MBIA and Ambac dropped on concern Buffett's
proposal would leave them with mortgage securities that caused
more than $5 billion of losses last quarter, while Berkshire
would gain a municipal guaranty business that has generated
profit for more than 14 years.
``He is offering to take the fattest, most profitable part
of their business,'' said Jerry Bruni, president and portfolio
manager, at J.V. Bruni and Co. in Colorado Springs, Colorado.
Bruni has $650 million under management including Berkshire
shares. The firm sold MBIA last month. ``I can't imagine why
they would want to do that. If I were MBIA or Ambac, this does
not sound like a good offer.''
0
MBIA and Ambac dropped on concern Buffett's
proposal would leave them with mortgage securities that caused
more than $5 billion of losses last quarter, while Berkshire
would gain a municipal guaranty business that has generated
profit for more than 14 years.
``He is offering to take the fattest, most profitable part
of their business,'' said Jerry Bruni, president and portfolio
manager, at J.V. Bruni and Co. in Colorado Springs, Colorado.
Bruni has $650 million under management including Berkshire
shares. The firm sold MBIA last month. ``I can't imagine why
they would want to do that. If I were MBIA or Ambac, this does
not sound like a good offer.''
Buffett wants to cherry pick the best stuff for the cheapest price.
If MBI and ABK give him what he wants, they may as well flush the stocks based on stupidity.
The audacity of Buffett to say such a pompous thing as if these PUBLIC companies are going to give HIM and his company what he wants on the terms he does.
I guess you cannot blame him for trying, but the entire idea is purely laughable..sure Warren, come take the SAFEST and most profitable part of the business..and we will give it to you on a steep discount.
What a hilarious comment..
0
This isnt a shock.
Buffett wants to cherry pick the best stuff for the cheapest price.
If MBI and ABK give him what he wants, they may as well flush the stocks based on stupidity.
The audacity of Buffett to say such a pompous thing as if these PUBLIC companies are going to give HIM and his company what he wants on the terms he does.
I guess you cannot blame him for trying, but the entire idea is purely laughable..sure Warren, come take the SAFEST and most profitable part of the business..and we will give it to you on a steep discount.
If we even think that is possible, then get out of all longs, especially in the financials.
If the insurers go under (we already know they are incapable of meeting current obligations) then what happens to the market for such instruments? Who wants to own somthing which cannot be insured?
The implications of these insurers going under is monsterous. I dont see how it would be allowed.
I guess one positive is it would crush some stocks that dont deserve it and would create buying opportunities.
These Buffett comments almost tick me off because he really thinks he can go in and throw these companies 50 cents on the dollar for PRIME stuff and be considered a savior for doing so.
I want some of that action...safe, reliable AAA stuff for 50 cents on the dollar. The after tax ROR on such a noble investment would be probably in the 10% range..
Buffett cannot operate/acquire in the free market, he now needs sweetheart deals to gain market share for his company.
0
Koaj,
If we even think that is possible, then get out of all longs, especially in the financials.
If the insurers go under (we already know they are incapable of meeting current obligations) then what happens to the market for such instruments? Who wants to own somthing which cannot be insured?
The implications of these insurers going under is monsterous. I dont see how it would be allowed.
I guess one positive is it would crush some stocks that dont deserve it and would create buying opportunities.
These Buffett comments almost tick me off because he really thinks he can go in and throw these companies 50 cents on the dollar for PRIME stuff and be considered a savior for doing so.
I want some of that action...safe, reliable AAA stuff for 50 cents on the dollar. The after tax ROR on such a noble investment would be probably in the 10% range..
Buffett cannot operate/acquire in the free market, he now needs sweetheart deals to gain market share for his company.
Warren Buffett said Wednesday he made "several hundred million dollars"
on the loonie but wished he kept the holding because he believes the
currency will likely continue to strengthen.
Mr. Buffett, in Toronto for the Canadian launch of Business Wire --
a corporate news release service that will be available on all Canwest
Web sites, including the Financial Post -- made a well-publicized bet
against the U.S. dollar several years ago. Although he has since
unwound much of the position he still believes the greenback will
continue to be weighed down by huge U.S. trade and current account
deficits.
