Tags |
|
|
Links |
|
|
Added for You - Self-Motivation or Regulation
Being in a very competitive market online, when you have finish selecting the products you wish to market, it is also very important to plan and visualize what are your objectives.Step 3 - PlanningMost Internet Marketers will fail to this before they off their journey to promote their products. There are many forms and ways to market an online product. But like any business, it is very important you plan your layout of your business because you even start any promotion or thinking of using which form of tools to promote your products.Always plan a head of things and plan it on a daily routine to do a set of task to build momentum for your online business. Here is a example how I plan my business, I wanted to create a community online to share my expertise on Web Design and Graphics to a audience of people online.However, sharing knowledge on that is pretty common, so I planned to have a unique selling point compared to the rest of my competitors. I shared valuable information on not only on how to design website, but how you can generate massive amount of traffic for your online business.To know what's your unique selling point, you first have to ask yourself what is it that you can provide that your current competitors do not do, which can give more value to your customers.Always have that in your mind during your planning and plan out a action plan task you need to do to accomplish what you want to achieve.Step 4 - Implementation and SetupThis process is normally the part where most people will feel frustrated about. From my experience, normal people who are used to a 9 to 5 desk job will normally only know how to do two things in their job. Check emails and reply emails.Most will always get stuck in the process of developing your website for your business. But like any businessman, you do
Prettejohn further explained that if insurance/reinsurance companies fail to achieve contract certainty and thus cannot fully assess their exposure then the rationale for regulatory interest (FSA) is obvious.
Prettejohn concludes that, “We have no choice in the drive to contract certainty; we simply have to make it happen. The commercial and regulatory rationale cannot be denied. As such, I would prefer that as far as Lloyd’s is concerned, we do not have to exercise any mandate or sanction to enforce compliance. A voluntary market solution is distinctly preferable and it is certainly to be preferred to FSA enforcement.”
The London Market is on its way to meeting their goal. Where are we and can we str
The debate over how much of a companies large reserves of spending power should be spent with greedy, oafish design agencies rages on and is not about to be resolved in this trite article, however we can suggest some alternatives to the usual company logo ideas and perhaps for once bad could be the new good...or something.A company logo should make you stop and think... How many times have you heard your design manager or someone from the marketing/advertising department going on about the need for a clever logo or a design that 'thinks outside the box'? In marketing terms this is met by much consternation by people with any sense of reality and nodding agreement from the rest of the clueless saps who pass off as the workforce these days. Thinking outside the box in this day and age is what all your competitors are doing. To move with the times we either have to think 'over' the box or get on a retro trip and think yourself back inside the box, now that everyone has gone outside to think.A company logo should stick in your mind's eye Continuing with our theme of going back to basics in terms of logo design. The trend that is emerging and proving highly profitably in certain quarters is the 'so bad its good' theme. Easyjet, Pot Noodle, Tango, Spam... I'm thinking off the top of my head here but all these brands once languished in obscurity and given a little bit of a trashy makeover have seen sales rocket. The same can be said for the previously unheard of Cillit Bang cleaning brand - design so off putting it makes you want to punch yourself in the face and with the most ridiculous name imaginable but hey whats happening, it's stuck in shoppers minds and bingo like groaning zombies they bought the product without actually realising what it is and why they just paid for it.When good logos turn bad or how to un-design a logo Built in failure plays a big p
Introduction
Historically, the Sellers and Buyers of reinsurance have been notoriously lax in getting “actual contracts” negotiated, drafted and signed. We all know the heralded stories of “handshake deals” and “cover notes written on napkins”; everyone knew each other and deals were done as a gentlemen’s agreement. The deal was priority, the contract was not. With the growth of the reinsurance community and the involvement of larger sums of money, this remiss practice led to “regulatory involvement’ in 1994 when the Plenary Committee of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) adopted amendments to Chapter 22 of the NAIC Accounting Practices and Procedures Manual establishing what has become known as the “Ninth Month Rule”.
Ninth Month Rule
In the early 1990’s there was regulatory concern that parties to a reinsurance agreement may reconstruct essential coverage terms of a previously negotiated reinsurance deal after the losses have occurred in order to take reinsurance credit for a transaction that involves no transfer of insurance risk.
