That's some catch

Nicholas Beaudrot points to some interesting stuff in Warren Buffet's annual letter to shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway (PDF). The short short version is that the housing bubble happened first in the mobile home sector, a sector in which Buffet was heavily invested but managed not to lose his shirt. What was his magical formula? He issued loans only after establishing that the borrower had sufficient income to meet the payments.

Smart guy, that Buffet.

Nevertheless, the outlook for 2009 is dim:

[Our] lending operation, though not damaged by the performance of its borrowers, is nevertheless threatened by an element of the credit crisis. Funders that have access to any sort of government guarantee – banks with FDIC-insured deposits, large entities with commercial paper now backed by the Federal Reserve, and others who are using imaginative methods (or lobbying skills) to come under the government’s umbrella – have money costs that are minimal. Conversely, highly-rated companies, such as Berkshire, are experiencing borrowing costs that, in relation to Treasury rates, are at record levels. Moreover, funds are abundant for the government-guaranteed borrower but often scarce for others, no matter how creditworthy they may be.

This unprecedented “spread” in the cost of money makes it unprofitable for any lender who doesn’t enjoy government-guaranteed funds to go up against those with a favored status. Government is determining the “haves” and “have-nots.” That is why companies are rushing to convert to bank holding companies, not a course feasible for Berkshire.

Though Berkshire’s credit is pristine – we are one of only seven AAA corporations in the country – our cost of borrowing is now far higher than competitors with shaky balance sheets but government backing. At the moment, it is much better to be a financial cripple with a government guarantee than a Gibraltar without one. |2009 Buffet Shareholder Letter, p. 12|