"I think it is more likely that we will continue our
present polices in the U.S. and the Canadian dollar, over time, would
strengthen even further."
WALL I disagree, he has every right to try and make sweetheart deals and no one has to agree to them. And if the larger market wants to misinterpret his actions that is their business, not his!!
0
Warren Buffett said Wednesday he made "several hundred million dollars"
on the loonie but wished he kept the holding because he believes the
currency will likely continue to strengthen.
Mr. Buffett, in Toronto for the Canadian launch of Business Wire --
a corporate news release service that will be available on all Canwest
Web sites, including the Financial Post -- made a well-publicized bet
against the U.S. dollar several years ago. Although he has since
unwound much of the position he still believes the greenback will
continue to be weighed down by huge U.S. trade and current account
deficits.
"I think it is more likely that we will continue our
present polices in the U.S. and the Canadian dollar, over time, would
strengthen even further."
WALL I disagree, he has every right to try and make sweetheart deals and no one has to agree to them. And if the larger market wants to misinterpret his actions that is their business, not his!!
I never said he didnt have a right, my comment was that it was absurd and pompous.
As if he was the only person capable of stepping in to pick at the bones for the best of assets. I am sure there are MANY firms and individuals (Soros?) who would also be willing to come out in the media and be a hero by saying such a stupid comment.
I consider it very similar to what many flimsy (not calling him flimsy, rather drawing similarities) investors down here try and do..go to a homeowner in foreclosure and offer them a few bucks to swoop in and take over payments, knowing there is equity in the house and they can pounce on the homeowner when they are down and take advantage of the bad situation.
My opinion on Buffett is pretty bad in the first place, but the comments made today were borderline laughable. I am sure more than one person got a chuckle out of his comments today.
I guess if you toss out a life ring enough times, someone might take you up on the offer.
The biggest problem I have is the perception that he is being a good guy here, trying to bail out the insurers..nothing further from the truth, Buffett wants to make a killing off a bad situation..and I am sure NONE of the firms will take him up on this very pathetic offer.
0
Vermeer,
I never said he didnt have a right, my comment was that it was absurd and pompous.
As if he was the only person capable of stepping in to pick at the bones for the best of assets. I am sure there are MANY firms and individuals (Soros?) who would also be willing to come out in the media and be a hero by saying such a stupid comment.
I consider it very similar to what many flimsy (not calling him flimsy, rather drawing similarities) investors down here try and do..go to a homeowner in foreclosure and offer them a few bucks to swoop in and take over payments, knowing there is equity in the house and they can pounce on the homeowner when they are down and take advantage of the bad situation.
My opinion on Buffett is pretty bad in the first place, but the comments made today were borderline laughable. I am sure more than one person got a chuckle out of his comments today.
I guess if you toss out a life ring enough times, someone might take you up on the offer.
The biggest problem I have is the perception that he is being a good guy here, trying to bail out the insurers..nothing further from the truth, Buffett wants to make a killing off a bad situation..and I am sure NONE of the firms will take him up on this very pathetic offer.
Man such heavy handed tactics here. Read the whole article.
Buffett wanting to charge a heavy fee for the top level muni re-insurance-
Buffett said Berkshire offered to reinsure the municipal bonds in
exchange for a fee equal to 1.5 times the remaining unearnedpremium
over the life of the bonds.
And I loved this part-
Buffett said on CNBC that such a deal would ensure that the bonds would
sell at a fair price. Currently, he said, the bonds sell at significant
discounts because of concerns about the financial health of the bond
insurers.
Good ole Warren wanting to step in and overcharge for a safe RE on AAA bonds implying that if he doesnt save the day (and make a killing in return) that there will be liquidity issues.
Cant blame the guy for trying to be a vulture. I hope the other two tell him to shove off as well.
0
Here is the article in question.
Buffett
Man such heavy handed tactics here. Read the whole article.