Thus, on September 18, 1994 amendments were adopted which revised Chapter 22 of the NAIC Accounting Practices and Procedures Manual. The Manual is used by most states to establish statutory accounting practices for insurers. Specifically, Chapter 22 governs how reinsurance transactions will be accounted for in the financial statements of insurance and reinsurance companies.
One of the amendments prescribed a special accounting treatment for reinsurance transactions where the contract associated with said transaction has not been signed within nine months of the inception date of the transaction (i.e. the “Nine Month Rule”). Thus, if a contract is not signed within the specified nine months the underlying transaction will receive retrospective accounting treatment which would significantly impact the financial statement of the insurer.
Silverstein and Spitzer
Following the events of September 11, 2001 (in particular, the Silverstein case) and the investigations of the industry by the Attorney General of New York, it is not hard to imagine that regulators may once again take a look at how the industry executes its contracts. Is this what we want as an industry?
Ronald Reagan once said “the nine most terrifying words in the English Language are: ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” Well… I won’t go so far as to say regulators are terrifying, but if we are not proactive enough to help ourselves, we can be sure that we’ll be faced with further regulations.
The issue in the Silverstein case had to do with the definition of “occurrence” or rather the lack thereof. This issue arose because the parties failed to reach agreed upon contract wording before the loss occurred. While this example is in the context of an insurance binder, the same problems emerge in regard to reinsurance placement slips. In any case, this exposed to the public and highlighted to regulators a less than sophisticated business practice that occurs in both the insurance and reinsurance industries. (i.e. incomplete terms at inception). It should not have been surprising; many examples of this type of issue have been happening for years.
New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer’s investigation threw the spotlight on a heretofore little known industry and the lack of disclosure that was exposed has no doubt cast a shadow on the image of our industry with consumers and regulators. The fact that, as an industry practice, contracts are not signed until almost nine months after the inception date only darkens that shadow of suspicion.
These events have rightfully awakened some in the industry to push for contracts to be signed by inception with full disclosure of all contract terms and conditions.
London Market and Contract Certainty
In London, the Financial Services Authority (FSA) (“an independent non-governmental body, given statutory powers by the Financial Services Ad Markets Act 2000”; according to its website) has set a challenge for the UK insurance industry to achieve “contract certainty” by the end of 2006. Should the industry fail to meet this deadline the FSA has indicated that regulatory intervention will result with possible “operational risk charges, other capital charges and specific rules.”
Nick Prettejohn, CEO of Lloyds, in a speech to the Insurance Insider Breakfast Briefing stated that there are commercial and regulatory reasons for a move towards contract certainty which he defined as “not only contract delivery” (i.e. having a contract produced or drafted prior to inception) but as a “complete and final agreement of all terms between the insured and insurers before inception”. Prettejohn explained that contract certainty is essential in order to minimize risk because without it underwriters have uncertainty about their exposure: “uncertainty over exposure for underwriters leads not only to reserving risk but also to an inability to properly understand business performance and therefore pricing. Inability to calculate exposure properly leads to capital misallocation.” Thus, he states, there is a “commercial case” for contract certainty.
Prettejohn further explained that if insurance/reinsurance companies fail to achieve contract certainty and thus cannot fully assess their exposure then the rationale for regulatory interest (FSA) is obvious.
Prettejohn concludes that, “We have no choice in the drive to contract certainty; we simply have to make it happen. The commercial and regulatory rationale cannot be denied. As such, I would prefer that as far as Lloyd’s is concerned, we do not have to exercise any mandate or sanction to enforce compliance. A voluntary market solution is distinctly preferable and it is certainly to be preferred to FSA enforcement.”
