Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Value Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Spekulatius who wrote (37023)	3/18/2010 7:41:49 PM
From: Paul Senior	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 78516

I know that catastrophes can and sometimes do, bring insurers down. With Chile, it seems - as far as we know - that the VR losses are going to be manageable. Insurance accounting is so arcane. Some losses are always allowed for by the reinsurers. How, and how much and where, I'm not so sure. It's possible a lot of the monies are in an off-balance sheet item. This may be so for assumptive reinsurance (all items removed from asset and liability on the corporate balance sheet). From Wikipedia, "Assumption reinsurance is a form of reinsurance whereby the reinsurer is substituted for the ceding insurer and becomes directly liable for policy claims. This ordinarily requires a notice and release from affected policyholders. In the more typical reinsurance arrangement, the reinsurer has an obligation to indemnify the ceding insurer, which remains liable for claims on policies it has issued, and policyholders' approval is not required." I'm going to assume it's not critical for me to understand all this accounting jargon. Of course, maybe if I had such knowledge in some previous bets on insurers, I might have saved myself from some losses. I'll just stick with p/bk, dividend, history, margins, etc., and also not making just one big bet on one insurer (reinsurer).