Street Capitalist: Event Driven Value Investments

(Photo: Peter J. Thompson/National Post)

A friend recently attended an talk with Prem Watsa of Fairfax Financial (PINK:FRFHF / TSE:FFH). I know there are a lot of Fairfax followers on here, it is a company I’ve been bullish on for a while. Here are some of their notes. Keep in mind, these are just notes, they could be totally wrong:

The Soft P&C Market:
If you look at the insurance sector, a number of businesses are trading at low multiples because of the current pressures of the soft market. Some, like the management over at W.R. Berkely believe that the market is poised to turn around.

-Fairfax has wide reach. Active in over 100 countries, 25% premiums outside of N. America
-Fairfax faces declining volumes because of soft market but Fairfax has power to write more business if they see things improved.
-Globally, P&C markets remain soft. Signs of improvement in certain regions: Northbridge managed to raise rates in Canada.
-Fairfax could easily double underwriting volumes in the face of hard market, boosting earnings and investment float

The Investment Environment:
As some of you may know, Watsa’s Hamblin-Watsa Investment Counsel takes Fairfax’s float and uses it to make investments in all sorts of securities. They have an excellent track record of beating the market over the years.

-Watsa sees the possibility that growth will be flat as we may encounter deflationary pressures on the economy.
-Fairfax has structured their investment portfolio so that it can withstand a 50% drop in equity markets in addition to major CAT losses.
-Fairfax continues to be conservative about the markets and has 30% of the equity portfolio hedged with index swaps.
-2/3 of their muni bonds are insured by Berkshire Hathaway. Most were purchased near bottom prices. This boosts their yield on the portfolio which has an extra kicker of being tax exempt securities with a 5.75% average yield
-Some opportunities for value investors but they are becoming fewer.
-Target holding at least $1B in cash at holdco level in case of negative events.

Zenith Acquisition:
Fairfax recently acquired Zenith National Insurance Group. The company specialized in workers comp insurance and ran a conservatively managed investment portfolio.

-Fairfax has known Zenith management for over 20 years. Zenith has an excellent underwriting record and the company scaled back volumes because of soft market
-Zenith has a vanilla investment portfolio, Fairfax intends to have Hamblin-Watsa take over and try to boost performance
-Crum & Forster may be able to sell products through Zenith’s network of brokers and agents.

Michael Lewis has a new book coming out called The Big Short: Inside the Doomsday Machine and like everything else Lewis writes, it is sure to be awesome. Vanity Fair has an excerpt of the book and I suggest you all read it whenever you get a chance. It is a great read about investor Michael Burry:

To his swelling audience, it didn’t seem to matter whether the stock market rose or fell; Mike Burry found places to invest money shrewdly. He used no leverage and avoided shorting stocks. He was doing nothing more promising than buying common stocks and nothing more complicated than sitting in a room reading financial statements. Scion Capital’s decision-making apparatus consisted of one guy in a room, with the door closed and the shades down, poring over publicly available information and data on 10-K Wizard. He went looking for court rulings, deal completions, and government regulatory changes—anything that might change the value of a company.

As often as not, he turned up what he called “ick” investments. In October 2001 he explained the concept in his letter to investors: “Ick investing means taking a special analytical interest in stocks that inspire a first reaction of ‘ick.’” A court had accepted a plea from a software company called the Avanti Corporation. Avanti had been accused of stealing from a competitor the software code that was the whole foundation of Avanti’s business. The company had $100 million in cash in the bank, was still generating $100 million a year in free cash flow—and had a market value of only $250 million! Michael Burry started digging; by the time he was done, he knew more about the Avanti Corporation than any man on earth. He was able to see that even if the executives went to jail (as five of them did) and the fines were paid (as they were), Avanti would be worth a lot more than the market then assumed. To make money on Avanti’s stock, however, he’d probably have to stomach short-term losses, as investors puked up shares in horrified response to negative publicity.