Buffett wanting to charge a heavy fee for the top level muni re-insurance-
Buffett said Berkshire offered to reinsure the municipal bonds in
exchange for a fee equal to 1.5 times the remaining unearnedpremium
over the life of the bonds.
And I loved this part-
Buffett said on CNBC that such a deal would ensure that the bonds would
sell at a fair price. Currently, he said, the bonds sell at significant
discounts because of concerns about the financial health of the bond
insurers.
Good ole Warren wanting to step in and overcharge for a safe RE on AAA bonds implying that if he doesnt save the day (and make a killing in return) that there will be liquidity issues.
Cant blame the guy for trying to be a vulture. I hope the other two tell him to shove off as well.
This is an interesting event. Wallstreet, your analysis is dead on.
I am a huge fan of Buffett, and I think he spews knowledge almost every time he speaks. However, he definitely shouldnt be labeled a hero and all 3 companies probably will turn him down.
I am always impressed with how financially savvy he is (and how sharp his mind is) for his age. I dont think there are too many other people that are willing and able to take this type of proposal to the table. 12 months ago there would have been a line of private equity groups waiting to offer, but now this is a little harder to come by.
0
This is an interesting event. Wallstreet, your analysis is dead on.
I am a huge fan of Buffett, and I think he spews knowledge almost every time he speaks. However, he definitely shouldnt be labeled a hero and all 3 companies probably will turn him down.
I am always impressed with how financially savvy he is (and how sharp his mind is) for his age. I dont think there are too many other people that are willing and able to take this type of proposal to the table. 12 months ago there would have been a line of private equity groups waiting to offer, but now this is a little harder to come by.
The deals he has made say in the last decade have been for the most part sweetheart deals.
I have never been a huge fan of his. I consider him SIMILAR to Mark Cuban..
Cuban made a ton of dough by being in the right place at the right
time. If Broadcast.com were still a public company today, they would
probably be trading at less than 5 per share and yahoo could have
scooped them up for 10% or less than what they paid back then.
Same with Buffett..he made his empire when the market was an infant,
when only a few players were in the game and when the information age
was non-existant. He made his "glory" plays back when people did not
study fundamentals and he was a pioneer to real DD investing..that time
has been gone for probably close to 20 yrs and his glory days are in
the past.
I dont like when deep pocket players come and take advantage of
situations and get heralded for being such a great investor and a
humanitarian.
Buffett is a greedy sucker, he is no saint by ANY financial measure.
0
True..
The deals he has made say in the last decade have been for the most part sweetheart deals.
I have never been a huge fan of his. I consider him SIMILAR to Mark Cuban..
Cuban made a ton of dough by being in the right place at the right
time. If Broadcast.com were still a public company today, they would
probably be trading at less than 5 per share and yahoo could have
scooped them up for 10% or less than what they paid back then.
Same with Buffett..he made his empire when the market was an infant,
when only a few players were in the game and when the information age
was non-existant. He made his "glory" plays back when people did not
study fundamentals and he was a pioneer to real DD investing..that time
has been gone for probably close to 20 yrs and his glory days are in
the past.
I dont like when deep pocket players come and take advantage of
situations and get heralded for being such a great investor and a
humanitarian.
Buffett is a greedy sucker, he is no saint by ANY financial measure.
If you are looking for saints in the financial world, Wall, let me save you the trouble:there aren't ANY.Zip..Nada.. Not Soros not CarlosSlim not anyone.You might as well look for pol that doesn't lie. End of story.
And these geniuses that are responsible for the mortgage and muni bond mess are free to be bailed out, for their greed and stupidity...by the American taxpayer. Sorry, but I can't generate ANY enthusiasm for that notion either.
As for Buffett being a humnaitarian, who the hell reports that??? Bill and Melinda Gates?? LOL.
0
If you are looking for saints in the financial world, Wall, let me save you the trouble:there aren't ANY.Zip..Nada.. Not Soros not CarlosSlim not anyone.You might as well look for pol that doesn't lie. End of story.
