Aviva Share Discussion Threads

[whatsup32] 24/5/2020 14:08

Cjac39, I really want to read and digest your posts but find it difficult reading given how it’s not presented in the same manner as wba1 and other posters.

Perhaps breaking your comments up into paragraphs may help.

Or maybe it’s just my lack of reading skills. Not meant to offend as I know you have valuable knowledge that you are passing on to us.

[wba1] 24/5/2020 12:14

cjac39;
agree with you, although I am sure you (the same as me) regard the tangible NAV as being almost irrelevant given that any market value of the parts is much greater. I have heard it suggested that market values have plummeted, but that seems to ignore being able to benchmark the value of parts of Aviva against similar competitors (currently reduced) market cap (such as DL and L&G). Even some recent deals in unrelated sectors demonstrate that market values, whilst reduced, remain robust. I was interested to see the Marstons/Carlberg JV (in a sector decimated by lockdown) which still managed to value the Marstons brewing arm at 13x ebitda (and more than the market cap of the whole of Marstons by some distance!).

My main concern at the moment is the building media noise about crooked insurers, as though all are the same, and implying that the politicians should be forcing insurer payouts where no cover exists. I saw only yesterday a Mail story about Lloyds Syndicate DTW1991. It is unfortunate that the ridiculous twisting of a small number of insurers (such as this mob and Hiscox) to escape paying valid claims is creating risk for the whole industry. This will not cause Aviva (or any major insurer) to go pop as you put it, but it could continue to affect sector valuation for some time.

As for broker notes and the like. I always thought the investment bank sector was summed up by the in house nickname of the old Allianz arm, Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein - which was known as Dreadful Kokesnort Wassermatter.

On the matter of political posts. I promise not to start such a discussion, but retain the right to correct statements by others who choose to divert this thread into such matters.

[spud] 24/5/2020 12:12

Indeed. There’s always a hidden agenda in broker notes. Basically it’s legitimate Market manipulation in order to benefit their own Book.

By all means acknowledge them, but remember to always read between the lines...

spud

[cjac39] 24/5/2020 11:42

its amazing the ranges you get in these broker notes and they all make wild assumptions about whats going to happen with great certainty on things they have limited ability to predict. i read the recent db note and its better than most. however to arrive at 370p (which is basically a discount to tangible nav estimated at year end 2020 as 411p) they've also baked in some pretty chunky losses in 2020. my central thesis to owning the insurance stocks as opposed to trying to predict something i cant is that they will survive all but the most ridiculous meltdown scenario in credit. even if you add together all the defaults from 1920/30 and 2007/8/9 and push down property etc you don't get close to breaking the insurers. (JRP is bit of a standout because retail property prices could sink them but actually forcing them to break up and close to nb would be better for shareholders but that's another story). AV is a case in point: they've pushed down property prices 15% assumed greater downgrades etc and they still hold 75%+ capital OVER AN ALREADY RIDICULOUS SCR capital requirement. sure if every bond they own gets downgraded and defaults they go pop but that wont happen. we are talking about the largest companies in the world like Astra Zeneca, Unilver, HSBC, etc etc going pop. ain't going to happen. and hence why screaming about huge hidden losses in their matching adjustment portfolios is a nonsense. whether its worth 300 350 or closer to their tangible balance sheet value of 420 rising to 500 in a few years who knows but its not worth 236p today. another wave is looking less likely too in my personal view which would accelerate greatly the release of this value but that's a personal view disagreed by many.

[waterloo01] 24/5/2020 10:34

Be prepared

Aviva chief executive Maurice Tulloch, working out of Canada, should have done enough with the insurer’s trading update to calm nerves about company prospects and his own.

The Covid-19 hit of £160million is minor in relation to Aviva’s solvency ratio of 182 per cent at the end of March.

General insurance outcomes are still uncertain but Aviva appears confident it can weather the storm of legal challenge to business interruption claims.

The insurer’s investment portfolio looks solid with minimal default risks so far.

In contrast to HMG, the insurer saw the virus coming in January and rapidly hunkered down.

Laptops were dished out to staff, dividends suspended and pay and bonuses slashed. Until the end of March, life, savings and general insurance were on the up. Eh... as they say in Canada.