“That was a classic Mike Burry trade,” says one of his investors. “It goes up by 10 times, but first it goes down by half.” This isn’t the sort of ride most investors enjoy, but it was, Burry thought, the essence of value investing. His job was to disagree loudly with popular sentiment. He couldn’t do this if he was at the mercy of very short-term market moves, and so he didn’t give his investors the ability to remove their money on short notice, as most hedge funds did. If you gave Scion your money to invest, you were stuck for at least a year.

Betting on the Blind Side (Vanity Fair)

(Flickr:rickz)

Investing in commodities is usually a hotly debated area among value investors. In theory, being able to obtain commodities at a deep discount is just what value investing is. But, there is a tendency for investors to circle around this corner of the market only when commodity prices really heat up. It is easy to accidentally invest into a bubble and watch your margin of safety disappear. Still, I believe it is insightful to study how great commodity investors work, and MaryAnn Busso’s awesome Bloomberg article about Tom Winmill provides us with a glimpse of his approach:

Gold had a good year in 2009. Tom Winmill’s Midas Fund had an even better one.

The $125 million fund, which invests in companies that mine or process metals or other commodities, was up 83 percent last year. That return beat 95 percent of the fund’s peers, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Winmill, 50, says his training as a lawyer helps him sift through engineering reports on mining deposits, Bloomberg Markets reports in its March 2010 issue. “That’s much more important than putting on your hiking boots and walking around the mine,” he says.

Among the items high on Winmill’s checklist when picking stocks: a miner’s ability to start production on time and on budget and to preserve the value of its shares. “I like to see a mining company that pays a dividend, occasionally does a stock buyback — instead of constant stock issuance — and doesn’t make dilutive acquisitions in order to extend their empire,” Winmill says. Those three things, combined with a good project, are key, he says.

As of January, Winmill had the majority of the fund’s assets in stocks of gold-mining companies. Returns on miners’ shares tend to amplify the returns on gold because of the companies’ operating leverage, Winmill says. That gave the fund a boost from a bullish market as investors sought to protect the value of their holdings. “The devaluation of the dollar and the bursting of the bond bubble are going to hurt a lot of investors,” Winmill says. “And inflation is going to hurt a lot of savers.”

Midas Fund’s Winmill Turns Gold Rise Into 83% Return on Miners (Bloomberg)

Some of the key takeaways here are that an investor should spend a lot of time getting acquainted with understanding the engineering reports issued by these miners, to properly gauge the situation. Note that he does not find actually visiting the mines to be useful. There is probably good reason for that, someone who is untrained at gauging physical mining operations may inaccurately perceive activity. Engineering reports are a way to more objectively determine the mine’s prospects.

After looking at gold through his four filters of U.S. fiscal policy, U.S. monetary policy, market supply and demand, and geopolitical events, Winmill analyzes individual gold miners, hoping to take advantage of the operating leverage they provide. I thought Winmill’s checklist for mining companies was worth noting:

1. The ability to start production on time and on budget
2. Pays a dividend
3. Pursues share buybacks
4. Does not pursue dilutive acquisitions

A company with all of these characteristics would be one that is run by a sound capital allocator. After the commodities bubble burst in 2008, Rio Tinto was one miner that was hit particularly hard. The company engaged in a ruinous acquisition plan, financed by mountains of debt. The company was like a homeowner who purchased homes that they could not afford, with the hope that its price would rise, and that they would be able to refinance their mortgages. Eventually, the music stopped playing and Rio Tinto scrambled to find ways to infuse its balance sheet with capital and pay down debt.

