NAPSLO 2017

Surplus Lines Growth Slows

Attendees at the NAPSLO convention in San Diego need to find ways to compete, yet avoid falling victim to price wars.
By: | August 29, 2017 • 5 min read

The excess and surplus (E&S) lines market is between a rock and a hard place.

Depressed interest rates and a soft market driven by fierce competition, lack of a big catastrophic event and unprecedented levels of available capital have combined to squeeze margins further and have forced some players to pull back or exit the sector altogether.

Advertisement




Total surplus lines direct written premiums increased by the smallest amount in five years, up 2.5 percent in 2015, ending two straight years of underwriting gains, according to analysts. However, the market as a whole has more than doubled over the last 20 years from 3.4 percent of total property/casualty (P&C) direct written premiums in 1995 to seven percent in 2015.

As a percentage of commercial lines direct written premiums, surplus lines insurers also increased their share from 6.3 percent to 14.2 percent over the same period.

“With the demonstrated capability to effectively assess new exposures and the flexibility to tailor terms and limits to meet coverage standards, we believe that the surplus lines market will continue to assert its value in the property/casualty insurance marketplace,” an analyst said.

And with a planned merger between the National Association of Professional Surplus Lines Offices (NAPSLO) and the American Association of Managing General Agents (AAMGA), due to come into force before this month’s annual NAPSLO convention in San Diego, there has arguably never been a more opportune yet challenging time to be in the E&S market.

“An abundance of capital, low interest rates and a super competitive marketplace have all conspired to create a challenging set of headwinds,” said Jeremy Johnson, president, U.S. Commercial, AIG.

“Although we believe that the $40 billion E&S market will likely outperform the standard market in 2017, it’s certainly a market beset with a host of familiar challenges.”

Key Challenges

Property was worst hit, with rates falling between 10 and 12 percent, said David Bresnahan, executive vice president, Berkshire Hathaway Specialty Insurance.

David Bresnahan, executive vice president, Berkshire Hathaway Specialty Insurance

“Property remains the softest category by far with the most competition and as a result it has suffered continued rate reductions for several years now,” he said. “In financial lines, primary and lead lines are stable, but excess executive lines are under very heavy competition, while med mal and casualty are the most stable.”

Jim Auden, managing director of Fitch Ratings, said that pricing and competition, particularly from the wider P&C market, were the two biggest challenges facing the E&S industry.

“Profitable avenues of business growth are getting harder to find in E&S,” he said.

“In this part of the market underwriting cycle, admitted carriers’ efforts to maintain premium volume lead them to creep further into what was previously considered E&S space, further pressuring the E&S market.”

Consolidation

E&S market leader Lexington pulled back last year as its direct written premiums fell to $3.76 billion from $4.66 billion in 2015, resulting in its market share shrinking to 12.6 percent from 15.6 percent over the same period.

It is expected to continue to reduce its net written premiums because of unsatisfactory rates.

There has also been an increase in M&A activity led by Japanese insurer Sompo Holdings’ $6.3 billion takeover of Endurance Specialty Holdings.

Allied World Assurance Co. Holdings AG also announced its pending sale to an investor group led by Fairfax Financial Holdings for $4.9 billion, and Liberty Mutual agreed to a $3 billion deal to buy Ironshore from Fosun International Holdings.

“In financial lines, primary and lead lines are stable, but excess executive lines are under very heavy competition, while med mal and casualty are the most stable.” — David Bresnahan, executive vice president, Berkshire Hathaway Specialty Insurance

“I think more capital is and will continue to find its way into E&S, especially in the short tail lines and property,” said AIG’s Johnson.

Despite all of the challenges faced by the E&S market, there are still pockets of opportunity.

Among the biggest growth areas are private flood, drones, the service economy and robotics. But the biggest opportunity is cyber, said Terry Leone, manager, insurance research at S&P Global Market Intelligence.

“Standalone insurance almost doubled in 2016 from $488 million to $911million,” he said. “The more cyber attacks there are, the more demand there will be for protection.”

James Drinkwater, president, AmWINS

James Drinkwater, president of AmWINS brokerage and one of NAPSLO’s wholesale broker directors, added: “People are now starting to buy whereas last year they were just getting quotes.”

Innovation brings opportunity, but Bresnahan said that companies need to concentrate on getting the basics right.

“Carriers need to spend more time on the basics like getting policies issued quickly, paying claims without reservation and generally being a little bit more responsive,” he said.

“That has certainly been the feedback from customers who would prefer the industry gets the basics of service and claims right first.”

NAPSLO/AAMGA Merger

One of the key developments in the E&S market this year was the proposed merger between NAPSLO and AAMGA to form the Wholesale and Specialty Insurance Association (WSIA).

It was a no-brainer, said AAMGA president Corinne Jones, given that 76 percent of AAMGA members also have a NAPSLO membership and 48 percent of NAPSLO members are affiliated with AAMGA.

“The potential synergies of merging the AAMGA and NAPSLO, together serving the entirety of the wholesale, specialty and surplus lines insurance marketplace, became a common sense opportunity the organizations had to explore,” she said.