The London Market is on its way to meeting their goal. Where are we and can we stri
Step 1 - IntroductionWhen the time comes and you are ready to market your idea, most likely you will turn your attention to large companies for help. After all, you are telling yourself, these huge, large corporations are experienced in invention marketing and will take care of my idea; they have unique domain knowledge and the expertise necessary for me to succeed. Without much ado, you take your idea and knock on the door of big conglomerate. You are asked to explain your idea and provide business plan. By the end of the day you are told to stay patient and wait while the big boys are taking care of you. You wait weeks and months; keep telling yourself that the phone may ring any day now. Unfortunately nothing happens until you give in – you call first and told that your idea was too non-commercial…Step 2 - Benefits Of Working With Smaller CompaniesStories like these are common when inventor has to deal with large corporations. It is a fact that the bigger the company is, the more bureaucratic it is. Many big companies lose focus and often hire employees who are either not qualified for the job, or just not interested in what they are doing. If you come across these folks who are trying to make you feel insignificant (and your idea unimportant and impractical) don't get discouraged by this - chances are you will be better off dealing with smaller company that is more focused and willing to take risks!Many smaller companies are focused on producing products that are specific to your area of interest. These companies are hungry for success and willing to take risks and introduce something new into the market in order to put themselves on the map. In addition, organizational structure of these smaller companies is less bureaucratic and it will be easier for you to come across people willing to take risks.Step 3 - Benefits Of Market Your Invention Yoursel
One of the amendments prescribed a special accounting treatment for reinsurance transactions where the contract associated with said transaction has not been signed within nine months of the inception date of the transaction (i.e. the “Nine Month Rule”). Thus, if a contract is not signed within the specified nine months the underlying transaction will receive retrospective accounting treatment which would significantly impact the financial statement of the insurer.
Silverstein and Spitzer
Following the events of September 11, 2001 (in particular, the Silverstein case) and the investigations of the industry by the Attorney General of New York, it is not hard to imagine that regulators may once again take a look at how the industry executes its contracts. Is this what we want as an industry?
Ronald Reagan once said “the nine most terrifying words in the English Language are: ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” Well… I won’t go so far as to say regulators are terrifying, but if we are not proactive enough to help ourselves, we can be sure that we’ll be faced with further regulations.
The issue in the Silverstein case had to do with the definition of “occurrence” or rather the lack thereof. This issue arose because the parties failed to reach agreed upon contract wording before the loss occurred. While this example is in the context of an insurance binder, the same problems emerge in regard to reinsurance placement slips. In any case, this exposed to the public and highlighted to regulators a less than sophisticated business practice that occurs in both the insurance and reinsurance industries. (i.e. incomplete terms at inception). It should not have been surprising; many examples of this type of issue have been happening for years.
New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer’s investigation threw the spotlight on a heretofore little known industry and the lack of disclosure that was exposed has no doubt cast a shadow on the image of our industry with consumers and regulators. The fact that, as an industry practice, contracts are not signed until almost nine months after the inception date only darkens that shadow of suspicion.
These events have rightfully awakened some in the industry to push for contracts to be signed by inception with full disclosure of all contract terms and conditions.
London Market and Contract Certainty
In London, the Financial Services Authority (FSA) (“an independent non-governmental body, given statutory powers by the Financial Services Ad Markets Act 2000”; according to its website) has set a challenge for the UK insurance industry to achieve “contract certainty” by the end of 2006. Should the industry fail to meet this deadline the FSA has indicated that regulatory intervention will result with possible “operational risk charges, other capital charges and specific rules.”
Nick Prettejohn, CEO of Lloyds, in a speech to the Insurance Insider Breakfast Briefing stated that there are commercial and regulatory reasons for a move towards contract certainty which he defined as “not only contract delivery” (i.e. having a contract produced or drafted prior to inception) but as a “complete and final agreement of all terms between the insured and insurers before inception”. Prettejohn explained that contract certainty is essential in order to minimize risk because without it underwriters have uncertainty about their exposure: “uncertainty over exposure for underwriters leads not only to reserving risk but also to an inability to properly understand business performance and therefore pricing. Inability to calculate exposure properly leads to capital misallocation.” Thus, he states, there is a “commercial case” for contract certainty.
Prettejohn further explained that if insurance/reinsurance companies fail to achieve contract certainty and thus cannot fully assess their exposure then the rationale for regulatory interest (FSA) is obvious.
Prettejohn concludes that, “We have no choice in the drive to contract certainty; we simply have to make it happen. The commercial and regulatory rationale cannot be denied. As such, I would prefer that as far as Lloyd’s is concerned, we do not have to exercise any mandate or sanction to enforce compliance. A voluntary market solution is distinctly preferable and it is certainly to be preferred to FSA enforcement.”
