Sun, Jan 25, 2015, 7:57 AM EST - U.S. Markets closed


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

Federated National Holding Company Message Board

s12stocks 7 posts  |  Last Activity: Nov 1, 2014 10:45 PM Member since: Aug 19, 2010
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to


    by huahua777 Oct 31, 2014 8:52 PM
    s12stocks s12stocks Nov 1, 2014 10:45 PM Flag

    FNHC does not actively pursue policies from Citizens like other companies do. It's possible that former Citizens customers are now FNHC customers just because some wanted to switch carriers or FNHC offers a lower rate. But that's not what we're talking about. The business model of other companies involve active pursuit of Citizens for revenue growth. FNHC is not doing that.

    I don't know what analysts projections you're talking about that we missed "by quite a bit". Admittedly, I don't pay much attention to that sort of thing, so if you have a link, that would be helpful.
    I have a link.
    The title of this link is:
    "Federated National beats 3Q profit forecasts"

    It goes on to say::
    The results topped Wall Street expectations. The average estimate of analysts surveyed by Zacks Investment Research was for earnings of 31 cents per share.

    By my calculation 56 cents is an earnings beat over 31 cents of 81%.
    So according to this article FNHC beat the estimates by 81%. Again, I don't put much weight into analysts, but if you have an article that says they missed by quite a bit and this article says they beat by 81%, that is a quite a discrepancy and we should all know about it.

    As for HCI, UVE, and UIHC, you should probably do some more research. I'm not a big fan - especially of HCI. Just because a stock price goes up doesn't mean you're right, and just because it goes down, doesn't mean you're wrong. I know that HCI's stock price is having an incredible run. But I think FNHC is a far better quality company.

  • Reply to


    by huahua777 Oct 31, 2014 8:52 PM
    s12stocks s12stocks Oct 31, 2014 10:04 PM Flag

    I don't understand. What is weak? The quarter was good, and business is still growing at the same rate, and a new income stream will be coming from Monarch which will boost business even more in the coming quarters.
    Also, FNHC doesn't take any business from Citizens.

  • s12stocks s12stocks Oct 21, 2014 8:38 PM Flag

    Yes, I'm holding. I still haven't sold any of my shares. Glad to see the new high and waiting for more to come.

  • Price was over $26 on the day of the conference call. Then takes a nose dive straight down to ~$19.50 where coincidentally they decide to do the offering. Pretty much at the lowest price possible. Then beginning the next day all the way until now, heads right back up. $25.50 as I type this. I really have no clue why anyone would defend the execution of that offering. Just look at the numbers. This company is worth far more than the $25 it's trading at now and we gave away shares at $19.50.

  • Reply to

    Horrible Secondary offering

    by s12stocks Aug 1, 2014 9:54 AM
    s12stocks s12stocks Aug 6, 2014 10:04 PM Flag

    ok, obviously you are looking at this vastly differently than how I value stocks, which is as a die hard value investor. I disagree with most of your points, and think your logic is inconsistent in some cases. Only a few weeks ago you were talking about how this company would show a loss in q2 which I totally disagreed with, and they reported one of the highest if not the highest quarterly profit ever in the history of the company.
    Now you are singing the praises of $19.50 being a great price.
    It's bewildering to me how you value the company, but that's irrelevant. I have my own method of valuation which I have been using for years. I am very comfortable with it and will share my thoughts on this board to help out anyone willing to listen.
    I have been very satisfied with the performance of management and have agreed with almost everything they've done in the past 5 years.
    I raise the concern of being diluted by 70% between the last 2 offerings. I realize that to some people a greater number of shares outstanding is of little concern, but to me as a value investor, it is of great concern especially when done at questionable prices.
    I reiterate that the prices of both these offerings are undervalued.
    I wrote about the first offering last year and stated that I strongly disagreed with it. The price at the time was $10.75 and it was totally and utterly ridiculously underpriced. In the 8 months following, the stock price has done nothing go head up, and even hit prices of $25/$26. So how did that work out for us? In my opinion, horribly. Why in the world would I want FNHC to sell shares at $10.75? In short I wouldn't.
    I'm saying NOW, that I absolutely wouldn't want FNHC to sell shares at $19.50 which is what they just did.
    If anyone disagrees, I am open minded and willing to listen. All I ask is that the arguments make logical sense for a healthy discussion

    You can make your own judgements. I'm very comfortable with mine- $19.50 is NOT a good price.

  • Reply to

    Horrible Secondary offering

    by s12stocks Aug 1, 2014 9:54 AM
    s12stocks s12stocks Aug 4, 2014 11:35 AM Flag

    I question why "...they didn't have a choice". Where did you get this information.
    I also wonder why $19.50 - pretty much the lowest price possible is reasonable. I also wonder why "..they had to wait for earnings to come out". Are secondary offerings tied to earnings release dates?
    I also wonder why "...they really can't wait since we're in hurricane season". It is quite an assumption that a hurricane will send the price lower than $19.50. And by that logic, if you were so worried about hurricanes, why not do the offering in May, before hurricane season?
    I also wonder why "...if they waited a few more weeks they could've gotten $21 or $21.5/share". Again that is quite an assumption. Why not assume they could have gotten $24 or $26 or $30? Nobody has a crystal ball so I'd argue that any of those numbers are equally as likely, especially given that it's been only days after and the price has already risen above your hypothetical price of $21.50. . If they got $26, they'd have 500,000 fewer shares.. very significant.

    Timing the market is not a game I want management to be engaged in. However, I stand very strongly behind my statement that this is a horrible secondary offering. That's all I'm saying. The first offering was ridiculously undervalued and I was very strongly opposed to it when they announced it. This offering at $19.50 is also undervalued and whether due to bad luck or whatever, they got pretty much the worst price you could get. I feel very comfortable making that statement.
    As a result of these two offerings we've been diluted by 70%. Meaning you and I as shareholders own a 70% smaller piece of the pie than what we originally bought. Now, some of this may be a necessary evil, but it could've been done better. I don't like it when people take away my pie and then don't do it in an efficient way. We as shareholders should be very cognizant of this. In this case,we own a valuable asset and great care should be taken in that ownership

  • I know they didn't but, it's as if they waited for the price that brings maximum dilution. Why $19.50? That's a foolish price to sell at. I'm not happy about this price at all. As an owner of this stock since early 2010, this is the most unhappy I've been with this company. The only other time was the other stock offering, where we just basically gave away the shares for a tiny fraction of their value. Even when the company was losing money quarter after quarter, I had no problem with that.
    I'm not saying I'm selling, but this is the first time it's casually crossed my mind. A few more moves like this, and I seriously might.
    This stock offering at this price was a mistake.

27.59-0.18(-0.65%)Jan 23 3:59 PMEST

Trending Tickers

Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.