The comment was made in his prepared remarks and not something blurted out during Q&A session by accident.
Therefore, he is either teasing his audience or there is something in the pipeline, and given the recent divestures probably the latter.
FFH doesn't have any entity on its own balance sheet (except for its insurance subs). (i.e. unlike Onex that has gluskin sheff)
If the intent is to "free up capital" at holding level, than the excerise is largely futile, given that today the money, for the purpose to invest in the hard market, is directionally going from hold-co to the insurance entities that own various bits of the far-flung portfolio. Unless perhaps the capital that is being freed at the portfolio is way more than their needs to investment in the subs + the cost of annual dividend at FFH-level, so that the rest can be dividend back from the subs to the hold-co. while still being able to re-invest in the subs (i.e. changing the direction of net fund flow to hold-co so that it could cover its $300 million dividend)
With that in mind, the target needs either (1) be something that he wants to get rid of at a good price. However, the world is not fair and there is no marketability for rubbish at a good price. Or (2) he needs to monetize something that he does't want to sell but get a good price instead. That should help narrow down the list.
If the monetization is from camp (1) with limited marketability, there would be a BV driven solution as oppose to a hard cash solution in camp (2).
