Reggie Middleton: Ambac Insolvent

Well, anyone considering investing in Ambac (or others) should definitely look at the bear case. Reggie Middleton provides a super-bearish case saying that "Ambac is effectively insolvent". Take a look and form your own opinion. I haven't read it yet so I don't have anything to say.

For what it's worth, he is short Ambac and MBIA. Some people might think somone's report is nothing more than propaganda in light of that but I generally think the opposite. If anyone is putting their own money on their calls, I respect that...

The problem with Ambac for both shorts and longs is that this story may not end for at least 1 year. Some people think that the market will take a stand one way or another after the rating agencies release their rating evaluations but I suspect not. Every bad news is going to push the stock down and the occasional good news, along with short-covering, will push the price up. The stock has been moving almost 5% on a daily basis over the last few months. Daytrader heaven for sure...

Comments

  1. AnonymousDecember 1, 2007 at 8:19 AM

    That is an awfully prescient and realistic comment. You have earned my respect with that one. Take the time to go through the numbers in the downloadable pdf available in the blog post.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sivaram VDecember 1, 2007 at 10:30 AM

    That's not my report so if you are giving credit, it should go to Reggie Middleton.

    Don't say it's prescient because the game is not over until it is. Until these companies go bankrupt or their business models fall apart (sort of like how the dot-com business model from the 90's fell apart), awarding the prescient title is a bit premature :) After all, the market is filled tales of irrational pessmism which turned out to be completely wrong...



    I'm not sure I agree with the insolvency view. I will read this report soon but from his prior post on MBIA, I didn't find it convincing enough to change my view.

    As Accrued Interest has mentioned several times, the problem is that all the outcomes are EXTREMELY SENSITIVE to the numbers. A slight change in the default rate can mean the difference between the AAA tranche of a CDO taking a loss versus not taking any loss.

    To make matters worse, the underlying securities, such as CDOs, are not transparent so no public investor really knows exactly what's in them.

    Given the lack of transparency and sensitivity to the numbers, you can end up with all sort of scenarios, ranging from a total insolvency of a particular bond insurer to very little loss over the term of the bond insurance contract. This is why it doesn't surprise me when I hear extremely bearish arguments. You CAN make a superbearish case if you assume defaults, losses, recovery, etc are slightly worse than what the market expects.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular Posts

Thoughts on the stock market - March 2020

Image
Right now, DJIA has a P/E of 16.8 and forwand P/E of 15.1, whereas S&P 500 is at 20.1 with forward P/E of 15.8. Source: WSJ market Data If you ignore interest rates and inflation expectations--both of these influence valuations but depends on your macro call-- the market is not cheap. Long-term P/E is around 15. Trailing P/E is around 20% (Dow) to 40% (S&P500) higher than average. Forward P/E is in line with long term average but that assumes a strong V recovery. Consensus forecast is for profits to drop 1.2% in 2020. In 2008, it dropped 25.4% so current forecast is a very mild recession. Covid-19 coronavirus is not going to last more than a few months but these forecasts are still too rosy in my opinion. So I wouldn't rely on forward P/E. The richly valued (mostly tech or high quality) have not fallen much but the distressed ones have. So if you want to outperform in the long run, I think one’s choice right now is to: • Wait for market to fall another, say
✖ READ MORE >>>

Warren Buffett's Evolution and his Three Investment Styles

Image
A Young Warren Buffett In a comment to one of my posts , Mark Carter, who incidentally appears to have a  good blog worth checking out , asked: "Buffett Prime is 1970's to early 1990's" Could you elaborate? I have vaguely indicated how I view Warren Buffett in the past, but I thought I would detail my view of his investing behaviour. This is more of an opinion piece and many others would disagree with me (if you do, I'm curious to hear your thoughts). I don't follow Warren Buffett as closely as many value investors so I may get some facts wrong. My view is that Warren Buffett went through three different phases, with each consisting of different investment techniques. The overall investment theory remained the same—what people call value investing—but his execution, tactics, and strategy differs across the three phases. Some people may break up his career into additional periods but my feeling is that the three I will describe essentially capt
✖ READ MORE >>>

Charlie Munger: Stock market as a pari-mutuel betting system

The model I like to sort of simplify the notion of what goes o­n in a market for common stocks is the pari-mutuel system at the racetrack. If you stop to think about it, a pari-mutuel system is a market . Everybody goes there and bets and the odds change based o­n what's bet. That's what happens in the stock market. —Charlie Munger, "Art of Stock Picking" Although I don't share the same views on politics, I am probably closer to Charlie Munger than Warren Buffett when it comes to how we view the world. Warren Buffett is almost singly focused on business and investing, and is not very opinionated, indeed possibly not knowledgeable, in other areas. In contrast, I am closer to Charlie Munger in the sense that I have diverse interests—you can probably tell by the articles I link to or write about—and have an opinion on almost anything. There is one big difference though: I am not into the field of psychology quite like Munger. So it may be surprising to see me rarely
✖ READ MORE >>>