This week's Barron's [subscription required] reverses itself -- after panning Berkshire Hathaway Inc (NYSE: BRK.A) in December 2007 it has now reversed course -- with a hedge from a short seller. Since panning Berkshire in December -- when it traded for $143,000 a share, the stock has lost 14% so Barron's was right then. Is it right to bet on a rise in Berkshire now? I really don't know because I don't find either the bear or the bull case persuasive.
Why did Barron's pan Berkshire back in December? As I posted, Barron's bear case on Berkshire was simply that it was overvalued on the basis of its book value and earnings growth. Berkshire's ratio of market value to book value was then at 1.8 times its September 30 book value, of $77,800 a share. That was above its average of 1.6 in the past five years.
It was also valued at 23 times estimated 2007 operating profits of $6,300 a share. 2008's profits were then expected to be similar to 2007's. If Berkshire were then valued at 1.7 times book value, a premium to its five-year average, Barron's estimated that stock would trade at $132,000.
Why is gold making a new high, trading at $1,118.00 per ounce?
Chasing Value: Ten stocks for 2010 -- Part 1 
Closing Bell: A six-day rally (AIG, REGN, M, MOT, PALM, RIMM)