The London Market is on its way to meeting their goal. Where are we and can we str
In terms of how much money is traded at any given day, the New York Stock Exchange is considered the largest exchange market in the world. It is also regarded as the leader in the equities market in terms of technology and investments coming in from all corners of the globe. Every day, the New York Stock Exchange is where the biggest companies buy and sell billions of dollars worth of shares.The New York Stock Exchange consists of member-brokers who take on the trading of stocks (buying and selling) for clients, which are financially large companies based in different parts of the world. Combined, the value of companies that trade on the New York Stock Exchange is estimated at nearly four trillion dollars. Members of the New York Stock Exchange buy and sell millions of dollars worth of stock for their clients every single day.Through the New York Stock Exchange, companies sell their stocks to the public in an effort to raise money to use in their business operations. For instance, big corporations like Sony or Coca-Cola sell stocks on the New York Stock Exchange to the public. Those who buy stocks from these large corporations become stock owners of the companies. US-based corporations are not the only ones that can sell stocks on the New York Stock Exchange. Currently, there are about 2,800 companies located from all over the world listed on the New York Stock Exchange.Those who shares of large corporations are in part owners of those corporations and as such, these corporations must regard the shareholders as if they own a large portion of their stocks. The New York Stock Exchange requires all companies trading stock to provide their shareholders with complete financial reports the way they do their Chairman of the Board. You can find out more about stock trading at http://www.learningtotradestock.comTo safeguard the interest of investors, the New York Stock
The issue in the Silverstein case had to do with the definition of “occurrence” or rather the lack thereof. This issue arose because the parties failed to reach agreed upon contract wording before the loss occurred. While this example is in the context of an insurance binder, the same problems emerge in regard to reinsurance placement slips. In any case, this exposed to the public and highlighted to regulators a less than sophisticated business practice that occurs in both the insurance and reinsurance industries. (i.e. incomplete terms at inception). It should not have been surprising; many examples of this type of issue have been happening for years.
New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer’s investigation threw the spotlight on a heretofore little known industry and the lack of disclosure that was exposed has no doubt cast a shadow on the image of our industry with consumers and regulators. The fact that, as an industry practice, contracts are not signed until almost nine months after the inception date only darkens that shadow of suspicion.
These events have rightfully awakened some in the industry to push for contracts to be signed by inception with full disclosure of all contract terms and conditions.
London Market and Contract Certainty
In London, the Financial Services Authority (FSA) (“an independent non-governmental body, given statutory powers by the Financial Services Ad Markets Act 2000”; according to its website) has set a challenge for the UK insurance industry to achieve “contract certainty” by the end of 2006. Should the industry fail to meet this deadline the FSA has indicated that regulatory intervention will result with possible “operational risk charges, other capital charges and specific rules.”
Nick Prettejohn, CEO of Lloyds, in a speech to the Insurance Insider Breakfast Briefing stated that there are commercial and regulatory reasons for a move towards contract certainty which he defined as “not only contract delivery” (i.e. having a contract produced or drafted prior to inception) but as a “complete and final agreement of all terms between the insured and insurers before inception”. Prettejohn explained that contract certainty is essential in order to minimize risk because without it underwriters have uncertainty about their exposure: “uncertainty over exposure for underwriters leads not only to reserving risk but also to an inability to properly understand business performance and therefore pricing. Inability to calculate exposure properly leads to capital misallocation.” Thus, he states, there is a “commercial case” for contract certainty.
Prettejohn further explained that if insurance/reinsurance companies fail to achieve contract certainty and thus cannot fully assess their exposure then the rationale for regulatory interest (FSA) is obvious.
Prettejohn concludes that, “We have no choice in the drive to contract certainty; we simply have to make it happen. The commercial and regulatory rationale cannot be denied. As such, I would prefer that as far as Lloyd’s is concerned, we do not have to exercise any mandate or sanction to enforce compliance. A voluntary market solution is distinctly preferable and it is certainly to be preferred to FSA enforcement.”