I can’t say I have a lot of knowledge of good managers of miners and other commodity companies, but I do know that many investors like Ken Peak, who runs Contango Oil and Gas (AMEX:MCF). In the Bloomberg article, Winmill goes on to mention a few companies that he likes:

Among the miners that meet Winmill’s investment test is Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (AMEX:NAK) The Vancouver-based company is developing Alaska’s Pebble gold and copper project in partnership with Anglo American Plc. Shares of Northern Dynasty, which is 20 percent owned by Rio Tinto Group, rose 124 percent in 2009. This year, the stock rose 3 percent to trade at $8.52 on Feb. 10. “They’ve got experienced, well-capitalized partners who really know how to get the ore out of the ground,” Winmill says.

Midas also owns shares of Jaguar Mining Inc.(NYSE:JAG) The Concord, New Hampshire-based company is bringing older gold mines in Brazil back into production. Winmill says Jaguar’s output might reach 600,000 ounces in about five years, up from 115,000 ounces in 2008. He says the company is likely to be acquired. Jaguar’s shares jumped 114 percent in 2009. This year, they fell 14 percent to trade at $9.60 on Feb. 10…

Midas’s holdings also include Silvercorp Metals Inc. and Fresnillo Plc. Shares of Vancouver-based Silvercorp, which has been buying high-grade mines in China, rose 210 percent last year. Stock of Mexico City-based Fresnillo, which operates silver mines in Mexico, was up 244 percent in 2009.

Midas Fund’s Winmill Turns Gold Rise Into 83% Return on Miners (Bloomberg)

Be sure to read all of the article, it’s a great look at how one investor operates. Warren Buffett has invested in commodities in the past, specifically silver, so it is worth taking some time to study. It’s always good to expand your circle of competence and a good value investor should be willing to travel through asset classes in search of value.

Former Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson has a new book coming out, On the Brink: Inside the Race to Stop the Collapse of the Global Financial System, which looks like an interesting account of what happened from his perspective. As Paulson describes:

The pace of events during the financial crisis of 2008 was truly breathtaking. In this book, I have done my best to describe my actions and the thinking behind them during that time, and to convey the breakneck speed at which events were happening all around us.

I believe the most important part of this story is the way Ben Bernanke, Tim Geithner, and I worked as a team through the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. There can’t be many other examples of economic leaders managing a crisis who had as much trust in one another as we did. Our partnership proved to be an enormous asset during an incredibly difficult period. But at the same time, this is my story, and as hard as I have tried to reflect the contributions made by everyone involved, it is primarily about my work and that of my talented and dedicated team at Treasury.

–Henry M. Paulson

Warren Buffett recently had an opportunity to interview Paulson in Omaha, and didn’t spare any tough questions, choosing to even ask about whether the TARP would be repaid (Paulson said yes).

Below is a video of the interview:

via: Paulson: Acts averted disaster (Omaha World Herald)

Howard Marks of Oaktree Capital has a new memo that is great as usual. I particularly liked his point about inflation:

When Paul Volcker left the Fed in 1987, he was asked at his first public appearance, “Will interest rates go up or down?” He answered presciently: “Yes.” Of course, his answer is still the right one. But from today’s levels, I think rates are more likely to go up than down (there’s so little room for the latter).

Reduced faith in the dollar means it would take higher interest rates to attract non-U.S. buyers to dollar investments. And, even domestically, (a) one of these days the government will stop holding rates down and (b) higher inflation would require rates to rise to compensate for the fact that the dollars with which debts are repaid will buy less. For all these reasons, I think investors must consider the prospect of higher inflation, dollar weakness and higher interest rates.

What to do about them? The list of possibilities is long:

· Buy TIPS.
· Buy floating rate debt.
· Buy gold (but only at the “right” price, and what’s that?)
· Buy real assets, such as commodities, oil and real estate (ditto).
· Buy foreign currencies.
· Make investments denominated in foreign currencies.
· Buy the securities of companies that will be able to pass on increased costs.
· Buy the securities of companies that own commodities, or that own assets denominated in foreign currencies.
· Buy the securities of companies that earn their profits outside the U.S.
· Hold cash (to invest once interest rates have risen).
· Sell long-term bonds (and possibly go short).

