Are you kidding me?! In the normal world, the commercial insurance division would have been liquidated and AIG would be bankrupt. Without our tax dollars, this successful division would be gone. Let’s be clear – AIG got bailed out, to save Goldman and entire European economey from failing. The corporate suited masters of the universe screwed the American public here – which lead to this disaster. The division you praise is being re-branded to get the stick of failure away from it’s balance sheet. And – the mgt. team is still AIG – so, tell me, what do you really know?
Every officer in AIG and Goldman Sachs should be indicted. They should have to accept accountability that ought to come with the pay. But, they are punks in suits…
This part of the company is very successful, has always been, and continues to be. It had nothing to with the bailout, and if you read this article, it was substantially in surplus. It is transitioning and separating completely from the AIG entity. Those of you making your comments about the bailout, “Our tax dollars at work”, “It’s still AIG”, etc. are either speaking in complete ignorance at best or dishonesty at worst.
Obviously De. Know works for AIG or he wouldn’t be defending them.
I resigned from AIG from one of the three divisions being moved to Chartis. I left a few months ago after several months of buying into senior management’s talks about ‘we did nothing wrong’. I finally left because I was tired of defending my employer to my family and friends. I now work for a company I am proud to talk about.
Dr. Know must not know how to read a balance sheet – if he had read the bogus financial information Chartis posted on their website he would have noticed that these operating units posted a combined ration of 101% for 2008. Where is the profit?
For years, AIG paid bonuses and promoted employees based on pure unadulterated growth – note I said nothing about profit. That which is rewarded is done – so senior management is to blame for their misunderstanding of how to run a profitable insurance company.
AIG is still cutting rates on renewals to maintain business (rates which were artificially low in the first place). They should be focusing on PROFITABLE growth and try to get that combined ration below 100%.
All that and I still have several friends at AIG, some of whom I would hire becuase they are very intelligent, just misguided.
Wow, surprise, surprise, AIG is AGAIN changing their name to try and scam consumers. This is ridiculous. Last I checked, when an insured changed their business name because of a loss or a bad reputation under a previous corporate name, we would call them shady and refuse to write their insurance. Does this not apply to a company as well? Ridiculous. Let them go under, it will be better for all of us!
It never ceases to amaze me the level of ineptness that is exuded from posters bashing AIG. First, the Commercial Insurance division did not post the “scandalous” loss that you all love to hate. Right now, the US government (us) have a majority stake in the insurer. In order to help repay the loan, they are preserving their brand by spinning off a new entity. This new entity will be up for an IPO soon and a good portion of the equity that is raised will go back to paying off the loan. Why would they do this? Well, in this market there are not too many buyers that can afford to purchase multi million / billion dollar insurance divisions, let alone secure the loan to purchase them. An IPO is a great way to preserve shareholder value, retain corporate identity, and help pay back the loan.
I love the comments about “letting them go under” as if that would help out the situation regarding the loan repayments. That “sound” reasoning is really well thought out….
No, I don’t work for AIG. I just can’t stand the people who love to hate because they don’t know what the heck is going on.
Talking about common sense, I am confused. Let’s see as an American taxpayer and small business owner do I understand that I should be for bailing out a company that is going to have taxpayer money to compete directly against other carriers I write for that do not have this advantage.
AIG made terrible business decisions and cost us taxpayers billions, so now they can compete directly against other insurance companies and often times below the competition. In my opinion AIG should have beewn allowed to fail. As an agent am I to understand that this makes common sense?
The question isn’t whether AIG should be allowed to fail (moot point). We didn’t allow them to fail and now, it would not be in our best interest for them to fail.
The loan that AIG received was for satifying debt obligations and paying out claims that came about via the CDS’s. The loan amount never made it past the parent company (the UW divisions of AIG never saw a dime from the loan). Thus, they are not using loan money to malicously underprice thier competition all over the world. A logical conclusion would be that the division of AIG that competes in your area lowered thier rates (from this small scale example, you have seemd to expand it to conclude that “AIG is using our tax payers to underprice thier products”). Trust me, AIG does not have an “advantage” because they received a loan from the government. The damage to thier brand has cost them millions if not billions in premium (ie – Chartis).
I am sorry that you have to compete against a company that the government holds a majority stake in. Maybe we should outlaw the USPS because it is not fair for UPS. Better yet, I saw we make the evil government ban state run educational institutions – it is not fair to all of the private institutions out there! Who’s with me!?!
In my opinion it should have never been bailed out in the first place, so following your common sense when is enough? How many more billions should we as taxpayers put in reserves? I sthere no bottome to the well? They are still having financial problems, so should we as taxpayers continue to support their failures? To me this just isn’t common sense.
I agree with your logic in that it may not be common sense to continue bailing out companies or extending loans to them. However, in the case of AIG, the damage is done – they have not requested an additional infusion of cash from the government and they have actually started paying back the loan while continuing thier operations. Chartis is part of the plan to pay us back.
