SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: TobagoJack who wrote (30193)3/1/2008 7:07:59 AM
From: elmatador  Respond to of 217561
 
Buffett’s State of the World: There’s Folly in Wonderland

By FLOYD NORRIS
Published: March 1, 2008
The billionaire investor Warren E. Buffett disclosed Friday that he had earned profits for shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway by speculating in the Brazilian currency, the real, and by buying a large stake in a French pharmaceutical company, Sanofi-Aventis.

He also complained that many other companies were overstating earnings, and he expressed puzzlement that their auditors let them get away with it.

Mr. Buffett’s annual letter to shareholders, which was released Friday, has become something of a business institution, with the certainty that he will offer caustic comments and the hope that he will shed light on his investments.

This year, his scorn was aimed at the “financial folly” of lenders who financed the housing boom, since vanished, and at companies that use rosy assumptions of investment success to raise reported profits.

The comments, which were released after the market closed, came as Berkshire reported that fourth-quarter profit fell 18 percent, in part because of falling insurance rates. Net income decreased to $2.95 billion, or $1,904 a share, from $3.58 billion, or $2,323, a year earlier.

Mr. Buffett offered no commentary on Berkshire’s foray into the municipal bond insurance business, and no explanation of why he spent $1.5 billion to buy a 1.3 percent stake in Sanofi-Aventis.

But he was willing to say, in effect, “I told you so,” in recalling his warning a year ago about “weakened lending practices” in the mortgage market.

“Just about all Americans came to believe that house prices would forever rise,” he wrote. “That conviction made a borrower’s income and cash equity seem unimportant to lenders, who shoveled out money, confident that H.P.A. — house price appreciation — would cure all problems. Today, our country is experiencing widespread pain because of that erroneous belief. As house prices fall, a huge amount of financial folly is being exposed. You only learn who has been swimming naked when the tide goes out — and what we are witnessing at some of our largest financial institutions is an ugly sight.”

ELMAT: The banks only profitted from people's perceptions.

His criticism of other companies was based on the fact that many assume their pension funds will earn 8 percent a year from investments, a return he deems unlikely given the low level of interest rates, but one that lets them report higher profits now.

He compared money managers who promise double-digit returns to the queen in “Alice in Wonderland,” who proclaimed, “Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.” Mr. Buffett added, “Beware the glib helper who fills your head with fantasies while he fills his pockets with fees.”

Mr. Buffett pointed out that some companies with pension plans in both Europe and the United States assume better returns on the American plans than the European ones.

“This discrepancy is puzzling,” he said. “Why should these companies not put their U.S. managers in charge of the non-U.S. pension assets and let them work their magic on these assets as well? I’ve never seen this puzzle explained. But the auditors and actuaries who are charged with vetting the return assumptions seem to have no problem with it.”

“What is no puzzle, however, is why C.E.O.s opt for a high investment assumption: It lets them report higher earnings. And if they are wrong, as I believe they are, the chickens won’t come home to roost until long after they retire.”

Mr. Buffett also had harsh words for state and local governments. “Public pension promises are huge and, in many cases, funding is woefully inadequate. Because the fuse on this time bomb is long, politicians flinch from inflicting tax pain, given that problems will only become apparent long after these officials have departed. Promises involving very early retirement — sometimes to those in their low 40s — and generous cost-of-living adjustments are easy for these officials to make. In a world where people are living longer and inflation is certain, those promises will be anything but easy to keep.”

ELMAT: Thisd applies to GM. Applied to Siemens too: Need to close down businesses in order to get rid of the employees -thus destroying capital stock- because of asnachronic labor laws.

He did not discuss why he wanted to insure municipal bonds issued by governments making such promises.

Mr. Buffett also warned of lower profits ahead for the insurance industry, which has benefited from two years without major disasters.

“That party is over,” he said. “It’s a certainty that insurance-industry profit margins, including ours, will fall significantly in 2008. Prices are down, and exposures inexorably rise.”

Berkshire’s investment in Sanofi-Aventis showed a profit of $109 million at the end of the year, but that profit has since vanished as the share price fell 23 percent in the first two months of 2008 amid concerns over possible generic competition for its best-selling drug.

Berkshire’s other major new stock investment in 2007, which was previously disclosed, was Burlington Northern Santa Fe, the railroad. On a $4.7 billion investment, Berkshire is now ahead by about $600 million.

Mr. Buffett said the company’s only direct foreign currency exposure last year was in the Brazilian real, an investment he conceded might seem odd. “After all, during the past century, five versions of the Brazilian currency have, in effect, turned into confetti,” he said. But the real position earned $100 million in 2007, according to the report.

