dwy000 Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 Great summary Orchard. Thanks for posting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gfp Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 Thanks for the notes. Can somebody tell me what HRG is doing with Fidelity Guarantee? Is it being spun off, sold, or what? What did they decide? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Txvestor Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 Thanks for the notes. Can somebody tell me what HRG is doing with Fidelity Guarantee? Is it being spun off, sold, or what? What did they decide? It is being sold to Anbang insurance co. out of China for 1.6B. I beleive this to be a very decent price for a life insurance company, at above book value in a low return environment. I think it is going through the approvals process and looks like they expect the sale to close later this year. Interesting that the arbitrage spread has increased quite dramatically over the past month or so. I have no insight into whether this is rational or not, given the news this oast week, but just note it to be almost $4 or roughly 17% based on current FGL quote and the $26.8 agreed price. I believe that since LUK/Steinberg became more active in the operations of the HRG, they have been looking to derisk the company, and planning to sell off FGL as part of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scorpioncapital Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 http://www.scmp.com/business/companies/article/1962372/anbang-prepares-second-bid-buy-us-insurer-fidelity-guaranty-life "Foreign media reported on Wednesday that Anbang was to put on hold its purchase of Fidelity & Guaranty Life after the New York finance regulator sought more detailed information about the Chinese company’s funding and shareholder structure." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gfp Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 Thanks Txvestor & scorpioncapital Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foreign Tuffett Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 Thanks Txvestor & scorpioncapital Seconded. You have both done this board's many LUK watchers a great service by posting your notes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrB Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 Re National Beef Weekly Beef Production seems to be picking up. Pricing still anemic https://www.ams.usda.gov/mnreports/lswwcbs.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arcticfox Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 Would be interested to hear feedback on a question for LUK management. I have read in the annual meeting notes and as demonstrated by their actions, they haven't bought back stock to keep cash and please the rating agencies. That makes sense to me, however why wouldn't they sell their HRG position at a profit, which has one good asset SPB and some mediocre assets and buy back stock with those proceeds. I find it a bit hard to believe they like HRG stock better than their own at these prices, unless they expect to hold or outright own Spectrum Brands for 5-10 plus years. Any thoughts or feedback on this or other capital allocation ideas would be appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muscleman Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 I started looking at LUK but can't figure out what to like about it. JEFF is in financial services and they are trying to get to double digit returns, which means they are not yet there and the optimistic return on equity is 10-15% if they do get there. JEFF is about 40% of LUK based on tangible equity. The remaining business are mostly capital intensive commodity businesses. Trading below tangible book along would not be a good reason to long. Also note that due to methods of consolidation accounting, the tangible book on SEC filing would be overstated, though not a big difference. • National Beef, 79% (beef processing); • HRG, 23% (diversified holding company); • Vitesse Energy, 96% (oil and gas exploration and development); • Juneau Energy, 98% (oil and gas exploration and development); • Garcadia, about 75% (automobile dealerships); • Linkem, 56% fully-diluted (42% voting) (fixed wireless broadband services); • Conwed Plastics, 100% (manufacturing); • Golden Queen, 35% (a gold and silver mining project); and • Idaho Timber, 100% (manufacturing) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebdem Posted June 26, 2016 Share Posted June 26, 2016 There are good reviews on seeking alpha: http://seekingalpha.com/symbol/LUK To put it short: LUK is more or less a (value) play on the quality of the new management. Might work... I see your point. If you look deeply, there is more quality for a comparable price in the market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinwalt Posted June 26, 2016 Share Posted June 26, 2016 Mecham likes it... over 12% of his portfolio + Handler bought a ton around 14-15 (25m I think) Tracking Allan Mecham's Arlington Value Capital Portfolio - Q1 2016 Update http://seekingalpha.com/article/3977840 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sae85400 Posted June 27, 2016 Share Posted June 27, 2016 $LUK is skating by on old management, new management has done nothing to inspire they are anywhere near the caliber of Cumming or Steinberg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottHall Posted June 27, 2016 Share Posted June 27, 2016 I started looking at LUK but can't figure out what to like about it. JEFF is in financial services and they are trying to get to double digit returns, which means they are not yet there and the optimistic return on equity is 10-15% if they do get there. JEFF is about 40% of LUK based on tangible equity. The remaining business are mostly capital intensive commodity businesses. Trading below tangible book along would not be a good reason to long. Also note that due to methods of consolidation accounting, the tangible book on SEC filing would be overstated, though not a big difference. • National Beef, 79% (beef processing); • HRG, 23% (diversified holding company); • Vitesse Energy, 96% (oil and gas exploration and development); • Juneau Energy, 98% (oil and gas exploration and development); • Garcadia, about 75% (automobile dealerships); • Linkem, 56% fully-diluted (42% voting) (fixed wireless broadband services); • Conwed Plastics, 100% (manufacturing); • Golden Queen, 35% (a gold and silver mining project); and • Idaho Timber, 100% (manufacturing) Why would it be overstated? There are three separate line items for noncontrolling interests and preferred shares. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukvalueinvestment Posted August 5, 2016 Share Posted August 5, 2016 Decent results. Buyback. Looks good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junto Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 For those interested: http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/08/10/business/dealbook/jefferies-free-of-the-restraints-of-bigger-banks-is-emboldened.html?_r=0&referer= Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petec Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 $LUK is skating by on old management, new management has done nothing to inspire they are anywhere near the caliber of Cumming or Steinberg I believe precisely the opposite. I found Cumming and Steinberg fairly uninspiring for their last decade and I believe they found it increasingly hard to work together. Handler and Friedman, by contrast, both have exceptional individual records going back to the mid-80's, and did a great gob working together to build Jefferies over the last 15 years. They have also done a good, maybe great job getting rid of some of the dross at Leucadia, laying out the future strategy, and making some new investments (FXCM). I think they've earned some faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ballinvarosig Investors Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 $LUK is skating by on old management, new management has done nothing to inspire they are anywhere near the caliber of Cumming or Steinberg I believe precisely the opposite. I found Cumming and Steinberg fairly uninspiring for their last decade and I believe they found it increasingly hard to work together. Handler and Friedman, by contrast, both have exceptional individual records going back to the mid-80's, and did a great gob working together to build Jefferies over the last 15 years. They have also done a good, maybe great job getting rid of some of the dross at Leucadia, laying out the future strategy, and making some new investments (FXCM). I think they've earned some faith. Agreed. Cumming and Steinberg wanted out, and to get out they did a deal that stank for shareholders and left the company lobsided towards Jefferies. Current management aren't to blame, they inherited a whole pile of cyclical businesses at the bottom of the market. If they were to go to market to get rid of National Beef or some of their exploration companies, any offers are likely to be derisory given the current market. So for now, they are stuck with what they have. I don't know how long the bear market for Leucadia's businesses will last, but at a guess, I reckon if you bought and held this for 5 years, you would get a very nice return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petec Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 I'm not so sure I think the deal stank. Both C & S remain significant shareholders and the deal allied LUK's capital with JEF's deal flow. It *is* unfortunate that JEF has been in a cyclical slump since the deal that shows no signs of ending. But personally I disliked the macro/commodity bent of LUK in the late 2000's and I thought National Beef was silly, so I far prefer the current mindset and deals. It's a bit harsh of the WSJ to say that performance has tanked since the deal when the stock price peaked at over $40 several years before the deal! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foreign Tuffett Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 Leucadia-backed Folger Hill has not bee a success thus far. http://www.businessinsider.com/folger-hill-hedge-fund-stumbles-after-pedigreed-start-2016-8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhoIsWarren Posted September 12, 2016 Share Posted September 12, 2016 Yah, looks like a struggle there. Leucadia management had always presented this venture as one that had limited downside and lots of upside. Although LUK invested c.$500m (and maybe a follow-on $400?), there were hedges put in place to protect that capital. Therefore the downside was really funding operating costs - let's say $20m over a couple of years. Fund performance and momentum in raising capital was key to the success of the project. If the article is accurate, I would seem likely that management will close Folger Hill soon, unless fortunes reverse quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foreign Tuffett Posted September 20, 2016 Share Posted September 20, 2016 More detail on Folger Hill's move into Asian markets. Go east young man! http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-20/kumin-s-folger-hill-hedge-fund-said-to-hire-first-asia-managers Does anyone have any general thoughts on LUK's valuation at the current price? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benhacker Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 Does anyone have any general thoughts on LUK's valuation at the current price? My view on valuation hasn't change(d) much recently. I think a higher valuation than most had been assuming for Nat Beef is probably much more real given results. LAM is not doing well, and JEF continues to suck. Not sure if I have much to add outside of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest roark33 Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 Ben--I enjoy your honest assessment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KinAlberta Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 I sold my short term position in it yesterday to take a small profit. In the 1990s I feel it held real promise but in the 2000s it was holding like iron ore and the like that drove up valuations (the luck of cheap optionality coinciding with a China driven commodity boom). Today I just don't see much in Leucadia that makes me want to hold it long term, though the future credit market could eventually really do interesting things with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
undervalued Posted September 22, 2016 Share Posted September 22, 2016 http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/22/china-to-reopen-beef-market-to-american-producers-after-13-years.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now