Advertisement




“WSIA will be highly effective in promoting the value of wholesale distribution with a stronger, unified voice on behalf of its members.”

Jones said that WSIA will provide a simplified menu of programs and services, a stronger, unified voice in its legislative and regulatory advocacy and improved synergy in committee and volunteer work.

Among the biggest regulatory hurdles yet to be overcome by the new organization is the Flood Insurance Market Parity and Modernization Act of 2017, which is awaiting approval.

Brady Kelley, executive director at NAPSLO, said that NAPSLO continued to focus on lobbying Congress about the Act, enabling the E&S market to continue providing coverage for unique and complex flood risks not available through the National Flood Insurance Program or on the standard market.

Another issue, he said, is lobbying Congress to reform provisions from the Dodd Frank Act in order to maintain the Nonadmitted and Reinsurance Reform Act in its current form.

“We have encouraged members to support H.R. 871, which eliminates unnecessary FATCA (Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act) reporting for the property and casualty industry, and we are asking senators for help in quickly confirming any nominees to the board of the National Association of Registered Agents and Brokers and to allow it to begin the implementation process,” he said. &

Alex Wright is a U.K.-based business journalist, who previously was deputy business editor at The Royal Gazette in Bermuda. You can reach him at [email protected]

More from Risk & Insurance

More from Risk & Insurance

Emerging Risks

Stadium Safety

Soft targets, such as sports stadiums, must increase measures to protect lives and their business.
By: | January 10, 2018 • 8 min read

Acts of violence and terror can break out in even the unlikeliest of places.

Look at the 2013 Boston Marathon, where two bombs went off, killing three and injuring dozens of others in a terrorist attack. Or consider the Orlando Pulse nightclub, where 49 people were killed and 58 wounded. Most recently in Las Vegas, a gunman killed 58 and injured hundreds of others.

Advertisement




The world is not inherently evil, but these evil acts still find a way into places like churches, schools, concerts and stadiums.

“We didn’t see these kinds of attacks 20 years ago,” said Glenn Chavious, managing director, global sports & recreation practice leader, Industria Risk & Insurance Services.

As a society, we have advanced through technology, he said. Technology’s platform has enabled the message of terror to spread further faster.

“But it’s not just with technology. Our cultures, our personal grievances, have brought people out of their comfort zones.”

Chavious said that people still had these grievances 20 years ago but were less likely to act out. Tech has linked people around the globe to other like-minded individuals, allowing for others to join in on messages of terror.

“The progression of terrorist acts over the last 10 years has very much been central to the emergence of ‘lone wolf’ actors. As was the case in both Manchester and Las Vegas, the ‘lone wolf’ dynamic presents an altogether unique set of challenges for law enforcement and event service professionals,” said John

Glenn Chavious, managing director, global sports & recreation practice leader, Industria Risk & Insurance Services

Tomlinson, senior vice president, head of entertainment, Lockton.

As more violent outbreaks take place in public spaces, risk managers learn from and better understand what attackers want. Each new event enables risk managers to see what works and what can be improved upon to better protect people and places.

But the fact remains that the nature and pattern of attacks are changing.

“Many of these actions are devised in complete obscurity and on impulse, and are carried out by individuals with little to no prior visibility, in terms of behavioral patterns or threat recognition, thus making it virtually impossible to maintain any elements of anticipation by security officials,” said Tomlinson.

With vehicles driving into crowds, active shooters and the random nature of attacks, it’s hard to gauge what might come next, said Warren Harper, global sports & events practice leader, Marsh.

Public spaces like sporting arenas are particularly vulnerable because they are considered ‘soft targets.’ They are areas where people gather in large numbers for recreation. They are welcoming to their patrons and visitors, much like a hospital, and the crowds that attend come in droves.

NFL football stadiums, for example, can hold anywhere from 25,000 to 93,000 people at maximum capacity — and that number doesn’t include workers, players or other behind-the-scenes personnel.

“Attacks are a big risk management issue,” said Chavious. “Insurance is the last resort we want to rely upon. We’d rather be preventing it to avoid such events.”

Preparing for Danger

The second half of 2017 proved a trying few months for the insurance industry, facing hurricanes, earthquakes, wildfires and — unfortunately — multiple mass shootings.

The industry was estimated to take a more than $1 billion hit from the Las Vegas massacre in October 2017. A few years back, the Boston Marathon bombings cost businesses around $333 million each day the city was shut down following the attack. Officials were on a manhunt for the suspects in question, and Boston was on lockdown.

“Many of these actions are devised in complete obscurity and on impulse, and are carried out by individuals with little to no prior visibility.” — John Tomlinson, senior vice president, head of entertainment, Lockton

“Fortunately, we have not had a complete stadium go down,” said Harper. But a mass casualty event at a stadium can lead to the death or injury of athletes, spectators and guests; psychological trauma; potential workers’ comp claims from injured employees; lawsuits; significant reputational damage; property damage and prolonged business interruption losses.

