The loses are from the consolidated income statement from all the subsidiaries. Most of the subsidiaries are separate companies with separate regulation and separate assets. They don't co-mingle. The corporate entity does not have to eat the losses from those companies - the subsidiaries pay their losses from their capital. The bulk of the red ink is from the mortgage insurance division, which is in runoff.
If a subsidiary is profitable it funnels dividends to the holding company ORI. The holding company can then pay out the dividends to shareholders. They don't have to deduct the losses from other subsidiaries in order to pay the dividend. The general insurance division was profitable in the middle of the financial crisis. ORI was able to pay the dividend and increase it annually because of that. The losses in the other 2 major divisions did not affect that.
Granted, if you are going to own a subsidiary, it's better that it be profitable than to be losing money. If the mortgage insurance division hadn't collapsed the company would be increasing the dividend rapidly instead of .01 per year. ORI made the decision to put the MI division into runoff and to put no more capital into it. A wise decision imo.
Also, some corporate debt had covenants that if any of the subsidiaries went into bankruptcy, the debt could be called. That probably affected a lot of institutional investors. They didn't want to take a chance that that might happen with the mortgage insurance division. IMO the fear was way overblown - the company had most of the money already and could have easily re-financed the remainder on good terms. If it had happened, or happens now, the kneejerk selling would be a gift buying opportunity. Likewise with negative outcome on a lawsuit with BAC.