I haven’t read his report, but on the LTC insurance reserve issue, it looks like his argument is that other insurance firms are holding much higher reserves for exposure to the same counter parties. So, he’s saying that either the other insurers are all over reserving or GE is under reserving.
The way that I’m reading his other main argument is that GE is manipulating accounting rues to avoid marking their ownership value down to market on their Baker Hughes stake. They sold down from 62.5% to 50.2% and booked a $2.2B loss on just that. But since they are still above 50% ownership (which is purposeful/ strategic), they can report the book equity that Baker Hughes shows (assets less liabilities) and avoid marking down the remaining equity stake to the true market value. i.e. the stake they just sold didn’t go for book value, so it stands to reason that the rest also isn’t worth book value.
Whatever his motivations for pointing this out, he is making points that can easily be verified or contradicted by the SEC.
