied

$12 in shares at variable rate based on price (currently at 0.068862 Fairfax/ 1 Allied)

 

28 + (14/26)*(0.030392)(Fairfax Share Price)+(12/26)*(0.068862)(Fairfax Share Price) = 1 Allied Share

 

Doing the math with Fairfax shares at $420 USD = $48 per Allied share. Allied currently trades ~ $52.00. Allied shareholders who were planning on holding on through the deal anyways should be dumping the position now and buying shares of Fairfax direct to capitalize on the dislocation between the two and capture 8% more Fairfax shares.

[naboo]

does anybody have the final share count after Allied World deal is done?

 

 

About half of the $54 per Allied World share is being paid for with cash. The original offer was:

 

$10 in cash, of which $5 is a cash dividend from Allied just prior to closing

$14 in FFH shares, at a fixed exchange ratio

$30 in FFH shares, with Fairfax retaining the option to replace this part on a dollar-for-dollar basis with cash from debt or from other partners.

 

Subsequently, OMERS, AIMCo and others agreed to cough up $18 per Allied share, so per Allied share it is now $28 cash, $26 in FFH shares; the company has said that that the $18 per share cash infusion means that 3.5 million FFH shares will not need to be issued. So a rough calculation would be that FFH will be issuing 3.5*(28/18)=5.44 million shares. Actually, it will be a bit more than that, since the 3.5 million share calculation was based on the March 9 closing price, which was $464.99; shares are now $432.46. If FFH is still trading at or below $435.65 at closing, that would mean approx. 5.44*(464.99/435.65)=5.81 million new shares, which would give us a share count of 23.86+5.81=29.67 million shares, a bit less if the FFH share price ends up above the US$435.65 lower collar.

 

 

 

I recalculated the FFH total shares.

 

$10 in cash

$14 in shares at fixed rate of 0.030392 Fairfax/ 1 Allied

$30 in shares at variable rate based on price (currently at 0.068862 Fairfax/ 1 Allied)

 

Amended deal terms:

 

$28 in cash

$14 in shares at fixed rate of 0.030392 Fairfax/ 1 Allied

$12 in shares at variable rate based on price (currently at 0.068862 Fairfax/ 1 Allied)

 

.068862 * (30-18)/30  = 0.0275448 + 0.030392= 0.0579368 (convert rate FFH/AWH)

 

AWH shares outstanding 87,484,665.   

 

87,484,665 * 0.0579368 = 5,068,582 shares FFH.

 

23,079,000 + 5,068,582 = 28,147,582  FFH outstanding shares after merge.

 

 

Can we expect $20/share book value increase this quarter?

 

 

Was trying to determine we might get a better deal buying Allied to get Fairfax given the variable rate or share conversion and the decline in Fairfax stock since announced. Turns out, Allied trades rich relative to Fairfax and not cheap (hasn't been dropping like the currency of its acquirer has devalued).

 

Original deal terms:

 

$10 in cash

$14 in shares at fixed rate of 0.030392 Fairfax/ 1 Allied

$30 in shares at variable rate based on price (currently at 0.068862 Fairfax/ 1 Allied)

 

Amended deal terms:

 

$28 in cash

$14 in shares at fixed rate of 0.030392 Fairfax/ 1 Allied

$12 in shares at variable rate based on price (currently at 0.068862 Fairfax/ 1 Allied)

 

28 + (14/26)*(0.030392)(Fairfax Share Price)+(12/26)*(0.068862)(Fairfax Share Price) = 1 Allied Share

 

Doing the math with Fairfax shares at $420 USD = $48 per Allied share. Allied currently trades ~ $52.00. Allied shareholders who were planning on holding on through the deal anyways should be dumping the position now and buying shares of Fairfax direct to capitalize on the dislocation between the two and capture 8% more Fairfax shares.

 

If you use my ratio above: 0.0579368

 

28 + 420 * .057968 = $52.35, AWH is still fair valued.

 

 

[TwoCitiesCapital]

.068862 * (30-18)/30  = 0.0275448 + 0.030392= 0.0579368 (convert rate FFH/AWH)

 

AWH shares outstanding 87,484,665.   

