Development of Simplified Issue Products in Canada L élaboration de produits à émission simplifiée au Canada

Transcription

1 JUNE 2014 ANNUAL MEETING VANCOUVER (SESSION 24) 1 Session 24: Séance 24 : Development of Simplified Issue Products in Canada L élaboration de produits à émission simplifiée au Canada MODERATOR/ MODÉRATRICE : SPEAKERS/ CONFÉRENCIERS : Cathy Shum-Adams Kris Boundy Pamela Kwiatkowski Chris Ricketts?? = Inaudible/Indecipherable ph = phonetic Unknown = Unidentified speaker Moderator Cathy Shum-Adams: Good afternoon. Welcome to Session 24: Development of Simplified Issue (SI) Products in Canada. Innovation in the past few years has sparked an array of simplified issue products in the Canadian marketplace. The format of this session is a panel discussion. There is a lot of ground to cover for this topic. What the panellists have done is carefully select a list of pertinent topics we thought the audience would be interested in. We have a lot of time at the end of the session for questions and comments after the panellists have presented or have finished their discussions. Let me do a very quick introduction of the panellists we have today in alphabetical order. To my left is Kris Boundy, who is a director of individual reinsurance at Munich Re. Kris, an actuary by training, is a Fellow of the CIA and a Fellow of the SOA. Pamela Kwiatkowski is the brokerage development manager for Assumption Life. Pamela frequently conducts seminars with affinity groups, financial institutions, industry associations, and has a tremendous amount of experience with all types of media. Last but not least is Chris Ricketts. She s a director of underwriting at BW Underwriting Services. Chris is the former president of the Canadian Association of Living Benefits Underwriters, and most recently spent several years on the executive of the Canadian Institute of Underwriters. As you can see we have representations from actuarial, from distribution, and from underwriting. This is a very high-level summary to define the discussions to follow. There are a couple of items that I would like to emphasize. First, while there are simplified issue critical illness and disability products available in the marketplace, the most prevalent one would be the life one, where there are the most number of issuers involved in selling simplified issue life products.

2 2 ASSEMBLÉE GÉNÉRALE ANNUELLE JUIN 2014, VANCOUVER (SÉANCE 24) Second, the reference to simplified issue products, for the sake of our discussions today, is actually for those SI products that are sold by insurance companies. You may ask why we re making that particular distinction. One may tend to think about creditor products particularly those that are sold by the banks where there are only a few questions asked are simplified issue products too. They are. For the sake of our discussion today, we are focusing on the simplified issue products sold by an insurance company. This is a perfect lead-in to my next slide, which shows a comparison of the bank mortgage creditor product versus the insurance company s simplified issue products. These are only the key highlights for some of the areas and this is, of course, just strictly on life coverage. In terms of the number of plans for the bank mortgage creditor products, there are about 17. As you all know, the big five banks and other banking institutions are all involved in selling these products. Keep in mind these products are actually underwritten by life insurance companies. Those are the risk-takers behind them. For insurance company products, there are term SI products as well as permanent SI products which are sold more as a final expense product. Some companies sell both term and perm and if I were to count T10, T20, T25 and the perm, there are about 30 plans or so in Canada. In terms of the process, the bank mortgage creditor product is simple. It is tied in with the loan application. When the person applies for a loan, the person is also presented with the insurance offer. The simplified issue product by the insurance company has to be initiated either by the buyer (the applicants) or the advisor (he seller). In terms of coverage. The bank s product is a decreasing coverage. It covers the outstanding loan plus perhaps any penalty and/or accrued interest. For the insurance company, mostly they are level coverage. There are some simplified issue products that are designed specifically for mortgage protection and of course those will carry a decreasing balance. I mentioned before, previously an SI product could be term, it could perm. For the rest of the table the comparison is made against the insurance company SI term products. I think that is a more appropriate comparison to the mortgage creditor products. In terms of maximum issue age: 64 is the most common age with the banks versus the insurance company it is at a higher age about 70. In terms of termination age: again the most common with the bank product is age 70. For the insurance company, as you can see, it s into the eighties. What this means is that due to the higher termination age, the coverage actually continues for the level term coverage product. It continues even after the mortgage is paid off. For joint coverage at banks it is readily available with the mortgage product on two lives sometimes even on multiple lives and the benefit is payable upon first death. With the insurance company, it is available but perhaps not as common. For those products that are designed for mortgage protection specifically, it is certainly available for joint coverage. Amortization period for the bank, most common is 25 years. For the insurance company, as you can see, there is T10, T20, T25, with termination ages well into the eighties. We should mention that a couple of plans are non-renewable, they are only offered for the 10, 20, or 25 years and thereafter they are not renewable for the insurance company. Maximum coverage: for the banks, $500,000 is the most common. For the insurance company, it really depends on the type of coverage. There are two different types of plan available. There is a Vol. 45, juin 2014 DÉLIBÉRATIONS DE L INSTITUT CANADIEN DES ACTUAIRES