The question as to if we should have bailed them out or not is irrelevant. We are in the situation we are in with them. I think that the best course would be to support thier actions because it will hopefully lead to repayment or turn out to be a good investment for us (IPO on Chartis). It will be interesting to see if they can pay off the loan, and if they do, which political party will claim that they had the “foresight” to see that this was a good investment :)
Common Sense you are correct in that it is too late to turn back the clock. One of the questions is what did we learn by bailing out AIG? Obviously not much if anything as we continued to bail out banks and car manufacturers. Now we as a nation have private enterprise competing with the Federal Government. To me this is not common sense.
As I mentioned now what? I believe given AIG’s financial condition they will be back. The question is will we cut our losses and learn as a nation, or will we continue to spend money we are borrowing from other countries to chase a company that has already shown us their ability to manage? As taxpayers if they come back I hope we can say as the adage goes, “Fool me once shame on you, fool us twice shame on us.” Unfortunately I think the evidence is in we continue to be shamed, and leave this huge deficit to our children and grandchildren.
Arizona, I agree with you. It will be interesting to see which companies pay us back and which do not. Additionally, it will be interesting to see what the fallout is of those that do and don’t.
I agree in that frivilous spending needs to stop somewhere. The problem is that we as citizens, do not know the internal consequences of these companies failing. I believe that the government made the right decision with AIG, but not with the auto makers.
Only time will tell – it is too early to declare thier decisions as good or bad in my opinion.
Well, our tax dollars at work? They are ripping off my husband! We paid into workers compensation ourselves as we owned a trucking business. Long story short, Chartis is now decided to stop all benefits although Dr. stated he can’t work driving and also denied rehab because he lives more than 50 miles from the Nevada line. In other words, they are using us and many other alike, to capture their huge bonuses! In the meantime, we could lose everything! (What is left after the accident)
Gov Bail-Out
so they can rip-off People on Workmans Compensation,denial of Legitimate Claims
finding any Excuse to Stop Someone”s Claim
I Don”t see how these Claims Agents Live
with themselfs,its bad enough were injured
and can”t work, I wish I Could,who can make ends Meet,and pay Bills on $180.00 wk
when i was making over 300.oo,and they Stop Payments,its your word against theres
that your Complying with there Request.were stressed out enough and we get Screwed out whats Owed to us, But Yet the Goverment had to Bail them Out,only to screw us.
Are you kidding me?! In the normal world, the commercial insurance division would have been liquidated and AIG would be bankrupt. Without our tax dollars, this successful division would be gone. Let’s be clear – AIG got bailed out, to save Goldman and entire European economey from failing. The corporate suited masters of the universe screwed the American public here – which lead to this disaster. The division you praise is being re-branded to get the stick of failure away from it’s balance sheet. And – the mgt. team is still AIG – so, tell me, what do you really know?
Every officer in AIG and Goldman Sachs should be indicted. They should have to accept accountability that ought to come with the pay. But, they are punks in suits…
Yeah, this’ll work…
Hm….does AIG plan to acquire The Chartis Group, that already owns http://www.chartis.com and http://www.chartis.net?
Does due diligence extend only to chacking the candy bars at Marty and Manny’s candy stand to see if they are not out of date?
But, it is US Government imminent domain domain… ok… that’s a joke, but, by any other name, it’s still AIG.
our tax dollars at work
I really think IOU is a much better choice for AIG’s new name…
I looked up what “chartis” means in Latin……- ” SAME wine in a different bottle”
This part of the company is very successful, has always been, and continues to be. It had nothing to with the bailout, and if you read this article, it was substantially in surplus. It is transitioning and separating completely from the AIG entity. Those of you making your comments about the bailout, “Our tax dollars at work”, “It’s still AIG”, etc. are either speaking in complete ignorance at best or dishonesty at worst.
maybe they should go by the name
FOREPLAY…a little would be nice next time
Obviously De. Know works for AIG or he wouldn’t be defending them.
I resigned from AIG from one of the three divisions being moved to Chartis. I left a few months ago after several months of buying into senior management’s talks about ‘we did nothing wrong’. I finally left because I was tired of defending my employer to my family and friends. I now work for a company I am proud to talk about.
Dr. Know must not know how to read a balance sheet – if he had read the bogus financial information Chartis posted on their website he would have noticed that these operating units posted a combined ration of 101% for 2008. Where is the profit?
For years, AIG paid bonuses and promoted employees based on pure unadulterated growth – note I said nothing about profit. That which is rewarded is done – so senior management is to blame for their misunderstanding of how to run a profitable insurance company.
AIG is still cutting rates on renewals to maintain business (rates which were artificially low in the first place). They should be focusing on PROFITABLE growth and try to get that combined ration below 100%.
All that and I still have several friends at AIG, some of whom I would hire becuase they are very intelligent, just misguided.
Wow, surprise, surprise, AIG is AGAIN changing their name to try and scam consumers. This is ridiculous. Last I checked, when an insured changed their business name because of a loss or a bad reputation under a previous corporate name, we would call them shady and refuse to write their insurance. Does this not apply to a company as well? Ridiculous. Let them go under, it will be better for all of us!
Of course that reveals their proprietary price structuring at present.