And these geniuses that are responsible for the mortgage and muni bond mess are free to be bailed out, for their greed and stupidity...by the American taxpayer. Sorry, but I can't generate ANY enthusiasm for that notion either.
As for Buffett being a humnaitarian, who the hell reports that??? Bill and Melinda Gates?? LOL.
I think it peculiar to hold him to a standard that is beyond normal.He played by the same rules his competitors played by in the same day and age.He still is. And if you are implying, and I think you are he was simply the beneficiary of good fortune, then I would also say as many coaches say every day, it is better to be lucky than good then.But I think you and I both know it was not just dumb luck that got him where he is today.
Soros almost broke the Bank of Englad.Do you think that move admirable?? It was simply shrewd and nallsy, the same shrwedness that led WB to buy Geico when everyone but everyone was claiming it was going to go into bankruptcy.
Anyway:
"If the bond insurers turn Buffett down, as I expect
they will, regulators will step in and do it themselves," Bill Ackman,
head of hedge fund firm Pershing Square Capital Management LP, said
during a presentation on Tuesday.
Indeed, Berkshire's
proposal was put together with the support of the New York State
Insurance Department, according to Ajit Jain, a reinsurance executive
at the company.
"We are ready and
willing to lend our reinsurance support to the municipal side of the
house, and in fact had set out in a letter to the New York
Superintendent of Insurance a concept that we believe would address the
needs and concerns of main street America's municipalities," Jain wrote
in a Feb. 6 letter to MBIA's bankers at Lazard Ltd. (LAZ:
LAZ37.84,
-1.21,
-3.1%)
. MarketWatch obtained a copy of the letter.
"The Superintendent has no objection to our approaching you with this proposal," Jain added.
But he said that Berkshire isn't going to reinsure the
structured-finance side of bond insurers' businesses, which is the
source of the industry's problems.
0
I think it peculiar to hold him to a standard that is beyond normal.He played by the same rules his competitors played by in the same day and age.He still is. And if you are implying, and I think you are he was simply the beneficiary of good fortune, then I would also say as many coaches say every day, it is better to be lucky than good then.But I think you and I both know it was not just dumb luck that got him where he is today.
Soros almost broke the Bank of Englad.Do you think that move admirable?? It was simply shrewd and nallsy, the same shrwedness that led WB to buy Geico when everyone but everyone was claiming it was going to go into bankruptcy.
Anyway:
"If the bond insurers turn Buffett down, as I expect
they will, regulators will step in and do it themselves," Bill Ackman,
head of hedge fund firm Pershing Square Capital Management LP, said
during a presentation on Tuesday.
Indeed, Berkshire's
proposal was put together with the support of the New York State
Insurance Department, according to Ajit Jain, a reinsurance executive
at the company.
"We are ready and
willing to lend our reinsurance support to the municipal side of the
house, and in fact had set out in a letter to the New York
Superintendent of Insurance a concept that we believe would address the
needs and concerns of main street America's municipalities," Jain wrote
in a Feb. 6 letter to MBIA's bankers at Lazard Ltd. (LAZ:
LAZ37.84,
-1.21,
-3.1%)
. MarketWatch obtained a copy of the letter.
"The Superintendent has no objection to our approaching you with this proposal," Jain added.
But he said that Berkshire isn't going to reinsure the
structured-finance side of bond insurers' businesses, which is the
source of the industry's problems.
Still, it's not clear whether the New York State
Insurance Department could impose such a plan on bond insurers if the
companies are against the idea.
MBIA, which is
regulated in New York, questioned a bailout like this during a
conference call with analysts and investors on Jan. 31. See full story.
It also said that insurance regulators could only take control of the
company if it is deemed to be insolvent under regulatory and statutory
accounting standards.
"I can assure you that
we will be showing a substantial, in the billions of dollars, amount of
statutory capital beyond requirements for the New York State Insurance
Department," Gary Dunton, chief executive of MBIA, said, according to a
transcript of the conference call.