[jomac2412] 24/5/2020 10:26

Deutsche also issued a broker note Friday , £1.31 above Cigti's , kinda shows how useless Broker notes are -

Aviva: Deutsche Bank reiterates hold with a target price of 370p.

[spud] 24/5/2020 10:10

Exactly! No more political diversions please!spud

[dr biotech] 24/5/2020 10:06

Friday broker round up. I don’t pay a lot of attention to brokers but I guess their opinion is as valid as any

Aviva : Citigroup cuts price target to 239p from 266p


As with the above..This thread has recently been one of the better ones to read, there are plenty that I never look at any more (ie Barcs/Lloy) as they have been ruined by off topic spam. Let’s keep it on message.

[wba1] 24/5/2020 10:03

Not my man at all. You are putting words into my mouth to defend your own indefensible comment. I actually rate Obama as an inferior President to both Reagan and Clinton (although several notches above Dubya) - and all of those as inferior to Nixon, who opened up China and extricated from Vietnam. I did not choose to open a debate about Trump and Obama, but to suggest a President who achieved something even Clinton could not get through as 'short on action' is indeed ludicrous. By all means complain about that policy (if you believe health care is unimportant), but at least acknowledge the action it required.

It is too early to evaluate Trump, and current judgement is largely based on his personality (which I find repellent). But many Presidents have been personally obnoxious and the question, with hindsight, will be whether he achieved anything. This is sometimes less than obvious at the time. A good example was Dubya replacing Rehnquist with Roberts, believing Roberts to be an extreme conservative. Turns out that as Chief Justice he sees keeping the court together as more important than Presidential politics.

[spud] 24/5/2020 09:21

Ludicrous? Ok, I get it. He's obviously your man, fair enough but please let's not ruin this board with political mudslinging criticisms of fellow contributors.spud

[wba1] 24/5/2020 09:03

Obama short on action? Achieved the health care reform that Presidents going back 50 years had failed to get enacted and that is currently the only hope for many Americans.

By all means have political views guys (and mine are not one sided - I rate Nixon one of the better Presidents) but try not to be so parochial that you sound ludicrous.

[ianood] 23/5/2020 14:40

Here, here...

[spud] 23/5/2020 09:36

Aside from Obama who was long on words and short on actions...spud

[careful] 23/5/2020 07:38

the Chinese situation is bad for pru.
strong in Asia.

Trump, the mad hatter, thinks he will be re-elected by provoking the Chinese.
So the Chinese are starting to get tough, nothing to lose.

History will show Trump to be the worst ever American president.

[mountpleasant] 23/5/2020 06:55

What happened with PRU.... down nearly 10%

[wba1] 22/5/2020 22:12

The French court seems to be separating the administrative decision from the cause of that decision (the pandemic). That is very unlikely to happen in the UK where wordings are generally clear in making a claim contingent on the cause. I do not have the knowledge of French law to know whether this is a reasonable interpretation in their case or whether it is one of those all too common cases of a lower French court ignoring case law and leaving it to be sorted on appeal.

But I should add that even in the UK there can be strange decisions. In the 90s I was on the wrong end of the House of Lords decision which ended the principle of the discount rate being set on the assumption that a lump sum settlement would be invested in a portfolio with a range of risk. After winning unanimously in the Court of Appeal we lost unanimously in the House of Lords resulting in settlements which assume no investment risk at all. But that case did not hinge on policy wordings.....

[eurofox] 22/5/2020 21:10

AXA said it was in the process of compensating those 200.

“The vast majority of AXA France contracts for catering professionals provide that a generalized event like the one we are experiencing today cannot bring into play the contractual guarantees,” AXA said in an emailed statement.

[whatsup32] 22/5/2020 20:53

Think we may get hit tomorrow.

[eurofox] 22/5/2020 16:42

... or a fall today on high volume?

[eurofox] 22/5/2020 12:59

now the rise today is on high volume

[gary1966] 22/5/2020 12:45

Personally have taken my Aviva trading money over to GOG in the short term. 90%+ of revenues contracted and trading on a P/E of 7. Fall overdone today but time will tell if it was the right move.

[eurofox] 22/5/2020 11:55

well worth pitching in on all those lows

[whatsup32] 22/5/2020 11:33

Times had a neutral/slightly positive article on Aviva today.

[eurofox] 22/5/2020 11:27

true, banks are overvalued