This seems like a lot of hot air. He’s saying that Root’s systems automatically load actuarial data into templates to make the rate filing process faster. That’s definitely useful but his alma mater at Nationwide has done that for 15+ years. I imagine it’s similar at other companies too. The issue with regulatory filings isn’t the stock exhibits, it’s all the random other state specific requirements that each state has. If an actuary’s job was just sending spreadsheets to regulators, most of us would be in the bread line. It’s convincing regulators to see things your way.
I’ve noticed a theme with Root of them trying to convince investors that the rest of the insurance industry is helpless dinosaurs that still live in the 70’s which is absolutely false. Maybe 20 years ago he’d have a point, but today any big name that the average person would recognize has streamlined the ratemaking process.
Interesting that nothing was said about Root’s claims processing. Recently had an insured that was hit by a root policyholder. According to the police report Root’s insured was 100% at fault but Root said they would only pay 60% of the damage and that my insured would have to file the rest with their insurance company. I would like to hear more about the money Root is saving by not paying claims.
Obviously I don’t know the particulars of the accident (rear-end loss? failure to obey traffic controls?) but the police report is never the end-all // be-all in liability decisions.
Even if the cop wrote the other person a ticket and there was a witness to confirm, the other driver still has duties they must adhere to (proper lookout, reasonable avoidance actions, driving at a safe speed, etc).
Comp/neg can apply in spite of the police report saying the other person was at fault. After all, if the cops know the other person ran a red light, they rarely ask the not-at-fault driver “when did you see the other vehicle and what did you do when you saw them?”
This company’s stock has fallen from $400+ to below $10 per share in the last 18 months.
Bragging about fast rate filings is like the University of Connecticut football team bragging about their quarterback making a 30 yard field goal in practice. A little impressive, but not significant in improving an underperforming group.
The carrier is fairly small right now so many state regulators do not focus on them.
The challenge may come if they reach a size where they gain more attention from some politicians.
Avoiding highly regulated states will also limit their growth potential.
This seems like a lot of hot air. He’s saying that Root’s systems automatically load actuarial data into templates to make the rate filing process faster. That’s definitely useful but his alma mater at Nationwide has done that for 15+ years. I imagine it’s similar at other companies too. The issue with regulatory filings isn’t the stock exhibits, it’s all the random other state specific requirements that each state has. If an actuary’s job was just sending spreadsheets to regulators, most of us would be in the bread line. It’s convincing regulators to see things your way.
I’ve noticed a theme with Root of them trying to convince investors that the rest of the insurance industry is helpless dinosaurs that still live in the 70’s which is absolutely false. Maybe 20 years ago he’d have a point, but today any big name that the average person would recognize has streamlined the ratemaking process.
Interesting that nothing was said about Root’s claims processing. Recently had an insured that was hit by a root policyholder. According to the police report Root’s insured was 100% at fault but Root said they would only pay 60% of the damage and that my insured would have to file the rest with their insurance company. I would like to hear more about the money Root is saving by not paying claims.
Obviously I don’t know the particulars of the accident (rear-end loss? failure to obey traffic controls?) but the police report is never the end-all // be-all in liability decisions.
Even if the cop wrote the other person a ticket and there was a witness to confirm, the other driver still has duties they must adhere to (proper lookout, reasonable avoidance actions, driving at a safe speed, etc).
Comp/neg can apply in spite of the police report saying the other person was at fault. After all, if the cops know the other person ran a red light, they rarely ask the not-at-fault driver “when did you see the other vehicle and what did you do when you saw them?”
This company’s stock has fallen from $400+ to below $10 per share in the last 18 months.
Bragging about fast rate filings is like the University of Connecticut football team bragging about their quarterback making a 30 yard field goal in practice. A little impressive, but not significant in improving an underperforming group.
Maybe Lemonade will acquire Root next once the Metromile merger dust settles.