However, later in the
call, Greg Diamond, head of investor relations at MBIA, clarified
Dunton's comments. The New York State Insurance Department can take
control of companies even if they're not insolvent, he explained.
The regulator could
take control if a company is found to have violated law or regulatory
orders or if the department is concerned about the company's ability to
pay its claims, Diamond said, according to the transcript.
0
and the end of the article
Still, it's not clear whether the New York State
Insurance Department could impose such a plan on bond insurers if the
companies are against the idea.
MBIA, which is
regulated in New York, questioned a bailout like this during a
conference call with analysts and investors on Jan. 31. See full story.
It also said that insurance regulators could only take control of the
company if it is deemed to be insolvent under regulatory and statutory
accounting standards.
"I can assure you that
we will be showing a substantial, in the billions of dollars, amount of
statutory capital beyond requirements for the New York State Insurance
Department," Gary Dunton, chief executive of MBIA, said, according to a
transcript of the conference call.
However, later in the
call, Greg Diamond, head of investor relations at MBIA, clarified
Dunton's comments. The New York State Insurance Department can take
control of companies even if they're not insolvent, he explained.
The regulator could
take control if a company is found to have violated law or regulatory
orders or if the department is concerned about the company's ability to
pay its claims, Diamond said, according to the transcript.
An one guy's comments about the whole muni bond insurance racket:
the whole idea of insuring government bonds , state, local or federal, is silly. However I would not be surprised if the federal government must start insuring its bonds within a few years or people won't buy them.
0
An one guy's comments about the whole muni bond insurance racket:
the whole idea of insuring government bonds , state, local or federal, is silly. However I would not be surprised if the federal government must start insuring its bonds within a few years or people won't buy them.
The difference between Soros and Buffett is one isnt perceived to be your grandpa and the greatest and revered investor to the common man in our times, and Soros is definately known for being more cutthroat.
My comment about Soros is I respect him more as a CURRENT investor, in the CURRENT market.
Buffett investing worked 30 plus years ago, but things have changed and an investor cannot just to and try to find severely undervalued LARGE public companies like he did. When Buffett made his moves, the stock market did not have the money flow that we have, nowhere close..so yeah there were legitimate strong companies who were selling at or below book value due more to the lack of investment capital rather than a shrewd investment.
Coke and Home Depot are not on sale like when he was an investor and outside Geico (which was bought 13 yrs ago) and he didnt buy it on the cheap..he bought Geico for 70 per share..view the link-
link
What exactly in the open market has Birkshire purchased that was severely undervalued in the last 10 yrs?
A common, every day investor will not gain much from what Buffett teaches, especially in this market environment.
He is portrayed as a "next door neighbor" kind of investor and that he definately is not.
I just found his "charitable" move today to be a complete and laughable event. Today just gave me the chance to express my disdain for the guy.
0
Vermeer,
The difference between Soros and Buffett is one isnt perceived to be your grandpa and the greatest and revered investor to the common man in our times, and Soros is definately known for being more cutthroat.
My comment about Soros is I respect him more as a CURRENT investor, in the CURRENT market.
Buffett investing worked 30 plus years ago, but things have changed and an investor cannot just to and try to find severely undervalued LARGE public companies like he did. When Buffett made his moves, the stock market did not have the money flow that we have, nowhere close..so yeah there were legitimate strong companies who were selling at or below book value due more to the lack of investment capital rather than a shrewd investment.
Coke and Home Depot are not on sale like when he was an investor and outside Geico (which was bought 13 yrs ago) and he didnt buy it on the cheap..he bought Geico for 70 per share..view the link-
link
What exactly in the open market has Birkshire purchased that was severely undervalued in the last 10 yrs?
A common, every day investor will not gain much from what Buffett teaches, especially in this market environment.
He is portrayed as a "next door neighbor" kind of investor and that he definately is not.
I just found his "charitable" move today to be a complete and laughable event. Today just gave me the chance to express my disdain for the guy.
What did he pay for the other 51 per cent he owned? As I recall, it was pennies on the dollar at th time.Might be wrong.
