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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Buffettology -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: James Clarke who wrote (2748)	1/22/2001 2:57:07 AM
From: Moominoid	Respond to of 4690

I'm just wary of people on Yahoo etc claiming new float is somehow "earnings" irrespective of what it's cost is. Sure the insurance franchise is valuable but that can be measured in terms of how much it earns. Banks also get more deposits each year as GDP grows. I for one have been loath to change banks. I had an acoount which I won in a competition in high school at a UK Bank till a couple of years ago (I simplified things to just Aussie and US based investments now). Banks in that country compete strongly for college students because they know most will be long term customers. Similarly I tend to stick with the same insurer and same stockbroker same mutual fund manager etc. On the other hand I have often changed phone companies depending on who has the best deal currently. So I'm not sure why an insurance company should be valued on a whole different basis than a bank. Unless you are holding assets like gold or maybe useful assets not currently used like land anything that doesn't create earnings isn't worth anything. Of course I am saying you have to adjust earnings to add in the earnings of partly owned companies oen way or another. The reported earnings figure is pretty meaningless. David