Member Info for Theanalyzer

If a business that loses 90% of its net asset value in two years is a good business what is your definition of a poor business? Solvency II has been coming for many years - it wasn't a shock to most companies. Plenty of other specialist insurers at Lloyd's coped with SII. It is difficult to deal with SII if you blow your capital due to poor management.

Costs of AIM listing were £450,000 not £10 million of value.

Are management really going to be able to turn £1 million of cash / market cap into £11 million of market via a deal which you require so you can 10 bag? This assumes a desperate seller of a valuable asset which can't get a deal closer to a fair value from another shell. Good luck with that hope.

Err EY are already the auditors even if they did disclaim their audit opinion on grounds that discussions on restructuring were not sufficiently advanced to sign off on going concern - they called that right based on AGM announcement.

DShox The three companies I mentioned are very well known in the run off insurance market. As regards the equity point my recollection was that I quoted shareholders equity from the published accounts. Based on your comments about new and renewal business I do wonder if you understand how binding authorities with property and casualty brokers actually works with respect to the underlying clients. Gable has been told to cease writing more insurance risk by its regulator. Therefore it has to give notice to the brokers not to bind more insurance contracts whether new or renewals of prior years hence it is run off. The notice period may be a couple of months.

New business - nope because as stated in RNS it has instructed its agents to cease writing new business and thus all its brokers clients will have found new insurers to underwrite their business already. A book of past business which it could try and offload? The usual buyers of insurance companies eg Enstar, R&Q, Catalina are smart and always get a haircut from company selling - Gable has almost no headroom to negotiate a haircut because it only has £3 million of equity. Low interest rates mean any buyers need to be comfortable on reserves. A strong track record in underwriting to attract new capital - not really because they have made underwriting losses. A strong brand - nope. A large assembled workforce - it's 21 people we not really. So where is the value that creates extra £10 million in value that some posters have argued for citing 10 p plus per share?

Can't rebut the arguments so go for snide abuse

Simple hardly any liquidity to sell out their shares and hoping for some time of Houdini escape.

Solvency II has been coming for many years as reflected in many insurers accounts so don't believe the Gable spin about a new harsh regime suddenly being implemented. What caused Gable's crisis was almost £30 million of losses in last two years reducing their capital base to around £3 million which means they can't meet existing Solvency I capital requirements let alone Solvency II which is down to poor management. As for being a profitable business the retained deficit in earnings demonstrates that Gable hasn't been profitable - it has declared profits in the past based on under reserving which went adjusted for demonstrate it was loss making.

I can't prove that I am not shorting GAH as you can't prove a negative.

I do have an interest but not a financial one!

No I am not a buyer of GAH because I think it will end badly. The CEO has been vastly overpaid in recent years for piling on growth at what now appears to be too low a price. I am not short either.

Share price divided by net tangible assets is the common metric to compare all different property and casualty insurers google it if you don't believe me it's on investopedia plus loads of other sites Another metric is COR but as GAH has made losses last two years not a helpful comparator You can compare the metrics and GAH was looking expensive compared to industry benchmark

Price to net asset value is a common metric for p@c insurers just like P/E ratios are applied across all types and sizes of company

I don't have a short on GAH market cap is too small to short and to many people willing to chase up illiquid small cap stocks. I am positive on some shares which I hold like DOM, DPP, BPM, TPT, HL, CSN, WINE etc. Lets see what happens at AGM and It would be nice if new holders make money and old shareholders recoup some of their losses but I will be surprised if that happens

It has nowhere near enough money to fill the capital hole so nothing of substance

Actually is 3,026,000 being net assets of the company per audited balance or 2.24p per share So company is already trading 1.45 times net assets which is high for an insurer especially a poor performer like Gable Hiscox which is a very strong performer trades at 2 times book value.

There are estimated claims and other liabilities for all but £3m of cash reserves

DPP have entered 7th city - Lublin per store map Store numbers total now 29 The rollout continues DPP is increasing stores numbers fast now up from 18 at end of 2014 which was 1 store down on same number at end of 2013

Company lost 80% of its net assets last year. I wonder what your definition of a weak company is?