Warren E. Buffets Berkshire Hathaway Inc. said it will spend
approximately $23 billion, or $70 per share, to purchase the 49% of
Geico Corp. it doesn't already own.
How a person is portrayed is the work of TV and PR people.Only naifs buy into that crap, and while there are a lot of naifs in this country and the world, well, let's just stay in the real world.
Some people still think JFK was a great president, instead of a deeply mobbed up fool who almost caused WW III and deeply widened the Viet Nam war. It helps to have a brilliant historian/lackey like Artie Schlesinger sell the myth, but a myth it was and remains.
For that matter, there are people in Russia who still revere Stalin.
Did Buffett claim bid to be an act of charity? This was a business offer.He has done charitable acts (as the Gates Foundation will attest).I don't think he was selling this one as one.
Anyway...cheers. If you disdain Buffett, lay three names on the table of people you consider worthy of admiration. I doubt any of them are saints either, not if they inhabit this planet.
0
What did he pay for the other 51 per cent he owned? As I recall, it was pennies on the dollar at th time.Might be wrong.
Warren E. Buffets Berkshire Hathaway Inc. said it will spend
approximately $23 billion, or $70 per share, to purchase the 49% of
Geico Corp. it doesn't already own.
How a person is portrayed is the work of TV and PR people.Only naifs buy into that crap, and while there are a lot of naifs in this country and the world, well, let's just stay in the real world.
Some people still think JFK was a great president, instead of a deeply mobbed up fool who almost caused WW III and deeply widened the Viet Nam war. It helps to have a brilliant historian/lackey like Artie Schlesinger sell the myth, but a myth it was and remains.
For that matter, there are people in Russia who still revere Stalin.
Did Buffett claim bid to be an act of charity? This was a business offer.He has done charitable acts (as the Gates Foundation will attest).I don't think he was selling this one as one.
Anyway...cheers. If you disdain Buffett, lay three names on the table of people you consider worthy of admiration. I doubt any of them are saints either, not if they inhabit this planet.
The gist of our proposal to you is that we would
reinsure MBIA's current municipal bond insurance portfolio in
consideration of a premium payment to us of an amount equal to 150% of
the existing unearned premium reserves. Like many potential reinsurance
buyers, I recognize that your first reaction may be that this is an
excessive premium, and I want to offer you upfront the thought
processes that led me to conclude that this is in fact a fair proposal
that achieves important objectives for both parties.
We priced this proposed
reinsurance cover to reflect the significant opportunity cost from our
perspective in providing this type of bulk reinsurance cover. In the
current market environment, we are able to command premium levels
double (or higher) your client's prior rates to insure the risks that
in addition have the benefit of your client's AAA insurance cover.
Given our conservative use of capital (for example, the capital ratios
in our monoline insurer would be higher than other insurers and would
not be subject to reduction by dividends, fees, etc. for a minimum of
ten years under the concept we presented to the Department), by
offering this cover we forgo these direct opportunities to wrap already
wrapped bonds. Despite this, there is an obvious appeal to a bulk
transaction like this given the low overhead costs which would be
involved.
Taking all these
factors into account, we came down in favor of making the proposal and
are prepared to pursue it with you directly. It is efficient as both a
bulk transaction and a transaction that we believe will help stabilize
the currently unstable marketplace conditions for the municipal
business. In that sense, this approach also has the appeal of serving
the greater public good, not an unimportant consideration for us, both
as a matter of principle and as a company with a vested interest in
national economic conditions.
From your perspective,
I would respectfully suggest that this proposal would allow MBIA to
release substantial capital from the municipal bond side of the house
that can be deployed to support other obligations. I would submit that
our proposal at the pricing levels we require is actually a cheap way
for MBIA to raise capital as compared to other alternatives and is
therefore of great benefit to MBIA's owners and their municipal bond
policyholders.
Should this proposal
prove to be of interest to you, and I sincerely hope that it is, we
would ask for the courtesy of a reply as soon as possible. We would be
prepared to complete this transaction within the next five days.
