9 Underwriting discipline
Normally, insurance companies register an underwriting profit if premiums exceed the total of expenses and eventual losses that adds to the investment income the float produces. Buffett says the lure of this profit creates such intense competition that the industry actually ends up with a significant underwriting loss.But Berkshire is an exception, operating at an underwriting profit for 12 consecutive years, with pre-tax gain for the period having totalled $24 billion. The whole strategy of profitable underwriting and focus on float creation, as opposed to simply focusing on premium revenue, has meant that Berkshire companies would avoid underwriting insurance when prices were unattractive, while underwriting large amounts when the prices were attractive.“In 1984, National Indemnity wrote $62.2 million in premium. Two years later, premium volumes grew an extraordinary six-fold to $366.2 million. By 1989, they had fallen back 73 percent to $98.4 million and did not return to the $100 million level for 12 years. Three years later, in 2004, the company wrote over $600 million in premiums. Over this period, National Indemnity averaged an annual underwriting profit of 6.5 percent as a percentage of premiums compared with an average loss of 7 percent for a typical property and casualty insurer,” points out Thorndike in The Outsiders. As for re-insurance, almost all big-ticket underwriting lands up at Berkshire. “When major insurers have needed an unquestionable promise that payments of this type (where contracts entail substantial payments 50 years hence or more) will be made, Berkshire has been the party — the only party — to call,” says Buffett, adding that there have been only eight P/C policies in history that had single premium exceeding $1 billion and all eight were written by Berkshire; the highest ever was a transaction with Lloyd’s in 2007, where the premium was $7 billion.