Argus Group lost a total of $144 million in the past three years, mainly on its Butterfield Bank stake and soured non-core investments.CEO Alison Hill and Chief Financial Officer David Pugh, who sat down yesterday with The Royal Gazette to talk about the company’s results over the past few years, maintained that despite the losses and poor economy the company was solid and its core businesses continued to perform strongly.Ms Hill reiterated that the company’s most recent half-year results were viewed by management as a “turning point” and they were confident of the return to more ‘normal’ times for the group. She assured that the balance sheet now faces “substantially less exposure to risks arising from non-core investments”.Here’s a closer look at the numbers and what Argus has said about its results since the financial year 2009:l $3.9 Million Loss in Six Months Ended September 30, 2011 (driven by soured investment in Bermuda-based re/insurer Northstar Group, which is in the process of being wound up and surrendering its insurance licence in Ireland. Argus said there was “uncertainty surrounding the ultimate collectability of its investment in Northstar”).Argus decided that the value of the investment in Northstar should be treated as impaired to the extent that one shareholder (troubled company Gerova Financial) was unlikely to meet its obligations.Argus pointed out that, as in recent years, it was the investment-related losses that eroded “strong operational earnings” of $7.1 million (half-year ended Sept 30, 2011).Argus also said net premiums earned in the period increased by 9.6 percent reflecting new business, and noted it had $1.6 billion under its administration.Furthermore, Argus stressed assets supporting pensions were held in segregated accounts, and: “Segregated fund assets may not be applied against liabilities that arise from any other business of the group.”l $5.7 Million Loss in Financial Year Ended March 2011 (driven by non-performing investments in mortgages and hospitality sector, including Tucker’s Point).Argus pointed out: “Every one of our seven business units recorded excellent results for the period, generating earnings in the region of $20 million against the backdrop of a continued recession.”l $18.4 Million Loss in Financial Year Ended March 2010 (driven by plunge in value of its stake in Butterfield Bank).Argus explained: “At September 30, 2009, the half year, we reported net earnings of $12.2 million and we were optimistic of meeting our annual earnings target. However, in the second half of the year the further diminution in value of $29 million to our holding in Butterfield Bank and an additional provision of $10 million against potentially uncollectable commercial loans produced negative investment earnings. Clearly, without these two investment-related losses the earnings from our core businesses would have produced net income in the region of $20 million for the year.”l $115.7 Million Loss in Financial Year Ended March 2009 (driven by deterioration in value of investments, including Butterfield Bank and indirect exposure to the Madoff fraud causing $7.5 million writedown of the intangible value attributed to the acquisition of the former Tremont International Insurance. This was the first annual loss in the company’s 60-year history).Argus back then attributed these losses primarily to the instability in worldwide investment markets and the global recession. Argus also said: “The anticipated greater level of volatility in investment earnings resulting from the adoption of new accounting rules in 2008, was exacerbated by unprecedented instability in financial markets.”It added: “The company’s core businesses continue to perform strongly.“Gross premiums earned increased by six percent reflecting the Group’s continuing efforts to achieve acceptable underwriting ratios by appropriate adjustments to premiums. Claims, benefits and claims expenses rose by 14.6 percent over the prior year, reflecting a return to more normal underwriting results, particularly in the area of health claims. In addition it was necessary to strengthen actuarial reserves as investment values fell during the year.”