It never ceases to amaze me the level of ineptness that is exuded from posters bashing AIG. First, the Commercial Insurance division did not post the “scandalous” loss that you all love to hate. Right now, the US government (us) have a majority stake in the insurer. In order to help repay the loan, they are preserving their brand by spinning off a new entity. This new entity will be up for an IPO soon and a good portion of the equity that is raised will go back to paying off the loan. Why would they do this? Well, in this market there are not too many buyers that can afford to purchase multi million / billion dollar insurance divisions, let alone secure the loan to purchase them. An IPO is a great way to preserve shareholder value, retain corporate identity, and help pay back the loan.
I love the comments about “letting them go under” as if that would help out the situation regarding the loan repayments. That “sound” reasoning is really well thought out….
No, I don’t work for AIG. I just can’t stand the people who love to hate because they don’t know what the heck is going on.
Talking about common sense, I am confused. Let’s see as an American taxpayer and small business owner do I understand that I should be for bailing out a company that is going to have taxpayer money to compete directly against other carriers I write for that do not have this advantage.
AIG made terrible business decisions and cost us taxpayers billions, so now they can compete directly against other insurance companies and often times below the competition. In my opinion AIG should have beewn allowed to fail. As an agent am I to understand that this makes common sense?
The question isn’t whether AIG should be allowed to fail (moot point). We didn’t allow them to fail and now, it would not be in our best interest for them to fail.
The loan that AIG received was for satifying debt obligations and paying out claims that came about via the CDS’s. The loan amount never made it past the parent company (the UW divisions of AIG never saw a dime from the loan). Thus, they are not using loan money to malicously underprice thier competition all over the world. A logical conclusion would be that the division of AIG that competes in your area lowered thier rates (from this small scale example, you have seemd to expand it to conclude that “AIG is using our tax payers to underprice thier products”). Trust me, AIG does not have an “advantage” because they received a loan from the government. The damage to thier brand has cost them millions if not billions in premium (ie – Chartis).
I am sorry that you have to compete against a company that the government holds a majority stake in. Maybe we should outlaw the USPS because it is not fair for UPS. Better yet, I saw we make the evil government ban state run educational institutions – it is not fair to all of the private institutions out there! Who’s with me!?!
In my opinion it should have never been bailed out in the first place, so following your common sense when is enough? How many more billions should we as taxpayers put in reserves? I sthere no bottome to the well? They are still having financial problems, so should we as taxpayers continue to support their failures? To me this just isn’t common sense.
Arizona,
I agree with your logic in that it may not be common sense to continue bailing out companies or extending loans to them. However, in the case of AIG, the damage is done – they have not requested an additional infusion of cash from the government and they have actually started paying back the loan while continuing thier operations. Chartis is part of the plan to pay us back.
The question as to if we should have bailed them out or not is irrelevant. We are in the situation we are in with them. I think that the best course would be to support thier actions because it will hopefully lead to repayment or turn out to be a good investment for us (IPO on Chartis). It will be interesting to see if they can pay off the loan, and if they do, which political party will claim that they had the “foresight” to see that this was a good investment :)
Common Sense you are correct in that it is too late to turn back the clock. One of the questions is what did we learn by bailing out AIG? Obviously not much if anything as we continued to bail out banks and car manufacturers. Now we as a nation have private enterprise competing with the Federal Government. To me this is not common sense.
As I mentioned now what? I believe given AIG’s financial condition they will be back. The question is will we cut our losses and learn as a nation, or will we continue to spend money we are borrowing from other countries to chase a company that has already shown us their ability to manage? As taxpayers if they come back I hope we can say as the adage goes, “Fool me once shame on you, fool us twice shame on us.” Unfortunately I think the evidence is in we continue to be shamed, and leave this huge deficit to our children and grandchildren.
Arizona, I agree with you. It will be interesting to see which companies pay us back and which do not. Additionally, it will be interesting to see what the fallout is of those that do and don’t.
I agree in that frivilous spending needs to stop somewhere. The problem is that we as citizens, do not know the internal consequences of these companies failing. I believe that the government made the right decision with AIG, but not with the auto makers.
Only time will tell – it is too early to declare thier decisions as good or bad in my opinion.
Common Sense, so now that we agree to disagree on AIG do we contact President Obama to have a beer in the Rose Garden?
Well, our tax dollars at work? They are ripping off my husband! We paid into workers compensation ourselves as we owned a trucking business. Long story short, Chartis is now decided to stop all benefits although Dr. stated he can’t work driving and also denied rehab because he lives more than 50 miles from the Nevada line. In other words, they are using us and many other alike, to capture their huge bonuses! In the meantime, we could lose everything! (What is left after the accident)
Gov Bail-Out
so they can rip-off People on Workmans Compensation,denial of Legitimate Claims
finding any Excuse to Stop Someone”s Claim
I Don”t see how these Claims Agents Live
with themselfs,its bad enough were injured
and can”t work, I wish I Could,who can make ends Meet,and pay Bills on $180.00 wk
when i was making over 300.oo,and they Stop Payments,its your word against theres
that your Complying with there Request.were stressed out enough and we get Screwed out whats Owed to us, But Yet the Goverment had to Bail them Out,only to screw us.
I am not going to even comment on this one….(except for the comment I just posted).