3 JUNE 2014 ANNUAL MEETING VANCOUVER (SESSION 24) 3 deferred plan, which means the benefits payable are restricted for the first few years. It is usually deferred for the first two years. Benefits are not payable unless death results from accidental means. The list of questions will not be as long as the one for the immediate coverage plan. For the deferred the most common amount is $300,000. For the immediate, it s about a quarter of a million. It s interesting to note that because we re talking about this for mortgage protection if you look at CMHC s mortgage data the outstanding mortgage is only about $200 and some thousand. We re not talking about millions. In terms of the ROP (return of premium) feature, it is not applicable with the bank products because they pay right away. For the insurance defer plan most of them carry an interest component, the most common interest rates at 3%. Accelerated benefit, you can think of the terminal illness benefit. It is not common with the bank products. There are only one or two plans that I looked at that offered it. With the insurance company it is also not as common, but there maybe a few more offering it than the banks. Premium rates. It doesn t come as a surprise to you with the banks products they are higher than the insurance products. With the insurance products they are higher than conventional fully underwritten business. In terms of guaranteed premiums creditor, on paper, technically, the rates are not guaranteed; however, in reality it is my understanding that the rates have never been changed once coverage took effect. Guaranteed premiums are commonly available with products sold by the insurance company. Underwriting. Both of them are non-medical, it does not matter bank versus insurance company. The banks typically ask three to five questions if the mortgage amount, or loan amount, is under a quarter of a million, $250,000. For higher amounts, because the max coverage goes to $500,000, tele-underwriting applies. For insurance, non-medical again, the range of questions depends on the plan you look at. Some have three, some go up to 27 questions. Although it s not very common, for some of the plans the tele-underwriting applies as well. The pre-ex clauses are very common with the mortgage creditor product and the most common is a 12/12 pre-ex. Versus the insurance company where there are a couple of plans. We had a discussion at breakfast today there s one insurance company with a term product that has a preex and there is another product that is designed for a mortgage protection that has a pre-ex as well. Insurability. Once the application is approved with the bank product, it remains approved even if, let s say, the applicant then later applies for an addition to the mortgage to do home renovations. Up to a certain limit of that addition, it s actually not subject to reassessment of the risk. If it s subject to reassessment and if that person is declined for the additional portion, the original coverage stays in place. Of course with the insurance company s products, once it s approved at the beginning, it stays approved. For the beneficiary with the credit product, the beneficiary is the bank. The insurance product, the policyholder has a choice to name the beneficiary. The indexed option is not common. Not applicable to the bank products. It is applicable to some of the plans sold by the insurance company.

