BargainValueHunter Posted October 26, 2010 Share Posted October 26, 2010 Specifically, the use of net operating losses and cash flow investing from non-insurance float income. Or is the compounding engine run by Ian Cumming and Joseph Steinberg totally unique? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted October 26, 2010 Share Posted October 26, 2010 There are some out there, or they do it slightly differently, but Leucadia is pretty unique. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 There are some out there, or they do it slightly differently, but Leucadia is pretty unique. Cheers! sanjeev, i think he was looking for names! ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scorpioncapital Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 I wasn't aware Leucadia had any non-insurance float income, what exactly does that mean? I think something like Brookfield Asset Management or Loews has some similarities, but they also have very large differences. The big difference I see at LUK is throwing the institutional imperative against the wall and the concept of bi-modal investing. I've seen several conglomerates that have a large amount of capital in some industry and can't find themselves to sell it all and go where the money is likely to be. I've also seen some very diversified companies that have a little bit of everything and don't make large, concentrated bets on high probability deals. These features distinguish the best investors from the average ones. As a side note, I notice Buffet's new protege Combs bought some LUK in his portfolio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myth465 Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 I am actually redigging into BAM. I noticed on the investor day presentation, they are hoping to streamline things, I forgot about the Brazil exposure and it seems like a decent way to get in. BAM though has changed quite a bit since I owned it in 2008. Should be fun to research. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bronco Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 There was a separate post on these types of companies. It is really hard to find companies that truly utilize float and us it well. For non-float, and I am not sure of the companies, I see things such as banking, writing put options, and gift cards. Some of these may be float-like or float-light. There was some speculation a while back (and no forgotten) that Buffett was able, from a state insurance stat. standpoint, to do more than other companies. If so, kudos to him. In current times, it appears that the mad scientest Biglari gets it. We'll see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Partner24 Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 I don't know any public conglomerate that use the Leucadia "business model". That being said, if you know one, I'm very interested to hear about it. A year or two ago, an investor asked C&S at the LUK AGM if there was any next Leucadia out there. One of them answered something like "We don't know any, but if you see one, shoot it". They don't want more competition in their field. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest misterstockwell Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 TTT? He is at least an equal at dodging taxes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogermunibond Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 Enstar Group (ESGR) is something of a compounding machine. Running off reinsurance portfolios. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myth465 Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 We seem to redo a version of this thread every few weeks :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Partner24 Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 We seem to redo a version of this thread every few weeks Great, people keep fishing. One day, they'll catch a tasty fish. ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myth465 Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 We seem to redo a version of this thread every few weeks Great, people keep fishing. One day, they'll catch a tasty fish. ;D You are correct, amongst all of this chatter I have decided to buy LUK. Now I want a pullback but may cave and buy prior to earnings. It seems like its time to batten down the hatches and move further up on the Management quality. One sleeps easy at night holding LUK with that decent cash pile. They can finally take advantage of a pullback if we get one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scorpioncapital Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 I'm shifting into luk from berkshire, berkshire is a great co. but I don't see it outperforming so why hold a single share when a co. like luk can do equal or better, makes no sense... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myth465 Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 I have been in investing for 4 years, and have never owned Berkshire for the same reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ourkid8 Posted October 29, 2010 Share Posted October 29, 2010 In Berkshire's defense: Berkshire's return over the last 4 years: Oct 30, 2006 - $105,000.00 Oct 28, 2010 - $120,025.00 14.3% Leucadia National Corp return over the last 4 years: Oct 30, 2006 - $25.94 Oct 28, 2010 - $24.98 -3.84 S&P 500 INDEX return over the last 4 years: Oct 30, 2006 - 1,364.30 Oct 28, 2010 - 1,183.78 -15.25 I'm shifting into luk from berkshire, berkshire is a great co. but I don't see it outperforming so why hold a single share when a co. like luk can do equal or better, makes no sense... I have been in investing for 4 years, and have never owned Berkshire for the same reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scorpioncapital Posted October 29, 2010 Share Posted October 29, 2010 Exactly, the last 4 years have been great to own Berkshire, now I'm shifting into LUK. However, I don't think 4 years is a defense of anything, try 10 years, LUK up over 200%, Berkshire maybe 100%. That's a whole lot of $$$ on the table over 10 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ourkid8 Posted October 29, 2010 Share Posted October 29, 2010 I initially only calculated a 4 year time frame to prove a point to Myth465... If you look 10 years out, yes LUK outperformed BRK by 139% but if you start looking out even further, let's say 20 years BRK outperformed LUK by 29% which speaks volumes on it's own. If we look out even further it would be much more dramatic. Considering BRK's size, I still feel long term you will do extremely well and continue to obtain above average returns... Thanks, S Exactly, the last 4 years have been great to own Berkshire, now I'm shifting into LUK. However, I don't think 4 years is a defense of anything, try 10 years, LUK up over 200%, Berkshire maybe 100%. That's a whole lot of $$$ on the table over 10 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dealraker Posted October 29, 2010 Share Posted October 29, 2010 shalab, I too think there is a good chance Warren Buffett can do it another 10 years. I don't think too many think this way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bronco Posted October 29, 2010 Share Posted October 29, 2010 Leucadia to me is more like Loews - a weird holding company seizing the moment (buying distressed assets). Fairfax is similar to BRK, but not entirely. FFH seems to be in that 1967 - 1970's Berkshire stage, buying insurance companies and increasing float. A GIANT difference between Buffett and Prem is Buffett's willingness to buy non-insurance companies. It isn't like this is insignicant, unless you consider Burlington, Mid-American, Pritzker, etc. immaterial parts of their business. But all good choices! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 29, 2010 Share Posted October 29, 2010 In Berkshire's defense: Berkshire's return over the last 4 years: Oct 30, 2006 - $105,000.00 Oct 28, 2010 - $120,025.00 14.3% Leucadia National Corp return over the last 4 years: Oct 30, 2006 - $25.94 Oct 28, 2010 - $24.98 -3.84 S&P 500 INDEX return over the last 4 years: Oct 30, 2006 - 1,364.30 Oct 28, 2010 - 1,183.78 -15.25 I'm shifting into luk from berkshire, berkshire is a great co. but I don't see it outperforming so why hold a single share when a co. like luk can do equal or better, makes no sense... I feel the same way! If BRk can beat the S&P 500 by a percent or two every year...and the s&p 500 beats 80% or so of investors over a long period of time, the odds are very much in my favor! I have been in investing for 4 years, and have never owned Berkshire for the same reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shalab Posted October 29, 2010 Share Posted October 29, 2010 >Fairfax is similar to BRK, but not entirely. FFH seems to be in that 1967 - 1970's Berkshire stage, buying insurance companies and increasing float. FFH is like the BRK of the nineties in terms of market cap. It is already at 10 billion. However, one has to respect what Prem Watsa has accomplished. He was an immigrant from India with little/no background in finance and then he built a company which has made money for so many and inspired many more. Comparison to Berkshire are not fair. It is a lot different than Buffett, who was into finance from the age of seven and would have succeeded no matter what. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myth465 Posted October 29, 2010 Share Posted October 29, 2010 Me not owning Berkshire has nothing to do with LUK. I have never owned LUK either. I just dont see the point, when you are working with less then $200k and trying to build wealth, I dont see how Berkshire gets you there in a meaningful way. Now if I had $10 million and was looking to protect wealth then ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scorpioncapital Posted October 29, 2010 Share Posted October 29, 2010 " If you look 10 years out, yes LUK outperformed BRK by 139% but if you start looking out even further, let's say 20 years BRK outperformed LUK by 29% which speaks volumes on it's own. If we look out even further it would be much more dramatic. " It's unbelievable the lack of research people do on these things and think they should post. Leucadia market price Dec 31, 1990: $1.10 Leucadia market price now (ADJUSTED FOR SPECIAL DIVIDENDS, SPINOFFS, AND DIVIDENDS): $33 CAGR (20 years): 18.5% Berkshire market price Dec 31, 1990: $6850 Berkshire market price now: $119,000 CAGR(20 years): 15.3% And yes you are right over longer the difference is even more dramatic, but not in the way you think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shalab Posted October 29, 2010 Share Posted October 29, 2010 scorpion - not sure what is your thesis... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdWatchesBoxing Posted October 29, 2010 Share Posted October 29, 2010 http://tinyurl.com/3ygy8zm Yeah, at 30 yrs, it doesn't even come close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now