The London Market is on its way to meeting their goal. Where are we and can we str
There are a wealth of search engine optimization tips available free on the web to assist internet marketers in improving their page rank. Beware! Many of them are outdated and can destroy your carefully cultivated ranking.When you are reading information on how to make your site more search friendly, always check the date it was posted. It is important to remember that the entire history of the internet as the average person has experienced it spans only a decade or so. Because of the amazing collective memory of the internet, a lot of old info is still floating around.We've come a long way in that decade - especially in terms of how information on the internet is indexed, or as you think of it, how your website's search engine ranking is determined. All “tricks” to getting a higher search ranking have a lifespan. At first they may be wildly successful, pulling in traffic by playing to flaws in the search engines' logic. When the technique becomes common enough, the search engine programmers take note and adjust their algorithms.Back in the distant, foggy past (1996 or so) that process could take quite a while and thus the “trick” would stay useful. Nowadays the window between discovery of an exploit and correction by the search engines is much smaller. What's more, the search engines have become vindictive and may very well ban you for using the wrong method of getting traffic. If you rely on Google and other engines for your livelihood, that could spell complete disaster!Be wise and avoid any technique that feels “scammy” to you. Commonly repeated techniques to avoid include: multiple domains that point to one site or multiple sites with exactly the same content; ”invisible” keywords using text the same color as the background; listing the same keyword multiple times in a row; immediately redirecting to a different domain; and many, many more.
These events have rightfully awakened some in the industry to push for contracts to be signed by inception with full disclosure of all contract terms and conditions.
London Market and Contract Certainty
In London, the Financial Services Authority (FSA) (“an independent non-governmental body, given statutory powers by the Financial Services Ad Markets Act 2000”; according to its website) has set a challenge for the UK insurance industry to achieve “contract certainty” by the end of 2006. Should the industry fail to meet this deadline the FSA has indicated that regulatory intervention will result with possible “operational risk charges, other capital charges and specific rules.”
Nick Prettejohn, CEO of Lloyds, in a speech to the Insurance Insider Breakfast Briefing stated that there are commercial and regulatory reasons for a move towards contract certainty which he defined as “not only contract delivery” (i.e. having a contract produced or drafted prior to inception) but as a “complete and final agreement of all terms between the insured and insurers before inception”. Prettejohn explained that contract certainty is essential in order to minimize risk because without it underwriters have uncertainty about their exposure: “uncertainty over exposure for underwriters leads not only to reserving risk but also to an inability to properly understand business performance and therefore pricing. Inability to calculate exposure properly leads to capital misallocation.” Thus, he states, there is a “commercial case” for contract certainty.
Prettejohn further explained that if insurance/reinsurance companies fail to achieve contract certainty and thus cannot fully assess their exposure then the rationale for regulatory interest (FSA) is obvious.
Prettejohn concludes that, “We have no choice in the drive to contract certainty; we simply have to make it happen. The commercial and regulatory rationale cannot be denied. As such, I would prefer that as far as Lloyd’s is concerned, we do not have to exercise any mandate or sanction to enforce compliance. A voluntary market solution is distinctly preferable and it is certainly to be preferred to FSA enforcement.”
The London Market is on its way to meeting their goal. Where are we and can we str
One of the ways that I have found to develop rapport right off the bat with my subscribers is by giving them free gifts.I think that one of the things over the last few years that has been very strong and has been very effective is sending out content e-mails.However, I'm not so sure that that is the strongest thing anymore.With the advent of so many free gifts, etc., I think that just sending out great content is not enough anymore.I think that you have to offer free gifts.Where do you get these free gifts to give away?Well, one of the things that you can do to create these gifts is to write your own e-books. I write short 10 page e-books, they take me an hour or two to write, and send them to my subscribers, especially on the first visit after the first visit. Then I look for products that other people have created that I can purchase the giveaway rights to it.Now that is something is interesting, to address here, and that is giveaway rights. Just because you purchase, for example, master resale rights to something does not any way shape or form imply that you also have giveaway rights. And often times there is a minimum price that is set on the master resale rights. And many times there is a restriction that the product cannot be given away that it has to be sold for some certain price or at a higher price than the some certain price.
Prettejohn further explained that if insurance/reinsurance companies fail to achieve contract certainty and thus cannot fully assess their exposure then the rationale for regulatory interest (FSA) is obvious.
Prettejohn concludes that, “We have no choice in the drive to contract certainty; we simply have to make it happen. The commercial and regulatory rationale cannot be denied. As such, I would prefer that as far as Lloyd’s is concerned, we do not have to exercise any mandate or sanction to enforce compliance. A voluntary market solution is distinctly preferable and it is certainly to be preferred to FSA enforcement.”
