Likewise, as in the Chubb deal, not good for customers or the insurance biz. Taking competition and capacity off the table is not what we need right now. Especially from Allianz, a Euro “anti-risker” company.
I’m behind the times, but even though the insurance business is hyper competitive, isn’t it still better to spread the risk over many, many balance sheets, instead of lowering the number of players? It’s too hard to predict catastrophes, and reinsurance can only go so far, right?
My DM used to say they didn’t want every building insured in one area in the event of a catastrophe. That was back in the late 90’s – maybe the models have changed since then.
As Tiger mentioned, these “synergies” often seem to end with higher prices to the consumer and poorer customer service.
That’s always been my thought, but…. State Farm seems to be happy with ~33% of the Louisiana homeowners market, so maybe we’re the ones missing something? 🤷♂️
Likewise, as in the Chubb deal, not good for customers or the insurance biz. Taking competition and capacity off the table is not what we need right now. Especially from Allianz, a Euro “anti-risker” company.
I’m behind the times, but even though the insurance business is hyper competitive, isn’t it still better to spread the risk over many, many balance sheets, instead of lowering the number of players? It’s too hard to predict catastrophes, and reinsurance can only go so far, right?
My DM used to say they didn’t want every building insured in one area in the event of a catastrophe. That was back in the late 90’s – maybe the models have changed since then.
As Tiger mentioned, these “synergies” often seem to end with higher prices to the consumer and poorer customer service.
That’s always been my thought, but…. State Farm seems to be happy with ~33% of the Louisiana homeowners market, so maybe we’re the ones missing something? 🤷♂️