## Recent

% | \$
 Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

# Berkshire Hathaway Inc. Message Board

• ignoramus_ ignoramus_ Aug 6, 1998 12:42 PM Flag

## GEICO refuses to give BRK discounts

When I talked to GEICO about my car insurance, I mentioned to them that I was a BRK shareholder and requested a discount, but they refused to give it to me.

Did it happen to anyone else?

SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies

• Before or after taxes is not relevant. If, for
that newspaper example, the newspaper's actual P/E
(after-taxes) was 30 but Buffett's calculated "intrinsic" P/E
was 25, then Buffett would determine that the
newspaper was overvalued. If the actual P/E (after taxes)
was 20, then he'd determine the paper was
undervalued. Or you could use the pre-tax P/E values instead
to determine whether the paper was over or
under-valued. If the paper's actual pre-tax P/E was above 16,
then Buffett would determine the paper was overvalued;
if the paper's actual pre-tax P/E was below 16, then
Buffett would say undervalued. Whether you use the
after-tax or the pre-tax P/E is not relevant. Whichever you
use, you want to compare that to a company's actual
after-tax or before-tax P/E to determine whether the
company is over- or under-valued. That was the point of
that example.

Look at Coke. It's P/E is around
50. Its pre-tax P/E will, of course, be lower because
EPS will be higher. But whether you use the after-tax
P/E or the pre-tax P/E, you want to compare that to
Coke's "intrinsic" P/E (what the P/E SHOULD be), as
determined by discounting Coke's cash flow.

The
point of the newspaper example was not so much to say
anything about using after-tax vs. before-tax figures but
to show what the change in intrinsic value would be
if you change the assumptions used in the perpetual
annuity formula. If you say growth is 6% forever, then
intrinsic value = \$1 mil. / (0.10 - 0.06) = \$25 million.
\$25 mil. would be the appropriate amount to pay if g
= 6%. If the company's market capitalization is
higher than \$25 mil., then it's overvalued. On the other
hand, if there is no growth over time but earnings "bob
around" around an unchanging value, g = 0% and intrinsic
value = \$1 mil. / (0.10 - 0.00) = \$10 mil. In this
case, if the company's market cap. is \$15 mil., the
company is overvalued.

all the information available and it looks as the
Buffett pays such high P/E multiples because he figures
his discounting process before taxes. You can see
this in the 1991 Chairmens letter when he uses his
example of a newspapers who's earnings are growing at 6%
a year and discounted at 10% that a valuation of 25
times after tax and 16 times pretax earnings is made.
If anyone can confirm this please do! Thanks

Web_Brk

• I am considering buying some brkb shares for my
children's college fund (16 and 18 years away still). With
the long horizon, I am thinking that now looks like a
good time to get in. Do you folks think I should wait
a little bit to see if we are in the midst of a
correction, or do you think the decline is about
over?

Also, I realize this has probably been discussed in
previous posts, but I am interested to know what people
think will happen to brk when Buffet retires or dies.
Any input would be appreciated, even if it is just a
referral to previous post numbers where the topic was
discussed.

## Top Stories

217,750.00-2,249.91(-1.02%)Sep 23 4:00 PMEDT