The physical damage, said Harper, might be something risk managers can gauge beforehand, but loss of life is immeasurable.

Advertisement




The best practice then, said Chavious, is awareness and education.

“A lot of preparedness comes from education. [Stadiums] need a risk management plan.”

First and foremost, Chavious said, stadiums need to perform a security risk assessment. Find out where vulnerable spots are, decide where education can be improved upon and develop other safety measures over time.

Areas outside the stadium are soft targets, said Harper. The parking lot, the ticketing and access areas and even the metro transit areas where guests mingle before and after a game are targeted more often than inside.

Last year, for example, a stadium in Manchester was the target of a bomb, which detonated outside the venue as concert-goers left. In 2015, the Stade de France in Paris was the target of suicide bombers and active shooters, who struck the outside of the stadium while a soccer match was held inside.

Security, therefore, needs to be ready to react both inside and outside the vicinity. Reviewing past events and seeing what works has helped risk mangers improve safety strategies.

“A lot of places are getting into table-top exercises” to make sure their people are really trained, added Harper.

In these exercises, employees from various departments come together to brainstorm and work through a hypothetical terrorist situation.

A facilitator will propose the scenario — an active shooter has been spotted right before the game begins, someone has called in a bomb threat, a driver has fled on foot after driving into a crowd — and the stadium’s staff is asked how they should respond.

“People tend to act on assumptions, which may be wrong, but this is a great setting for them to brainstorm and learn,” said Harper.

Technology and Safety

In addition to education, stadiums are ahead of the game, implementing high-tech security cameras and closed-circuit TV monitoring, requiring game-day audiences to use clear/see-through bags when entering the arena, upping employee training on safety protocols and utilizing vapor wake dogs.

Drones are also adding a protective layer.

John Tomlinson, senior vice president, head of entertainment, Lockton

“Drones are helpful in surveying an area and can alert security to any potential threat,” said Chavious.

“Many stadiums have an area between a city’s metro and the stadium itself. If there’s a disturbance there, and you don’t have a camera in that area, you could use the drone instead of moving physical assets.”

Chavious added that “the overhead view will pick up potential crowd concentration, see if there are too many people in one crowd, or drones can fly overhead and be used to assess situations like a vehicle that’s in a place it shouldn’t be.”

But like with all new technology, drones too have their downsides. There’s the expense of owning, maintaining and operating the drone. Weather conditions can affect how and when a drone is used, so it isn’t a reliable source. And what if that drone gets hacked?

“The evolution of venue security protocols most certainly includes the increased usage of unmanned aerial systems (UAS), including drones, as the scope and territorial vastness provided by UAS, from a monitoring perspective, is much more expansive than ground-based apparatus,” said Tomlinson.

“That said,” he continued, “there have been many documented instances in which the intrusion of unauthorized drones at live events have posed major security concerns and have actually heightened the risk of injury to participants and attendees.”

Still, many experts, including Tomlinson, see drones playing a significant role in safety at stadiums moving forward.

“I believe the utilization of drones will continue to be on the forefront of risk mitigation innovation in the live event space, albeit with some very tight operating controls,” he said.

The SAFETY Act

In response to the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, U.S. Homeland Security enacted the Support Anti-Terrorism by Fostering Effective

Warren Harper, global sports & events practice leader, Marsh

Technologies Act (SAFETY Act).

The primary purpose of the SAFETY Act was to encourage potential manufacturers or sellers of anti-terrorism technologies to continue to develop and commercialize these technologies (like video monitoring or drones).

There was a worry that the threat of liability in such an event would deter and prevent sellers from pursing these technologies, which are aimed at saving lives. Instead, the SAFETY Act provides incentive by adding a system of risk and litigation management.

“[The SAFETY Act] is geared toward claims arising out of acts of terrorism,” said Harper.

Bottom line: It’s added financial protection. Businesses both large and small can apply for the SAFETY designation — in fact, many NFL teams push for the designation. So far, four have reached SAFETY certification: Lambeau Field, MetLife Stadium, University of Phoenix Stadium and Gillette Stadium.

Advertisement




To become certified, reviewers with the SAFETY Act assess stadiums for their compliance with the most up-to-date terrorism products. They look at their built-in emergency response plans, cyber security measures, hiring and training of employees, among other criteria.

The process can take over a year, but once certified, stadiums benefit because liability for an event is lessened. One thing to remember, however, is that the added SAFETY Act protection only holds weight when a catastrophic event is classified as an act of terrorism.

“Generally speaking, I think the SAFETY Act has been instrumental in paving the way for an accelerated development of anti-terrorism products and services,” said Tomlinson.

“The benefit of gaining elements of impunity from third-party liability related matters has served as a catalyst for developers to continue to push the envelope, so to speak, in terms of ideas and innovation.”

So while attackers are changing their methods and trying to stay ahead of safety protocols at stadiums, the SAFETY Act, as well as risk managers and stadium owners, keep stadiums investing in newer, more secure safety measures. &

Autumn Heisler is a staff writer at Risk & Insurance. She can be reached at [email protected]