Sincerely
Ajit Jain,
President
cc: The Honorable Eric Dinallo, Superintendent
0
Concluding part of the Buffett letter :
The gist of our proposal to you is that we would
reinsure MBIA's current municipal bond insurance portfolio in
consideration of a premium payment to us of an amount equal to 150% of
the existing unearned premium reserves. Like many potential reinsurance
buyers, I recognize that your first reaction may be that this is an
excessive premium, and I want to offer you upfront the thought
processes that led me to conclude that this is in fact a fair proposal
that achieves important objectives for both parties.
We priced this proposed
reinsurance cover to reflect the significant opportunity cost from our
perspective in providing this type of bulk reinsurance cover. In the
current market environment, we are able to command premium levels
double (or higher) your client's prior rates to insure the risks that
in addition have the benefit of your client's AAA insurance cover.
Given our conservative use of capital (for example, the capital ratios
in our monoline insurer would be higher than other insurers and would
not be subject to reduction by dividends, fees, etc. for a minimum of
ten years under the concept we presented to the Department), by
offering this cover we forgo these direct opportunities to wrap already
wrapped bonds. Despite this, there is an obvious appeal to a bulk
transaction like this given the low overhead costs which would be
involved.
Taking all these
factors into account, we came down in favor of making the proposal and
are prepared to pursue it with you directly. It is efficient as both a
bulk transaction and a transaction that we believe will help stabilize
the currently unstable marketplace conditions for the municipal
business. In that sense, this approach also has the appeal of serving
the greater public good, not an unimportant consideration for us, both
as a matter of principle and as a company with a vested interest in
national economic conditions.
From your perspective,
I would respectfully suggest that this proposal would allow MBIA to
release substantial capital from the municipal bond side of the house
that can be deployed to support other obligations. I would submit that
our proposal at the pricing levels we require is actually a cheap way
for MBIA to raise capital as compared to other alternatives and is
therefore of great benefit to MBIA's owners and their municipal bond
policyholders.
Should this proposal
prove to be of interest to you, and I sincerely hope that it is, we
would ask for the courtesy of a reply as soon as possible. We would be
prepared to complete this transaction within the next five days.
500k, I dont know if I would have anyone but ME take care of it..
I know there are more active and involved investors in the current market I would rather invest my money versus the buy and hold theology and ground up thinking he has..as does a few of his predecessors.
I would hold Lynch and the guy from Vanguard at a MUCH higher pedistal as to market experience, investment advice and knowledge..Bogle? I forget his name.
I also respect Jimmy Rogers more than Buffett and that Jim Jubak guy as well..they are more active and current and share their information, while Buffett is more secretive and self-involved.
The media spun todays event as charitable from Buffett..as if the "Oracle of Omaha" was going to swoop in and save the markets...what a bunch of garbage.
The only time in this current market that you take advantage of his style of investings is when the fear of current events overrides investment sensibility, say after 9-11 and when the NAZ went from 5k down to 1000 or whatever the bottom was. I also remember the markets got killed in the late 90s..when we get severe fear based selloffs, and recessions, that is the time you can utilize his thinking.
Some people think that Rockefeller was a great investor..but some think he had a ton of money and took advantage of bad times in the history of the US to make that fortune. I dont grade Buffett that way, but I surely have never read a book from him, nor do I consider what he says to be anything more than another person when I listen concerning investment advice.
This bailout stuff really really stunk up the joint and who else would be allowed to publically make this kind of junk bid and have the markets trumpet it as some great thing? I find it laughable..similar to back in the day when I was a broker, there would be these little shops that would throw out pathetic tender offers on stocks and see if stupid shareholders would bite..say a stock was selling at 50 bucks, some investment group (usually no-name) would send a tender offer out for well under current price and see if they could take advantage of idiots who would sell. I consider these terms and conditions parallel to that.
0
Vermeer,
500k, I dont know if I would have anyone but ME take care of it..
I know there are more active and involved investors in the current market I would rather invest my money versus the buy and hold theology and ground up thinking he has..as does a few of his predecessors.
