Over the years, the smaller regional companies have been more nimble than the giants and it is easier to talk to them and negotiate the terms. The big giants of the insurance world use a cookie cutter approach designed by goofy actuaries/modelers and it is hard to get them to budge when needed.
Smaller companies are necessarily going to have underwriting results that are more responsive than the dinosaur sized national carriers. But that works both ways; i.e. for both ups and downs of cycles.
I don’t agree that large insurers can’t be as smart as regionals because their organizational structure may have divisions that operate like regionals.
You do not know what you are talking about. Regional carriers often put forth price and coverage terms that are irresponsible and not in line with the insured’s exposures, hazards and risk management. When there is trouble, the regional carrier seeks to non-renew the business. With adequate capital, the business will be rewritten at accurate premium and terms and conditions that match the insured’s operations.
Time to read up Mikey.
Often?! How often? I’m not doubting what you said happens, but I am unsure if you are serious or exaggerating about ‘often’.
If regional risks experience frequent cancellations or steep rate hikes by naive regional carriers, they would eventually migrate to national carriers. The test of this is market share trends for regional vs national carriers.
Yes. I see regional carriers in some parts of the country removing subsidence and residential exclusions off excavators and demolition contractors. Moreover, they include professional liability (Contractor’s) on an occurrence basis. Does that qualify for stupid or irresponsible?
Over the years, the smaller regional companies have been more nimble than the giants and it is easier to talk to them and negotiate the terms. The big giants of the insurance world use a cookie cutter approach designed by goofy actuaries/modelers and it is hard to get them to budge when needed.
Smaller companies are necessarily going to have underwriting results that are more responsive than the dinosaur sized national carriers. But that works both ways; i.e. for both ups and downs of cycles.
I don’t agree that large insurers can’t be as smart as regionals because their organizational structure may have divisions that operate like regionals.
@ Mikey Rooker
You do not know what you are talking about. Regional carriers often put forth price and coverage terms that are irresponsible and not in line with the insured’s exposures, hazards and risk management. When there is trouble, the regional carrier seeks to non-renew the business. With adequate capital, the business will be rewritten at accurate premium and terms and conditions that match the insured’s operations.
Time to read up Mikey.
Often?! How often? I’m not doubting what you said happens, but I am unsure if you are serious or exaggerating about ‘often’.
If regional risks experience frequent cancellations or steep rate hikes by naive regional carriers, they would eventually migrate to national carriers. The test of this is market share trends for regional vs national carriers.
@ Yogi Polar Berra
Yes. I see regional carriers in some parts of the country removing subsidence and residential exclusions off excavators and demolition contractors. Moreover, they include professional liability (Contractor’s) on an occurrence basis. Does that qualify for stupid or irresponsible?