Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Hopefully it will be better on the reinsurance side than David Einhorn's Greenlight RE. Much like GLRE, this is a reinsurance company where the float is invested in Dan Loeb's Third Point hedge fund.
Hi Scott. Suspect this news is more for our awareness than something you might recommend as an investment, no? I'm inclined to support Mr. Loeb's proactive shareholder behavior.
It's not something I'd recommend. Just noting it because there seems to be a continued interest here-and-there (I think someone else mentioned it a few months ago) in GLRE.
I'm not buying and will be happy to just watch. I think it's a matter of Greenlight RE being disappointing given its association with Einhorn's fund. It moves entirely in-line with the reinsurance industry (the Einhorn association premium seems to have gone lower and lower over time) and has not seemed to do all that remarkably as a reinsurance company. It acts like a reinsurance company, not like an investment with David Einhorn with a side of reinsurance company.
I've traded it a couple of times a while ago (it gets around/under book value, then wait until it starts trading at a bit of a premium again), but it's not going to be something that I'd look at as a long-term hold (I haven't owned it in a long while) even if it has started to perk up lately a bit with the industry as a whole.
In the instance of Third Point, you may get an initial pop from the association, but longer term I'm not really interested. Maybe if the reinsurance side is better than GLRE and it clicks as both a reinsurance company and the Loeb association, but it's not something I'm very interested in.
Loeb's Third Point Offshore (TPNTF in the US, very thinly traded; TPOG the original shares in London and those are pretty thinly traded too) is a direct investment with Loeb, but the only problem with that is that it trades at a LARGE discount to NAV that has swung significantly over time (it traded at a 50% discount to NAV at one point in 2008 and still trades at a low double digit discount.) I wouldn't recommend that either but at least that is a direct investment.
Comments
I'm not buying and will be happy to just watch. I think it's a matter of Greenlight RE being disappointing given its association with Einhorn's fund. It moves entirely in-line with the reinsurance industry (the Einhorn association premium seems to have gone lower and lower over time) and has not seemed to do all that remarkably as a reinsurance company. It acts like a reinsurance company, not like an investment with David Einhorn with a side of reinsurance company.
I've traded it a couple of times a while ago (it gets around/under book value, then wait until it starts trading at a bit of a premium again), but it's not going to be something that I'd look at as a long-term hold (I haven't owned it in a long while) even if it has started to perk up lately a bit with the industry as a whole.
In the instance of Third Point, you may get an initial pop from the association, but longer term I'm not really interested. Maybe if the reinsurance side is better than GLRE and it clicks as both a reinsurance company and the Loeb association, but it's not something I'm very interested in.
Loeb's Third Point Offshore (TPNTF in the US, very thinly traded; TPOG the original shares in London and those are pretty thinly traded too) is a direct investment with Loeb, but the only problem with that is that it trades at a LARGE discount to NAV that has swung significantly over time (it traded at a 50% discount to NAV at one point in 2008 and still trades at a low double digit discount.) I wouldn't recommend that either but at least that is a direct investment.