ELMAT: Elroy needs to learn that.



To: TobagoJack who wrote (30193)3/1/2008 10:47:05 AM
From: Maurice Winn  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 217561
 
TJ, I seem to have a faint memory of you saying something about these two companies a few years ago. They seem to be lining up, along with HOV, TOL etc as though they read your plan and have some time ago decided that it was an excellent idea.

Not wanting to be left out, politicians are getting in on the plan too, as planned, preordained, predicted, expected and inevitably, to make things better, or more likely worse.

Sometimes I wonder whether we really do have free will or are just doomed, or blessed, to follow preordained paths. For example, I couldn't help but think of you when I saw this, I suppose I could have chosen not to read it, but I was impelled by a mysterious force - a morbid and fearful curiosity about what turn of the drama is being prepared.

biz.yahoo.com

< Saturday March 1, 5:11 am ET
By Marcy Gordon, AP Business Writer
Some Analysts See Danger in Allowing Fannie, Freddie to Grow As Their Mortgage Losses Mount

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Loosening the regulatory reins around Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac gives them the freedom to play a bigger role in trying to stabilize a worsening housing market.

The danger, some analysts say, is that the government-sponsored mortgage titans will become saddled with too much financial risk.

ADVERTISEMENT
Fannie and Freddie this week reported fourth-quarter losses totaling $6.1 billion and predicted multibillion-dollar losses throughout 2008. Yet despite their financial troubles and the shakiness of the U.S. housing market, the government is making it easier for Fannie and Freddie to take on additional home-loan debt, something the companies have sought for months.

First they won the right -- as part of a bipartisan economic stimulus package -- to buy and guarantee mortgages above the traditional $417,000 limit. Then -- as a reward for filing timely financial statements following multibillion-dollar accounting scandals -- the companies were freed of a combined $1.5 trillion cap on their mortgage-investment holdings. Their regulator also raised the possibility of relaxing a mandated capital cushion Fannie and Freddie must keep in reserve.

While members of Congress and the Bush administration are hopeful these changes will enable Fannie and Freddie to help stem the housing downturn, some financial experts believe it is irresponsible to encourage the No. 1 and No. 2 mortgage finance companies to grow at this point in time.

Asked about the potential risks from being allowed to expand, the companies point to their mortgage portfolios currently being tens of billions below the now-expiring $746 billion limit. Without an easing of the risk capital level, they say, it is difficult for them to purchase as many mortgages as desirable to help the market.

"We have consistently shown that we operate in a very safe and prudent manner," said Freddie spokeswoman Sharon McHale. Fannie spokeswoman Amy Bonitatibus declined to comment.

Nobody is suggesting that Fannie and Freddie are on the verge of failure anytime soon. Some on Wall Street are even cheering the companies' efforts to gain market share at a time when smaller lenders are retreating.

That said, there is concern among some experts that they have grown too large and could endanger the financial system if they were to totter or fail.

"Neither of these organizations has enough capital to cover their risk, and they know it," said Christopher Whalen, senior vice president and managing director of Institutional Risk Analytics, a firm based in Torrance, Calif. "I'm concerned about solvency for these entities."

Congress created Fannie during the Depression and Freddie in 1970 to keep money flowing into the home-loan market by buying up mortgages and bundling them into securities for sale to investors worldwide -- thereby making home ownership affordable for low- and middle-income Americans.

Today the companies hold or guarantee around $4.9 trillion in home-loan debt, though under a 1992 law they are required to hold in reserve against risk only a fraction of what is mandated for commercial banks.

While the Treasury Department isn't obligated to assist Fannie or Freddie in a financial emergency, there is a perceived notion on Wall Street that the government would bail them out in the event of a collapse. The idea that they are "too big to fail" enables the two companies to borrow relatively cheaply on global markets by issuing hundreds of billions of dollars in top-rated ... continued...
>

Mqurice

PS: Edit... then I decide to click back upstream and while I was typing that, you were writing the word "ordained" as though there was a reverberation in the cosmic fabric. I'm not sure now which was preordained and which was ordained. But there is a lot of ordinance being ordered. Such as this $35bn air force airborne refueling system. Where are they wanting to do all that flying and what for? People seem to be planning all sorts of interesting things: biz.yahoo.com



To: TobagoJack who wrote (30193)3/1/2008 9:39:01 PM
From: Archie Meeties  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 217561
 
the only thing i encourage the coconut to learn from the italian culture is all things to do with pasta

No need for that, as pasta/noodles, started in China. -g-