Hide

FocusBar

Subscribe to Premium Member
Free 7-day Trial
All Articles and Columns »

Economic Improvement in 2012 Would Spell Big Comeback for Bruce Berkowitz: BAC, C, AIG

December 30, 2011 | About:
Holly LaFon

Holly LaFon

85 followers
Bruce Berkowitz’s Fairholme Fund, once considered the best mutual fund of the decade, will record more than a 32 percent loss for 2011. The preponderance of wounded financials in the fund contributed most to the poor performance, along with a few other stocks beset by some unfortunate events. Though Berkowitz has had a terrible year, his contrarian thesis may still prove extremely profitable if given more time, particularly as new, positive economic emerges.

To break even from his 2011 loss of 32 percent, Berkowitz would need to make a return of 47 percent in 2012. While a high aspiration, Berkowitz does not seem inferior to the task. In 2000, the fund’s first year, he made a 46.5% while the S&P lost 9.1%. Back then, the fund had only $650 million under management, but had the same value-oriented approach and concentrated portfolio. The only descriptor it might not use anymore is “risk-averse.” The next closest he came was in 2009, when he returned 39%.

There is also the chance that Berkowitz could exceed his break-even point and make a sizable profit. For instance, Berkowitz has paid for his 105,012,095 shares of Bank of America an average of $14 per share. At the $5.50 share price it trades for today, he has lost approximately $893 million, and his holding would now be worth $578 approximately. If the stock merely doubled, he would have almost made back his investment, with approximately $1 billion. The last time Bank of America traded for $11 was just May of 2011. In January, it traded for triple the current stock price.

The Financial Select Sector SPDR Fund fell 18.5% for the year, compared to the S&P 500 which ended the year flat. What could happen next year to promote an upswing? According to the FDIC’s third-quarter banking profile (posted on Fairholme’s website), net income rose to $35.3 billion in the third quarter, a 48.6 percent increase from the third quarter 2010, making it the highest level for industry profits since second quarter 2007. It was also the ninth consecutive quarter of earnings improvements as bank’s see lower expenses for loan-loss provisions, which declined 47 percent from third quarter 2010, and 2.6 percent less than the previous quarter. Loan losses declined for the fifth straight quarter, and 39% year over year.

Other key economic data could affect the banks: jobless claims are down, pending home sales are up and housing starts jumped a seasonally adjusted 9.3 percent from October to November, and 24.3 percent from November 2010.

Dick Bove, banking analyst for Rochdale Securities, said on CNBC on Thursday the big negative on bank stocks could be perception. “People got such a shock in 2007 and 2008 when the banks really let them down, that people simply don’t believe anything one can say about banks at the present time,” he said. “However, every one of the key elements that one would look at to determine whether the banking industry is coming back strongly, are all positive.”

However, Vikram Pandit, CEO of Citigroup (C), Berkowitz’s fourth-largest holding, said in at a conference in December that the bank still faced an extremely challenging environment. “It’s a combination of market uncertainties, sustained economic weakness in the developed economies, and as well, the most substantial regulatory changes we’ve seen in our lifetime,” he said. “Needless to say, when you put all these three trends together, the competitive landscape is going to likely be very significantly affected for a number of years in the future.”

In the same presentation, he also acknowledged that the bank has struggled to significantly increase revenue, which has increased from $105.8 billion in 2008, to $108 billion in 2008, to $111.5 billion in 2010. It also improved each quarter of the three quarts of the year so far. Material improvement in credit quality, however, has driven their growth in net income. Most of their losses have stemmed from their Local Consumer Lending segment, whose largest asset is their U.S. home mortgage portfolio. In response, they are reducing mortgage risk by selling current and delinquent mortgages, and allocating $10 billion of loan loss reserves against the portfolio.

Berkowitz said that he paid about $32 per share for AIG (AIG), his largest holding, while the book value now is around $30. Today, the stock trades for $23 per share.

AIG is still paying large amounts of money to the government for a bailout it received in September 2008. It made six major payments in 2011, for a total of approximately $45 billion. It owes a remaining $8.4 billion, and the government still owns about 77 percent of the company, which may take a while to sell.

Berkowitz commented on the government’s stake in AIG in a September 2011 interview on WealthTrack: “There is a 77% overhang, a lot of investors won’t go near the stock until that overhang disappears, waiting for the government to get out, thinking that the government will make a very bad deal… at some point, not knowing exactly how the governments going to get out, and what’s going to happen to those shares, I have to look at the balance sheet of the company, the earnings power of the company, what I believe the company’s capable of and growing and what they’re doing, what they’re saying, and put it all together, the good, the bad, the ugly, look at the price the price that the company’s trading and make a decision as to whether or not this institution can be permanently killed, in which case is no, and whether or not at that price there’s a sufficient margin or safety to not lose any money any hopefully make a reasonable return for shareholders.”