The London Market is on its way to meeting their goal. Where are we and can we strive toward the same goal without regulatory intervention?
Slip vs. Contract
Much of what Nick Prettejohn says also applies to the US Reinsurance Market. In order to have “contract certainty” (to borrow that phrase from our UK colleagues) there must be a complete and final agreement of all terms and conditions between the ceding company and the reinsurers before, or immediately following, inception.
Just out of law school I started my first “reinsurance job” barely having any idea of what “reinsurance” was. On my first day my new boss pointed out a pile of contracts that I could work on that “just came in”. Upon my review I noticed that these contracts that had “just come in” in September of 1988 had inception dates of January 1, 1977. Granted they were property cat covers, but just the same, it offended the sensibilities of a recent law school grad. What type of industry does business without a complete and signed contract? I wondered what I had gotten myself into.
Needless to say those “sensibilities” relaxed as I continued my reinsurance career and realized the reality that contracts were, in fact, signed at or before inception. They were called “placement slips” or “cover notes”, and though bare-boned they were still legally binding contracts. A more “complete” contract would be negotiated, drafted and signed at a later date, sometimes much later, as my anecdote indicates.
Any writing is enough to form a contract if it shows the intention of the parties to make an offer and acceptance. Thus, when a slip shows a promise by the insurance company to offer or cede premium and risk in exchange for a promise by the reinsurer to accept the premium and risk, you have a valid contract. Whether a slip contains enough information to answer all issues arising about the interpretation of the formed contract may be questionable. Any issues not fully vetted would be left for the parties to come to terms with in their business dealings or if they are unable to do so then to be decided by an arbitrator or judge.
With the advent of the Nine Month Rule, many reinsurers and brokers complained that it would be impossible to get contracts completed within such a time frame, (history shows this to be wrong, but it was the prevailing thought at the time). This new compressed time period pushed the brokers (and the direct markets) to include not just the usual laundry list of clauses in the slip, but to actually attach examples of clauses that were expected to be in the contract. This of course, has taken us a long way from the bare-boned cover note to something which had some substance to it. However, in light of the current market place we need to go farther.
I would argue that for purposes of “contract certainty” we need to push forward with a completed actual “contract” and not just a “complete slip” at inception. Since the use of a slip seems to imply that the terms and conditions are not yet completely set. Further to those persons not “in the business”, consumers and shareholders for example, it may seem like an actual contract has not been agreed to and it is just business as usual.
Contract Certainty
The problems with obtaining contract certainty are many. Having to negotiate contract provisions other than the strictly financial terms of a placement can lengthen and intensify the negotiation/placement process and put further pressure on an already hectic and harried renewal period. If it takes more time to negotiate the placement slip, it could possibly lead some brokers to fail to fully place coverage by the inception date, thus doing a disservice to their clients. Note that particularly in the “broker market”, because coverage is placed by “subscription”, you may not obtain agreements by all reinsurers at an early enough date to have the contract in place by inception. Very often the dynamics of negotiation take discussions right up to the inception date. In this case, considering that an underwriter’s authorization is at least partially based on the contract provisions, the underwriter would not be able to have a contract “in hand” at inception that reflects what has been currently negotiated.
Some have suggested “standardized wordings”. In that regard, maybe it would facilitate a quicker review of the wording because of familiarity. However, as a practical matter each cover is different; from the rate charged to the business covered, and thus “standardized wording” will not work in all situations. There is also the question as to whose “standardized wordings”. What the ceding company would tend to want as “standard” may tend to be what the reinsurance market would like least and vice versa. Any “industry standard” may run afoul of anti-trust considerations. In any case it is important to note that the placement of reinsurance is
HTTP = HTML link (for blogs, profiles,phorums):
<a href="http://www.added4u.com/article/120792/added4u-SelfMotivation-or-Regulation.html">Self-Motivation or Regulation</a>
BB link (for phorums):
[url=http://www.added4u.com/article/120792/added4u-SelfMotivation-or-Regulation.html]Self-Motivation or Regulation[/url]
Related Articles:
Freight Forwarding Companies Are Encouraged to Move Off The Roads
Planning to Pass Your Business on to Family Members
Bookmark it:
|