 

87,484,665 * 0.0579368 = 5,068,582 shares FFH.

 

23,079,000 + 5,068,582 = 28,147,582  FFH outstanding shares after merge.

 

 

Can we expect $20/share book value increase this quarter?

 

If you use my ratio above: 0.0579368

 

28 + 420 * .057968 = $52.35, AWH is still fair valued.

 

Seems like the difference is that I weighted the different conversion ratios and you don't. Now that I think about it, I'm not sure weighting them is appropriate approach so your figures are probably right.

[FFHWatcher]

For the past half decade, FFH has been quite profitable excluding the loss on the hedges (earnings before bad stuff). Underwriting profitability is consistently solid and, while the investment side has not been stellar, the results there will be really lumpy as shown recently when the "lumps" have been on the good side (again, excluding the loss on the hedges). Now, the term "excluding the hedges" is problematic in that the hedges DID happen and they DID cost the company plenty. But, they're gone now and the drain we saw on financials performance is gone as well. Countering that to a certain extent is the lack of bond exposure which was a substantial tailwind so it's not all peaches and cream, but, when looking at the company in its present form and current price, IMHO, it's attractive. My two issues are:

 

 

• FFH is my second largest holding. It was my largest but the price action has seen that change over the past several months.
  
• Catching a falling knife is dangerous, and this is definitely a falling knife (down more than 12% YTD compared to an 8% increase in the S&P). That's a 20% under-performance compared to the S&P which increases to 30% when considering the past 12 months.
  

Clearly we're closer to a floor on the price now than 6 months ago, but I can't state for sure that this IS the floor or how close we are thereto. I'm of the opinion that the Q2 financials will look pretty good which should cause a bump in price so I'm strongly considering adding more right now. Hopefully for you all, my purchase will have something akin to the cwericb impact allowing all of you to get in at a lower price.

 

 

-Crip

 

Crip, you have been around here forever. Your comment,  "This is definitely a falling knife".  You haven't held enough losers if you are calling this a falling knife plus the falling knife term is generally reserved for company's that have a realistic expectation to end at $0 (like Home Capital, for example).  I get it that it is falling everyday (a little) but it is more like death by a thousand paper cuts then a falling knife. Falling knives are down a lot more and also have a lot more ugliness then FFH, imo.  If it rebounds, it will possibly rebound 3-4 x's faster than it has declined.

[nwoodman]

If it makes you feel better.  Brian Bradstreet is also buying at these levels

 

https://www.thecerbatgem.com/2017/06/21/fairfax-financial-holdings-ltd-ffh-director-f-brian-bradstreet-purchases-1000-shares.html

 

cheers

 

nwoodman

SVTItdOneLineDetailNoDerivIns.pdf

[Guest longinvestor]

Same here. If they just invest like any other insurers (mostly bonds ), then the stock should do OK. If they do some smart investments that pay off like they have done in the past and continue to shoe good underwriting, the stock should do very well. F they blow their surplus cash flow and subpar investment, then we probably will look at a stagnating stock going forward.

In other words, it's getting closer to a "heads I win, tails I don't lose much" type of investment. I am in and buying more as the stock goes down.

On the topic of great investments they may have done in the past, what are some names they've held for their entire existence? Or even >10/15 years. Akin to Berkshire holding KO or AMEX. Prem  talked about that sort of holding was what they wanted to get into with their 2009 windfall.  Mentioned JNJ and such. I know, they're not Berkshire and all that but their investment approach has been head scratching. Nothing to show for. Bonds, absolutely done great. Trying to get my head wrapped around the stated 15% rate goal.

 

Edit: I've been on the sidelines for about 5 years now and price down to where it was then.

[Spekulatius]

Same here. If they just invest like any other insurers (mostly bonds ), then the stock should do OK. If they do some smart investments that pay off like they have done in the past and continue to shoe good underwriting, the stock should do very well. F they blow their surplus cash flow and subpar investment, then we probably will look at a stagnating stock going forward.

In other words, it's getting closer to a "heads I win, tails I don't lose much" type of investment. I am in and buying more as the stock goes down.

