More on AIG Q4 earnings: Book value/share (excluding AOCI) of $57.87, +15.5% Y/Y. P&C...

This news story has 21 comments:

Register or Login to rate comments »

DeepValueLover Comments (5089)
 
BV compounding nicely...
21 Feb, 04:41 PM Reply Like

WisPokerGuy Comments (400)
 
This recovery story is still only just beginning.
21 Feb, 06:06 PM Reply Like

ahouseoforange Comments (225)
 
$50 by June for sure!
21 Feb, 08:08 PM Reply Like

philipmax Comments (106)
 
AIG is going to grow to its former glory. Only problem, the stock price will have to go to $1500/sh to reach this former glory.
21 Feb, 08:08 PM Reply Like

Ghosts of Kariela Comments (144)
 
Not really there were splits, compare market caps
21 Feb, 08:38 PM Reply Like

philipmax Comments (106)
 
This is how I calculated: stock before the meltdown in Sept 2007 ~$75. reverse split 1:20 , so multiply 75by 20=$1500. N'est pas?
21 Feb, 09:28 PM Reply Like

BlueVelvet Comments (34)
 
Philip, The number of shares had changed a lot.
21 Feb, 09:45 PM Reply Like

DeepValueLover Comments (5089)
 
So you think AIG must have a market cap of $2.46 trillion to reach its former glory?

I don't think your math is correct.
21 Feb, 09:49 PM Reply Like

philipmax Comments (106)
 
Sure! They were reduced to 1/20th of the outstanding shares before the reverse split. That is, unless there was leakage and the number of shares were increased by newly minted stock options exercises and gov't intervention. Oh! Ye! The market cap may very well had been in the trillions prior to the debacle.

Don't have figures in front of me, but I remember the outstanding shares were nearly 4B before the split and now should be in the 200+/- M.
21 Feb, 10:07 PM Reply Like

Kraken Comments (440)
 
AIG's market cap was never in the trillions. If the company was really worth a few trillion, that would mean they would have insured pretty much all the policies in the country. The collapse alone of an institution of that size would have sent our economy back to the stone ages. Check your numbers again.
21 Feb, 10:55 PM Reply Like

speedofov Comments (22)
 
Wasn't it a 10 to 1 reverse split, not 20 to 1?
22 Feb, 02:19 AM Reply Like

philipmax Comments (106)
 
1:20 reverse split. I know I took a hit on outstanding.

C had a 1:10 reverse split at about the same time.
22 Feb, 01:01 PM Reply Like

Michael Clark Comments (7800)
 
Very funny headline. AIG 'excluding the cost of Sandy'.....

But Sandy is one of the costs of doing business. Of course, all businesses to well if we exclude the costs of doing buisness...
22 Feb, 03:18 AM Reply Like

SA Editor Stephen Alpher Comments (493)
 
The point was that AIG made a profit in the Q even w/a $2B hit from Sandy. Pretty impressive, and probably why the stock is up 4%.
22 Feb, 06:41 AM Reply Like

Roke6362 Comments (13)
 
The point is with p&c carriers, they do separate "normal" loss activity from "cat" losses like Sandy. The majority of normal losses are paid for with AIG funds, whereas "cat" losses are usually paid for through some form of reinsurance arrangement. The total loss was much more than $2B, but the remainder of it (for AIG) was risk-transferred to one or more reinsurance carriers.
22 Feb, 11:39 AM Reply Like

DeepValueLover Comments (5089)
 
Historic storms are a RARE cost of doing business. If a Sandy came along annually then AIG and all other insurance companies would NOT insure against storms in the Northeast.
22 Feb, 12:48 PM Reply Like

B4ngZ00m Comment (1)
 
Wish I knew what it meant. Jeez, I hate being a newbie.
22 Feb, 06:23 AM Reply Like

campito Comments (8)
 
Combined ratio 125%???
22 Feb, 06:24 AM Reply Like

philipmax Comments (106)
 
It means that the payout was 25% greater than premium income. This is not a good thing for insurance companies. They would like the ratio to be 75%. That is; for every $1 in premiums they pay out $.75.
22 Feb, 02:00 PM Reply Like

SA Editor Stephen Alpher Comments (493)
 
Wasn't it expected to spike after Sandy?
22 Feb, 02:04 PM Reply Like

philipmax Comments (106)
 
Yes everyone indeed expected it, but, it could have been a lot worse.. That is why the stock is up even when they had an adverse ratio for the quarter.
22 Feb, 03:49 PM Reply Like