These are the actions that can profit from – or that provide the flexibility to adjust to – increased inflation, a decline in the dollar and increased interest rates, all of which are interconnected. The most important one is the last one: long-term bonds could suffer worst in an inflationary, higher-rate environment, especially given today’s low starting yields.

One final point: When I provide this answer to the frequent question about inflation, I ask people whether they agree. Usually they do. Then I ask how much of their portfolio they’re willing to devote to protecting against these macro forces. If their answer is 5%, 10% or 15%, I point out that that’s pretty close to doing nothing. The question is whether you’re willing to devote at least 30-40%. Few people are.

But that’s the thing: It’s easy to say, “I’m worried about inflation.” It’s something very different to say, “I’m worried enough about inflation to do something meaningful about it.” Let me know when you decide how much you’re willing to devote.

Howard Marks: Tell Me I’m Wrong (Oaktree Capital)

Marks makes an excellent point about whether managers are taking on superficial hedges — only investing a small, meaningless amount in their hedges. These positions make great talking points in quarterly letters but offer nothing by way of actual protection for their partners.

The best hedging opportunities usually come in the form of missed priced insurance. Nassim Taleb’s option trading seems to fit this description. The most recent example is the CDS trade that worked beautifully during the crisis. Credit default swaps were so mispriced that even a small position offered massive returns.

When things look dangerous, great investors are always ready to significantly protect themselves. Warren Buffett’s hoarding of cash provided Berkshire with great opportunities to invest in companies that were temporarily weakened by the crisis. Investors like Seth Klarman sometimes move 50% into cash if opportunities dry up. That is a meaningful move that protects investors from potential losses versus those who complain about overheated markets while keeping their partners hopelessly fully invested.

I’ve been thinking about hedging a lot these days and plan on having a comprehensive post up soon.

The folks over at Dealbook have Paulson’s 3Q investor letter up. The letter is peppered with his insights from stocks to defaulted bonds.

What I wanted to do though, was highlight a few parts of the letter where I thought we could take a look at his methodology for looking at stocks. The idea here isn’t to find potential buys, but to see how he looks at companies.

Bank of America (NYSE:BAC)

-Paulson believes that by 2011, banks will have passed the write down cycle and return to growth in 2012.
-They are using a 10x normalized earnings multiple for large banks and the team estimates BAC to be worth $29.81 per share in 2011. Current shares trade at $16.35, so you are looked at almost 40% annualized.
-They expect provision for credit losses to come down quite a bit from 2008 levels, to 1.75%. That figure, $16,357 is about 61% of 2008’s numbers.

Then, there is Paulson’s gold position. If you looked at the latest 13F-HR filings, there are a lot of ways that investors have been playing gold. Some are going after miners, others are gaining exposure via ETFs, and then there are some that are trying to get their hands on the physical asset.

Paulson mentions two gold miners in his portfolio. This is how he looks at them:

-Five gold mining stocks comprise 14% of their portfolio.
-All five stocks would have upside in a flat environment, but an even higher upside in a rising price environment.
-AngloGold Ashanti (NYSE:AU) is the third largest gold producer in the world but trades at a lower Price/NAV than peers. So this is a value play based on comps.
-The company has a number of figures, which could contribute to its peer undervaluation:
1. Exposure to South Africa
2. Declining production profile
3. Large hedge book
4. Poor safety record.
-Paulson & Co. believe that the new CEO, Mark Cutifani would be a catalyst for change in the company and indeed: the company diversified out of South Africa, reduced their hedge book, increased their production profile, and improved their safety record.

So what we can take away here is that Paulson and his team were looking for a gold miner undervalued, relative to peers and viewed Cutifani, a great mining operator, as a catalyst.

