Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : Berkeley Technology Limited (BLKYY) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RockyBalboa who wrote (623)	9/15/2000 9:32:50 AM
From: Madharry	Respond to of 955

having worked in the insurance business i know of no more highly regulated business so don't believe your first argument carries any weight. My understanding is that of the money coming in 90% is used to buy bonds 10% is used for venture capital investments which until now have returned 1000% or so, so there is a significant cushion right now. coverage could become an issue if their product sales take off exponentially of course that would be great for them and for shareholders and if the ipo market dies for an extended period of time. I'll take my chances.

To: RockyBalboa who wrote (623)	9/17/2000 5:37:00 PM
From: J. Conley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 955

One has to question whether the sales of the bonds are in compliance with regulations and if so, if the purchasers of teh bonds are aware of the inherent business risks. You suppose, huh, that financial analysts at A.M. Best, Malone at FBR (who has been an WSJ All-Star analyst in insurance and specifically referred to the regulatory filings), the analysts at BEST, the state regulatory agencies, the 3000 some agents, and the institutional investors, are all overlooking one of the most basic facts about the insurance company? And also suppose they would be particularly inclined to overlook compliance with regulations knowing that the company invests in VC? And since the company is performing so poorly, the company itself has an incentive to throw it all down the drain, right? Do you have any fact at all why this should be a concern that we should look into? Armin is right, I'm not sure why your concern should be given any weight at all in an analysis and am not really sure you thought about this before you posted it. Incidentally, BEST, in fact, referenced the A.M. Best rating in one of their reports in which they stated an upgrade from B++ to A- level is foreseeable – mentioning the "virtuous circle." (From the BEST report dated 2/8/00.) I recently inquired about this and posted all that I know about this matter on the thread. That is, that the company will not sell equities and invest in bonds "just" to raise the rating; they are right now more focused on the bottom line. However, if there is a review by A.M. Best after FY2000, IMO, it is not unreasonable to assume there very well could be a rating change as a result. Best regards.