On the topic of great investments they may have done in the past, what are some names they've held for their entire existence? Or even >10/15 years. Akin to Berkshire holding KO or AMEX. Prem  talked about that sort of holding was what they wanted to get into with their 2009 windfall.  Mentioned JNJ and such. I know, they're not Berkshire and all that but their investment approach has been head scratching. Nothing to show for. Bonds, absolutely done great. Trying to get my head wrapped around the stated 15% rate goal.

 

Edit: I've been on the sidelines for about 5 years now and price down to where it was then.

 

At this valuation, great investments are not necessary any more for FFH stock to do well, just not screwing up will suffice.

[karthikpm]

The overall insurance space is benefiting from benign cats and benign loss cost inflation. It's hard to generate great returns going forward unless they are able to maintain higher quality insurance operations ( their insurance operations & quality is better in the last decade )  and stop acting defensively and buy higher quality names.Bonds with a subpar insurance operation will not get to the stated 15%  rate of return

[giofranchi]

Edit: I've been on the sidelines for about 5 years now and price down to where it was then.

 

True.

On the other hand, during the last 5 years I have made good money in FFH, increasing my position while it was trading near 1.1xBVPS and lightening my position up while it was trading near 1.4xBVPS. If something similar happens in the future, buying at current levels might turn out to be quite profitable.

 

Cheers,

 

Gio

[Crip1]

For the past half decade, FFH has been quite profitable excluding the loss on the hedges (earnings before bad stuff). Underwriting profitability is consistently solid and, while the investment side has not been stellar, the results there will be really lumpy as shown recently when the "lumps" have been on the good side (again, excluding the loss on the hedges). Now, the term "excluding the hedges" is problematic in that the hedges DID happen and they DID cost the company plenty. But, they're gone now and the drain we saw on financials performance is gone as well. Countering that to a certain extent is the lack of bond exposure which was a substantial tailwind so it's not all peaches and cream, but, when looking at the company in its present form and current price, IMHO, it's attractive. My two issues are:

 

 

• FFH is my second largest holding. It was my largest but the price action has seen that change over the past several months.
  
• Catching a falling knife is dangerous, and this is definitely a falling knife (down more than 12% YTD compared to an 8% increase in the S&P). That's a 20% under-performance compared to the S&P which increases to 30% when considering the past 12 months.
  

Clearly we're closer to a floor on the price now than 6 months ago, but I can't state for sure that this IS the floor or how close we are thereto. I'm of the opinion that the Q2 financials will look pretty good which should cause a bump in price so I'm strongly considering adding more right now. Hopefully for you all, my purchase will have something akin to the cwericb impact allowing all of you to get in at a lower price.

 

 

-Crip

 

Crip, you have been around here forever. Your comment,  "This is definitely a falling knife".  You haven't held enough losers if you are calling this a falling knife plus the falling knife term is generally reserved for company's that have a realistic expectation to end at $0 (like Home Capital, for example).  I get it that it is falling everyday (a little) but it is more like death by a thousand paper cuts then a falling knife. Falling knives are down a lot more and also have a lot more ugliness then FFH, imo.  If it rebounds, it will possibly rebound 3-4 x's faster than it has declined.

 

 

Based on the Investopedia definition (http://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fallingknife.asp), you are right...I stand corrected. That said, though not perfectly accurate, the concept is roughly right. One of the many flaws I have is that I hate buying something for more than I could by it for. Examples include making damned sure I get the asparagus at grocery store 2 for $1.99/lb as opposed to grocery store 1 directly across the street from store 2 at $2.29/lb. And that's NOTHING compared to my buying a car. I've lost opportunities to buy shares in the past because of this. Case in point, I put in a buy order yesterday at US$415 when the quote was US$414.70...now it's at $422. In reality, did it make sense to spend the additional $.70 to buy at a multi-year low? Likely it did.