Then, there is Gabriel Resources (TSE:GBU)

-Gabriel is another miner with an event catalyst
-The company is the largest potential goldmine in Europe and Paulson & Co. own 19.9% of it.
-NGOs have stymied the process for the mine to get their permit due to environmental concerns
-Newmont Mining and Electrum Strategic are other large owners of the company with 16% and 19% stakes
-Though the company trades at only $2 per share, the upside can go to $6-8 and $8-12 if they receive their permit and start production.

Gabriel appears to be a low risk high uncertainty situation with a binary outcome. Without their permit, the company is likely to trade flat while having a number of potential catalysts in place to unlock value.

Be sure to read the rest of the letter at the NYTimes Dealbook.

This is an interesting, pretty contrarian perspective to the Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE:BRK.A) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe (NYSE:BNI) deal:

Bruce Greenwald’s comments on the BNI deal (Advisor Perspectives):

I know you own Berkshire Hathaway, so I have to ask you what you think about Buffett’s purchase of Burlington Northern.

It’s a crazy deal. It’s an insane deal. We looked at Burlington Northern at $75 and I’ll give you the exact calculation we did. You don’t have a high earnings return. They are paying 18 times earnings, but it’s really much worse than that. They report maintenance cap-ex very carefully. They report depreciation and amortization, and they report only about 70% of the maintenance cap-ex. So they are under-depreciating, and their profit numbers are lower than the true profit numbers – and in a bad way, because the tax shield for the depreciation is undergone too. Their profitability is much lower than it looks.

Buffett’s paying 18-times [at $100/share] and at $75 he was paying 16-times. Our calculation is he was paying 21-times.

Secondly, there are two kinds of assets. There are the rights-of-way, which you can’t get rid of. So there’s no issue about having to earn a return on them because you have to keep it in the business, and because there’s nothing they can do with those rights-of-way. If you look at the asset value of the non-right-of-way equipment, and you write it up because it’s more expensive than it was originally, you get an asset value that’s very close to the earnings power value. We didn’t see a lot franchise value or hidden asset value.

The other thing is that if you try to calculate sustainable earnings, you have to cope with the fact that earnings are up enormously since 2003, when oil went up. There is a simple calculation you can do, which compares the cost-per-ton-mile for freight for a truck versus a railroad. If you build the increase in the price of diesel fuel into the post-2003 experience, when revenues suddenly start to grow, what you see is that the entire growth of the revenue is accounted for by the energy advantage that the railroads have and therefore how much business they can capture from the truckers, and how much pricing they can get because the competition is now more expensive.

There is nothing special about the railroads. It’s entirely an energy play.

If you look at what their margins should have gone up by, given the energy efficiency, the margins go up by only about half of that. So you don’t have a good aggressive management over these five years producing outsized returns.

We looked back at when they did the merger with Santa Fe, because then they did increase margins. But they got bored with it, and margins started to come down. The same thing happened recently. We don’t see a lot of hidden profitability in the culture of the company.

It looked to us like an oil play. He has a history of making bad oil play decisions. And that was at $75/share, we thought there were better oil plays. At $100/share we think he has lost his mind.

Here’s the link to David Einhorn’s presentation at the value investing congress: Liquor before Beer… In the Clear

Also, there’s an article from Bloomberg on the talk:

Hedge-fund manager David Einhorn said JPMorgan Chase & Co., Bank of America Corp., Wells Fargo & Co. and Citigroup Inc. are among banks that the government should break up to ensure no company is “too big to fail.”

Einhorn said he’s buying gold to bet against the dollar because U.S. government and Federal Reserve policies may undermine the currency. Rather than buoying banks with bailouts, the U.S. should decide which lenders endanger the financial system and force them to shrink, he said.

“The lesson of Lehman should not be that the government should have prevented its failure,” Einhorn, who runs New York- based Greenlight Capital Inc., said in a presentation at the Value Investing Congress in New York. “The lesson of Lehman should be that Lehman should not have existed at a scale that allowed it to jeopardize the financial system.”

Einhorn Says U.S. Should Make JPMorgan, Wells Shrink (Update3)