Nonetheless, AIG generated cash flow of $16.6 billion in 2010, and $679 million in the trailing twelve months. The company’s overall financial situation still shows weaknesses. It saw declining revenue of $77 billion in 2010 from $96 billion in 2009, although earnings increased to $7.8 billion in 2010 from a loss of $10.9 billion in 2009, showing a profit for the first time since the credit crisis. On November 3, AIG authorized a repurchase of $1 billion of common stock.

Bruce Berkowitz has never had a position that suffered permanent loss of capital, or owned shares of a company that went bankrupt. If these signs of new economic growth continue into 2012, his thesis on currently troubled equities could gain far more credence and returns.

Tickers in the article:


Download guru portfolio report (PDF format):

Bruce BerkowitzDownload Guru portfolio report
Bruce Berkowitz (Updated on 05/22/2013)

Track Gurus’ Stock Purchases Daily – Real Time Guru Picks

GuruFocus "Real Time Picks" reports the stock purchases and sales that Gurus have made within the prior 2 weeks. The report time lag can be as short as 3 days after the date of the transaction. This is just one of the features provided with GuruFocus Premium Membership.

Click Here to Try It Free!


Rating: 3.3/5 (40 votes)

Comments

vuasu
Vuasu - 1 year ago
Gurufocus, would you please elaborate on why you think AIG's BV is now only around 30?

"_Berkowitz said that he paid about $32 per share for AIG (AIG), his largest holding, while the book value now is around $30. Today, the stock trades for $23 per share."
fareastwarriors
Fareastwarriors - 1 year ago
Lots of Big assumptions there about the economy. Both Paulson and Berkowitz got burnt so badly.
PHILCIR
PHILCIR - 1 year ago
2012 -- the banks outperform apple. Wouldn't surprise me one bit.
rornsteen
Rornsteen - 1 year ago
i believe holding on to crap is very bad decision how well could berkowitz do if he had sold out of the junk he has and had invested in better companies holding on to aig c and bac is not smart berkowitz is dead meat even if his investments come back to his cost
stevenramsey
Stevenramsey - 1 year ago
The thesis for the banks is based on some very simple assumptions. Banks are critical to any capitalist system. These three mentioned, AIG, Citigroup, and Bank of America, all are huge to the cogwheel of America. If these three fail, many parts of the economy go BOOM. This sets the underlying floor. The other side of this double-edged sword is that, because they are so important to the economy, they rely on the economy's status.

They can, however, improve their lot (and are being forced to) by making better loans, work through the poor loans that got them in the ditch in the first place, and eventually, as earnings come back and improve, return the money to shareholders.

Being wrong for one year is hard for anyone, but Berkowitz has consumed a ton of information on the sector and talked with management, and he will base his decision on what he knows and not how people feel. Patience is crucial here. He may need to have it for awhile. But one year is not a long time to look wrong.

Remember, Buffett is in BAC, and his mistake rate is very low. I am in BAC too, but that's not as encouraging as the previous name-drop.
rornsteen
Rornsteen - 1 year ago
yes one yr is not a lifetime my point was that hed probably do better with other choices im not saying the 3 mentioned above wont make comeback but they are still tainted companies in my view id rather own a financial like blackrock your talking to wrong guy as ive always hated banks and bankers nothing the feds will do will make them honest maybe a little less dishonest

and dont forget berkowitzs dance with st joe a huge distraction

believe he flew too close to the sun

rornsrteen
cookie36
Cookie36 - 1 year ago
BB has always run a very concentrated portfolio. Needless to say, nobody questioned or complained as he was shooting the lights out and trouncing his benchmarks for a decade.

Those who stay true to their convictions may look foolish from time to time.

The time to "bet" on great managers is AFTER a period of under performance.

Does anybody truly believe that he has lost his ability to evaluate businesses?

Yes, he had an AWFUL year, but i expect BB bounces back and patient shareholders to be rewarded over time.
mysticdrew
Mysticdrew premium member - 1 year ago
Hi,

I'm not quite sure how the math works out for this statement:
"Berkowitz has paid for his 105,012,095 shares of Bank of America an average of $14 per share. At the $5.50 share price it trades for today, he has lost approximately $893 million, and his holding would now be worth $578 approximately. If the stock merely doubled, he would have almost made back his investment, with approximately $1 billion. The last time Bank of America traded for $11 was just May of 2011. In January, it traded for triple the current stock price. "

If his average price is $14, stock rebounding to $11 would still be a loss unless he continued to build up his position by averaging down.

Please leave your comment:


More Gurufocus Links

GuruFocus Affiliate Program: Earn up to $400 per referral. ( Learn More)
Get WordPress Plugins for easy affiliate links on Stock Tickers and Guru Names
Free 7-day Trial
FEEDBACK

This article has been successfully added into your Bookmark.

Members Only. Please Sign Up or Log In first.

Bookmark of this article has been deleted.