4 4 ASSEMBLÉE GÉNÉRALE ANNUELLE JUIN 2014, VANCOUVER (SÉANCE 24) The AD&D. It is not common, not in the industry norm, for the banks to offer AD&D. Although, I think there may be one or two plans that offer it. For the insurance company, it s actually quite common to offer AD&D benefits. It is usually up to two times the benefit if death is through accidental means. Additional benefits. At the bank, when you go in for a loan, they don t just sell you the life. They sell life, DI, and CI. Most banks offer creditor life. Some offer DI, and a few offer to CI. If it s all offered it is sold as a package. I mentioned in my introductory remarks that there are actually more insurance companies selling SI life than SI CI and DI. Depending on the carrier that the applicant chooses, the insurance company may not have the full range of products. Portability. That s an interesting one. If it s a mortgage product taken out with a credit union, my understanding is that coverage is portable within the credit union network so can you go from credit union A to B. That mortgage creditor product is portable there is an underwriter in the industry as well as an insurance company, their product is portable as well. For the most part, it s not portable within different banking institutions. For insurance company it is no problem. You own the policy. It doesn t matter if you have a mortgage at Royal Bank and tomorrow you switch to TD. That s a quick summary of the comparisons between the products. Now, we shall go into our panelist discussion. UNKNOWN: I just wanted to know if affinity products are included in today or would that be more like banks? Moderator Shum-Adams: For the sake of my comparison, I did not include the affinity in the insurance company products, but there would be another one that... UNKNOWN: And today, it s probably not going to be covered? Moderator Shum-Adams: No. UNKNOWN: Right, OK. That s fine. Moderator Shum-Adams: Thank you. Now we re going to go into the panellists discussions and we have a lot of time for questions at the end. If you would kindly let the panellists finish their discussions and you would kindly come up to the mic afterwards to pose your questions that would be great. Moving forward, looking back. The very last slide of our presentation is a moving forward question. We re going to look at the evolution of the simplified issue products a few years down the road. It s only appropriate that we start with a question on looking back in terms of the evolution of these products in Canada over time. For that, I m going to call on Chris Ricketts to give us a summary on the history. Speaker Chris Ricketts: Thanks, Cathy. As Cathy said, I m going to talk a little bit about the evolution of the simplified issue products in Canada. Originally, we saw these starting to be sold back in the early 1990s, looking for a cheaper and faster way of doing business and underwriting. Initially, the face amounts were very low. The SI app, as we know, contained several kick-out questions so we don t get those uninsurable risks coming in to us initially to look at during the underwriting process. Plus, an unlimited number of medical and non-medical questions are in the Part 2. Vol. 45, juin 2014 DÉLIBÉRATIONS DE L INSTITUT CANADIEN DES ACTUAIRES

5 JUNE 2014 ANNUAL MEETING VANCOUVER (SESSION 24) 5 The first 10 years, the insurance applications were generally paper-based and technology provided little more than a simple data entry vehicle and an admin system to process your underwriting applications. All applications required some type of underwriter or jet issue review at that point in time. The underwriting of the SI product presented some challenges. Decisions needed to be made with fewer medical requirements. This was not always an easy transition for underwriters who had been working with only fully underwritten products. That s really one of the big shifts and one of the big challenges that we ve continued to see in the industry with respect to underwriters, not being able to make that shift easily. We also had the challenges of a significant number of incomplete applications, which slowed down the process. Cheaper and faster was something that we really wanted to be focusing on. Over the years, a large number of companies have utilized MIB as a significant value-add to verify the details of medical history and identify red flags that the application otherwise would not uncover. For some companies, this also includes the IAI, the insurance activity index, where you can take a look and see: is the client applying or have they applied other places? Are there other outstanding applications? You get a better picture as to what s going on. Over the past 10-plus years, we ve seen a steady increase in the number of companies adopting and selling the SI products. As Cathy said, the focus has been primarily on the term life coverage. We had the knock-out questions for the uninsurable risks. As experience grew these questions were modified and tweaked to ensure more comprehensive client disclosures and improve claims experience. Some insurers have moved to the shortened application process, limiting medical and nonmedical questions on the Part 2, resulting in an expedited application process. The accountability of the collection of sensitive questions transferred from the advisor to the skilled interviewers. For the newer advisors this has been, for the most part, a welcome shift. For the ones that have been in the industry a long time, not so much. They still want to have the control of the application process and so it has presented some challenges along the way. As we ve gained experience in the market over the past 20-plus years, there have been some good improvements with the application question wording. We better understand how to ask the right questions. We clearly see that these really do influence the outcome of the underwriting process, and ultimately, we re gaining better decisions. Development of questions, focusing on creating questions which use plain language, has allowed the client to be able to comprehend the questions that are being asked. That has been a big focus of the industry over the past five to 10 years, making sure that we re writing the wording on the applications, including the medical questions, in layman s terms very, very important. Again, it has resulted in improved client disclosures which have assisted with making better underwriting decisions. This helps to alleviate the challenges which historically arise at claim time. There s been a shift, too, to a greater number of drill-down and reflexive questioning. Although the key focus was initially on the length of the interview, the additional reflexive questions have really created a bit of a longer interview process. This really wasn t a desirable thing initially, but we ve seen that it has assisted with limiting our exposure to bad risks.