I would hold Lynch and the guy from Vanguard at a MUCH higher pedistal as to market experience, investment advice and knowledge..Bogle? I forget his name.
I also respect Jimmy Rogers more than Buffett and that Jim Jubak guy as well..they are more active and current and share their information, while Buffett is more secretive and self-involved.
The media spun todays event as charitable from Buffett..as if the "Oracle of Omaha" was going to swoop in and save the markets...what a bunch of garbage.
The only time in this current market that you take advantage of his style of investings is when the fear of current events overrides investment sensibility, say after 9-11 and when the NAZ went from 5k down to 1000 or whatever the bottom was. I also remember the markets got killed in the late 90s..when we get severe fear based selloffs, and recessions, that is the time you can utilize his thinking.
Some people think that Rockefeller was a great investor..but some think he had a ton of money and took advantage of bad times in the history of the US to make that fortune. I dont grade Buffett that way, but I surely have never read a book from him, nor do I consider what he says to be anything more than another person when I listen concerning investment advice.
This bailout stuff really really stunk up the joint and who else would be allowed to publically make this kind of junk bid and have the markets trumpet it as some great thing? I find it laughable..similar to back in the day when I was a broker, there would be these little shops that would throw out pathetic tender offers on stocks and see if stupid shareholders would bite..say a stock was selling at 50 bucks, some investment group (usually no-name) would send a tender offer out for well under current price and see if they could take advantage of idiots who would sell. I consider these terms and conditions parallel to that.
OK man well I don't think it is fair to blame him for the coverage he gets from news outlets.We all know how skewed that is for anyone in the public eye.But enough on theOracle. I am familiar with the names you mention (and yeah it is Bogle, John Bogle of Vanguard right?)
What do sectors are you looking at now? I know your solar post.I have some exposure to Hoku, some good some bad.I was considering STP, not sure.
Also, what do you think of XTO?
Good conversation...the Carolina/Virginia hoops game was not pretty but it was exciting by the way.
0
OK man well I don't think it is fair to blame him for the coverage he gets from news outlets.We all know how skewed that is for anyone in the public eye.But enough on theOracle. I am familiar with the names you mention (and yeah it is Bogle, John Bogle of Vanguard right?)
What do sectors are you looking at now? I know your solar post.I have some exposure to Hoku, some good some bad.I was considering STP, not sure.
Also, what do you think of XTO?
Good conversation...the Carolina/Virginia hoops game was not pretty but it was exciting by the way.
I have my sectors going all the time..meaning I watch the same groups every day..of them they are-
Builders Lenders Financials Solars Tech
First glance, I dont see a ton to like in XTO. They are at the high end of trading range, for an exploration stock they are selling at a higher multiple than many, not much of a dividend..any reason you like it specifically?
Here is a stock to keep an eye on.. OCNF. They just reported good earnings, they have a big dividend, upped to almost 3 bucks a year..that is about 12-13%, they are in a high margin dry shipping market, like my DRYS..little company but interesting on a dip.
I think you have to play fast swings..learn whatever stock in whatever sector, find where it goes when the market comes in and range trade it. Buy and hold sucks, especially during a recession.
I like STP, also TSL, not so fond on SPWR because there are analysts who have been bashing them and that is serious.
0
Vermeer,
I have my sectors going all the time..meaning I watch the same groups every day..of them they are-
Builders Lenders Financials Solars Tech
First glance, I dont see a ton to like in XTO. They are at the high end of trading range, for an exploration stock they are selling at a higher multiple than many, not much of a dividend..any reason you like it specifically?
Here is a stock to keep an eye on.. OCNF. They just reported good earnings, they have a big dividend, upped to almost 3 bucks a year..that is about 12-13%, they are in a high margin dry shipping market, like my DRYS..little company but interesting on a dip.
I think you have to play fast swings..learn whatever stock in whatever sector, find where it goes when the market comes in and range trade it. Buy and hold sucks, especially during a recession.
I like STP, also TSL, not so fond on SPWR because there are analysts who have been bashing them and that is serious.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
