Jump to content

HALL - Hallmark Financial Services, Inc.


mpauls

Recommended Posts

What makes this stock a better value than Harry Long's RLI?

 

While I have no opinion on which is better, this is a super interesting company to follow. The CEO of HALL is kind of a less public version of Sardar Biglari...

 

You should do some research on Mark Schwartz. Given your new found interest in Biglari, I think you would like to read up on him. The story behind Pizza Inn alone, is fascinating. :)

 

As a strange corollary, the former CEO of Pizza Inn (Tim Taft) was probably in the running for the top slot at SNS, just after Sardar took over.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ragnar - thanks for the heads up - I will research this.

 

I guess my question still outstanding for Mpauls is why he/her isn't sharing his better ideas? 

 

For the record, I share what I own.  If you are scared to list stocks you are invested in because you are a fiduciary, use an alias!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like a friend that says "I can set you up with this girl, she's really nice".  "I wouldn't date her, but she's got a great personality".

 

I don't want this person as my matchmaker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed...for those of us who play in small caps, the internet is a big place and it will just suck up the margin of safety.

 

-O

I guess my question still outstanding for Mpauls is why he/her isn't sharing his better ideas?

 

Because some of us make a living by doing this, so some sharing is not appropriate.  Let it drop. 

 

Matt has shared plenty of valuable ideas.

 

Ben

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Sounds like a friend that says "I can set you up with this girl, she's really nice".  "I wouldn't date her, but she's got a great personality".

 

I don't want this person as my matchmaker.

 

That's pretty damn funny!  Although, I think Mpauls is at least paying for the dinner.  Cheers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 6 months later...

HALL has taken a pasting in the last two days after posting ugly results.

 

The adverse prior year development and the losses from the winter storms contributed 25.8% to the 121.6% consolidated combined ratio for the quarter.

 

Wow.

 

They are now selling for (basically) .95 of tangible book... By comparison, it doesn't seem like the cheapest thing out there; if there wasn't a well known value guy at the helm, I wonder how much lower it would be? Oddly, it still has a pretty high short ratio (though, that may change with the next reporting in light of the drop?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They made an unforced error by trying to repeat the success they have long had in non-standard auto in TX.  Begining in 2008 they expanded into FLA and it has been a disaster because of rampant fraud.  Personal injury claims in FLA (a no-fault state) are completely out of control as claims and payouts have doubled in the last three years.  The trial lawyers have successfully stopped the most recent attempt to bring the system back into control. 

 

It looks like HALL is doing a 180 and getting out of FLA.  The experience has been so bad, though that it wouldn't surprise me to see a management change.  Anyone who underprices policies by 100%-200% has no underwriting credibility, despite what historically has been a pretty good record for the firm overall.

 

What may be an upside catalyst is that two funds (associated with the controling shareholder) that own 16% of outstanding shares are set to mature sometime this year and have filed to sell their HALL shares.  Management has indicated that there is nothing to keep them from repurchasing all 16%.  With shares currently at 65% of BV, I see about a 6.5% accretion to BV if they buy them all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

What may be an upside catalyst is that two funds (associated with the controling shareholder) that own 16% of outstanding shares are set to mature sometime this year and have filed to sell their HALL shares.  Management has indicated that there is nothing to keep them from repurchasing all 16%.  With shares currently at 65% of BV, I see about a 6.5% accretion to BV if they buy them all.

 

care to give some more info on this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

care to give some more info on this?

 

Mark Schwarz, Chairman and CEO, controls a number of funds under the Newcastle name, which together own 34% of outstanding shares.  Two of these funds, Newcastle Special Opportunities Fund I, and Newcastle Special Opportunities Fund II were originally set with a hard maturity date sometime in 2011.  Each of these funds own 8% of outstanding shares of HALL.  Schwarz is deemed the beneficial owner and therfore a SEC S-3 filing is required and was made in Jan 2011.  I listened to Schwarz at a recent insurance conference and he made it clear that the shares would not be liquidated in the public market, but rather through an orderly sale at a privately negotiated price.  This sale can be made to a third party or to Hallmark itself as a share repurchase, or a combination of both.   I don't have any information on the exact timing.  I confirmed with management at the conference that they have no restriction to making a repurchase, but as you would expect, no other indication was given as to whether they will be the buyer or not.  We will find out when the transaction is complete with a supplemental prospectus sometime in the future.

 

Schwarz used the word 'cheap' in a public setting to describe the shares when they were at 73% of BV in February ($8.5 vs BV of $11.70).  Today they closed at 64% of BV ($7.05 vs. BV of $11.10).    Given that HALL management has enough cash to make the $23mm purchase and that they hold all the cards with respect to the current state of reserves, they are in the best position to buy.  I have no idea what will happen but their degree of participation in the purchase will speak volumes about their confidence in the business going forward.

 

Here is the S-3 filing:

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/819913/000114420411002118/v208011_s3.htm

 

Thats all I can add at the moment, if something else comes to mind I'll post it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Schwarz used the word 'cheap' in a public setting to describe the shares when they were at 73% of BV in February ($8.5 vs BV of $11.70).  Today they closed at 64% of BV ($7.05 vs. BV of $11.10).    Given that HALL management has enough cash to make the $23mm purchase and that they hold all the cards with respect to the current state of reserves, they are in the best position to buy.  I have no idea what will happen but their degree of participation in the purchase will speak volumes about their confidence in the business going forward.

Like Ragnar said, tangible book value is 0.95, as opposed to the 0.64 figure that you're quoting. Like I said when this thread was created, underwriting performance is awful, reserving is as bad (still is). Why should anyone pay close to book value for a turd, when only a few months ago they could have bought a gem (SUR) for even less?

 

Honestly, this looks like a stock to avoid until they actually decide to run this company as an insurance operation, as opposed to a hedge fund.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Schwarz used the word 'cheap' in a public setting to describe the shares when they were at 73% of BV in February ($8.5 vs BV of $11.70).  Today they closed at 64% of BV ($7.05 vs. BV of $11.10).    Given that HALL management has enough cash to make the $23mm purchase and that they hold all the cards with respect to the current state of reserves, they are in the best position to buy.  I have no idea what will happen but their degree of participation in the purchase will speak volumes about their confidence in the business going forward.

Like Ragnar said, tangible book value is 0.95, as opposed to the 0.64 figure that you're quoting. Like I said when this thread was created, underwriting performance is awful, reserving is as bad (still is). Why should anyone pay close to book value for a turd, when only a few months ago they could have bought a gem (SUR) for even less?

 

Honestly, this looks like a stock to avoid until they actually decide to run this company as an insurance operation, as opposed to a hedge fund.

 

SUR and HALL are in different businesses with different loss expectations but also different growth expectations. That's a general statement rather than specific to this particular company.

 

It's interesting that the NPW in personal lines increased despite the statement that unprofitable agent relationships were discontinued. Instead smaller premiums written, the expense ratio rose, apparently due to more claims staff. I wonder about the details behind "complexity related to Florida personal injury protection claims."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like Ragnar said, tangible book value is 0.95, as opposed to the 0.64 figure that you're quoting.

 

I wasn't quoting to TBV, I was quoting to the BV number expressed in the earnings release.  Either way, the point I was making was that if the CEO liked it in February, he should like it even more today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...