6 6 ASSEMBLÉE GÉNÉRALE ANNUELLE JUIN 2014, VANCOUVER (SÉANCE 24) The SI product has paid particular attention to areas which present significant risks. Things like alcohol and drug use, cancer, heart and cardiovascular disease, diabetes we ve seen a huge increase in the number of diabetics over the past 20 years, especially Type II and pre-diabetes kidney, respiratory and liver disorders, HIV and AIDS, blood disorders, hospitalizations, tests not yet completed so things that the client has not yet had completed which their doctor may have recommended and symptoms that they may have for which they have not yet sought medical treatment. Reduced age and amount requirements, improved level of client disclosures on the SI applications, and certainly, the tele-interview process transferring that ownership and accountability over to those folks that are really the experts in that area have assisted us with gaining the right types of disclosures. By the early 2000s, insurers began looking at the feasibility of building or implementing an expert underwriting engine in whole or in part. These are really an ideal vehicle to pass the SI application through with automated decision making running anywhere from a low end of 20% to a high end of 70%. This really depends upon the ability of the company to be able to build some complex rules and ensure that the right decision is coming out of those rules engines. It has provided us with consistency in underwriting decisions and reduction in underwriting costs. We ve seen some significant reductions in cycle time, fewer errors, and ultimately a product that has been in some ways easier to sell. It has allowed for risks that may not be otherwise insurable to be placed, providing an improved client experience over the traditional application process. There are still some cautionary notes, though. We have some different demographics that we re dealing with in the SI market. We have higher than average lapse rates, especially within the first couple of years and with the younger ages. These are challenges for advisors. They don t necessarily have the same control that they ve had in the past with respect to dealing with their client, knowing their client. We really do need to keep a close eye on things as we move forward. Moderator Shum-Adams: Thank you, Chris. Speaker Kris Boundy: I just had one comment there as well, about the evolution that we ve seen in the actual target market. As Chris mentioned, many of the products we ve seen up to this point really focused on the final expense market. We ve also seen products that have focused on serving the impaired mortality market. I think the discussion, more recently, has turned to figuring out how to get to that under-insured Canadian population more about the middle market, family market. Shifting this discussion a little bit now, from those types of target markets to this middle market are. I m sure you ve heard this stated elsewhere today, I know I have, from the LIMRA underinsurance study saying that 45% of Canadians recognize that they are underinsured. How are we reaching those people? Moderator Shum-Adams: Thank you, thank you to both. The next question we re going to direct to Pamela. What do brokers and advisors focus on when evaluating the choices of simplified issue products available in the market? Speaker Pamela Kwiatkowski: Good afternoon. It s a pleasure to have you all here in Vancouver. It s a lot of fun for someone in distribution to be in a room with actuaries. I know how often that happens. I think before we look at what the advisor is looking for from the SI market, I think we need to fully understand what the history of the advisor s experience has been in the SI market. Historically, that sale has been a reactive sale. The broker has a client, submitted an application, and it comes back with a rating, a postponement or a decline. The Vol. 45, juin 2014 DÉLIBÉRATIONS DE L INSTITUT CANADIEN DES ACTUAIRES