 

 

-Crip

[cwericb]

 

 

This popped up today:

 

Insider Filings:

 

Jun 21/17 Jun 16/17 Bradstreet, F. Brian Indirect Ownership Subordinate Voting Shares 10 - Acquisition in the public market 1,000 $562.42

 

Jun 21/17 Jun 16/17 Bradstreet, F. Brian Direct Ownership Subordinate Voting Shares 10 - Acquisition in the public market 1,000 $562.31

 

https://www.canadianinsider.com/company?menu_tickersearch=ffh

 

[One World Trader]

It's incredible how the market can price Fairfax at such different levels given the stability and track record of the business, and as a long time holder, I couldn't be happier

[bluedevil]

There is another source of earnings from this quarter that I have not seen mentioned yet on this thread -- the performance fees from Fairfax's management of Fairfax India.  Fairfax India is up somewhere in the order of $350m just this quarter, so the performance fees (20% once past a 5% annual hurdle) will be significant.  I'm not certain when it will be reflected in Fairfax's results, however.

[nwoodman]

There is another source of earnings from this quarter that I have not seen mentioned yet on this thread -- the performance fees from Fairfax's management of Fairfax India.  Fairfax India is up somewhere in the order of $350m just this quarter, so the performance fees (20% once past a 5% annual hurdle) will be significant.  I'm not certain when it will be reflected in Fairfax's results, however.

 

The performance fees are calculated on a 3 year basis so the first performance fee should be paid at the end of this year

 

From the Q1 FIH report (BVPS $12.50):

 

The performance fee is accrued quarterly and paid for the period from January 30, 2015 to December 31, 2017 and for each consecutive three-year period thereafter, and is calculated, on a cumulative basis, as 20% of any increase in common shareholders' equity (including distributions) above a 5% per annum increase. The amount of common shareholders' equity at any time which must be achieved before any performance fee would be payable is sometimes referred to as the "hurdle per share". The company determined that a performance fee of $45,941 should be accrued for the first quarter of 2017 as the book value per share of $12.50 (before factoring in the impact of the performance fee) at March 31, 2017 was greater than the hurdle per share at that date of $10.98.  If a performance fee is payable for the period ending on December 31, 2017, it will be paid in subordinate voting shares of the company unless the market prices per share of those shares is at least two times the then book value per share, in which event Fairfax may elect to receive that fee in cash. In the first quarter of 2017, the performance fee recorded in the consolidated statements of earnings was $44,571 (2016 - nil).

 

 

Not sure what will happen in terms of revaluing their stakes in BIAL,  but simplistically if the share price is tracking NAV,  then they have exceeded the hurdle of 10*1.05^3= 11.58  =>

 

Out performance 16-11.58=4.42/share

 

20% Fee = 0.884/share

 

Shares out 140m

 

Performance Fee = $123m

 

 

I am sure it won't wash through completely but the point is FIH has the potential to make a bucket load of money for them.  Fairfax can run their holding from the current 30% of FIH up to 49% after that it is to be paid in cash.  Not difficult to see them reaching that level of ownership relatively quickly

 

cheers

 

nwoodman

 

 

 

[clutch]

FFH is currently my best idea and I have allocated 17% of my portfolio in FFH over the last couple of weeks.

 

Hope it works out.

[mcliu]

It's interesting how sentiment has shifted so quickly. When the company was hedged and expected return was pretty low (<6%), shares traded at 1.5x adj. BV.

 

Now that the hedges have lifted, expected returns should be much higher (>10%), shares are trading at 1.0x adj. BV.  :o

[Crip1]

It's interesting how sentiment has shifted so quickly. When the company was hedged and expected return was pretty low (<6%), shares traded at 1.5x adj. BV.

 

Now that the hedges have lifted, expected returns should be much higher (>10%), shares are trading at 1.0x adj. BV.  :o

 

 

Suggests that this is a good time to be a contrarian...

 

 

-Crip

[Jurgis]

It's interesting how sentiment has shifted so quickly. When the company was hedged and expected return was pretty low (<6%), shares traded at 1.5x adj. BV.

 

Now that the hedges have lifted, expected returns should be much higher (>10%), shares are trading at 1.0x adj. BV.  :o

 

So you are saying hedges were costing 4% annual return?

 

That's not what Prem told us.  8)  ::)