Originally Posted by
ValueNZ
Thanks.
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong but one fairly significant disadvantage I see to Oceania's float is that it is relatively capital intensive. For OCA to grow it's float they need to develop property into a retirement village and sell(lend) the units, whilst an insurance company can just write an insurance policy. So as long as we as OCA wants to grow it's float, they'll need to continue spending cash developing these villages which have relatively low returns compared to say owning an equity portfolio.
Despite that I'm sure OCA's float comes out ahead compared to Berkshire's insurance operations, but still worth considering.