7 JUNE 2014 ANNUAL MEETING VANCOUVER (SESSION 24) 7 broker says, Oh, my goodness, what am I going to do here? I don t know what to do. My client has been declined. I ve got a problem. I didn t really understand. I didn t take the para-med, so I wasn t sure that there was going to be anything going on. Then they go to their MGA and they say, I need a solution. I need a quote. I need product information. At that point advisors weren t focused on the SI market. You had very few distributors that were targeted on the SI market, but by and large, advisors were not. It was one of those things that, I don t know where to look and how to find it, and so they d go to the MGA. I think the good news today is that we re moving from that reactive sale into more of a proactive sale. The advisor, with the shift in demographics and people living longer with disease, realizes that this is a very important gap in the briefcase to fill, thus we ve had an increase in SI products. The advisor is better able and better equipped to sit down with that customer and look at that customer from a more holistic point of view. Oftentimes offer an SI solution when it might best suit the client. Previously what would happen is that client, then being presented with an SI solution, is looking at a deferred product which is not the best solution for the client. It also provides that advisor an opportunity to open up into markets where the consumer is not so price sensitive, but they re process sensitive. They don t want to be asked a number of medical questions that are invasive. They don t want a needle, they don t want blood, and they don t want a para-med coming to their home. It really gives the advisor a greater breadth of products to offer their customer. With the growth of the SI market and the products that are coming to market presently, the insurers need to sharpen their pencils to get better at what we do and what is the advisor really looking for. I think a couple of things. First of all, they look at the claims history of the company. When we look at SI products, particularly historically, advisors sell a lot of them in rural areas or communities or within their centre of influence. It s very important to that advisor that the promise to pay actually happens. When you re in historically a senior market we all know if one thing happens everybody knows about it in the community. The other thing they re looking at is a lot of SI products have opened the doors to more accessibility to the ethnic markets persons on work visas. To Chris s point, the clarity and the language is so vital to the advisor. Also for some of the advisors English is their second language, not just their customer s. We endeavour to make sure that those medical questions are clear and easy to understand for both the advisor and the customer, leaving little room for interpretation. I think that s something that we as an industry need to continue to hone and to work on. The ability to sell non-face-to-face is important to the advisor, because the sale of an SI product is not the big whale. The advisor s not making a whole lot of money on that sale. It is typically to solve a problem that their customer has or to fill a gap. We need to make sure that their cost of acquisition and their efficiencies are as great as they can be. The non-face-to-face that also work with those advisors and distribution sources are in the internet space, the lead generation. That s also very important to them. We think of the advisor what does an advisor want? Well, I want lower premium and higher commission. That is not true, especially in the SI market. They re really looking for a quality product because at that point they would rather have a sale than no sale. The advisor s invested a lot of time and energy into that client and into trying to get a sale, so they re more looking to: is

8 8 ASSEMBLÉE GÉNÉRALE ANNUELLE JUIN 2014, VANCOUVER (SÉANCE 24) this product easy to sell? Is it easy for me to understand? Does it have an electronic process? Then I don t have the errors that I ve experienced in a traditional paper application process. If you ve been in the business, you know that advisors they have these applications and they miss one question, they re back to their MGA, they re back to their customer and the cycle time just goes on and the customer not-taken increases. They want to look at the efficiencies of doing that business and not so much the compensation. Although it is obviously important to them, it s not as traditionally important as it would be in the term or the UL market. I think conversion options are important as more products come to the market. Also, higher limits, more additional riders being available, and a broader breadth of age ranges. In the SI market final expense typically the older customer looking for $25,000 face amount, barely. Now we re looking at lifestyle choices where people become uninsurable. I kind of use the joke of being in Vancouver you re weed smokers, daily weed smokers, and need to have access to insurance. That s a reality. I get the call all the time. I think one of the things from the insurer s perspective that the advisor is looking for, is how do I tap into that market? Stop just pushing product information on me. I m getting that all the time. I get all this product information. You re coming out with a new product, that s great, but help me market to that underserved market. What tools are you going to give me? How are you going to educate me particularly in the ethnic market? Teach me about the industry. Why is it changing? What are these products? Where do they fit? Can you help me market? I think that that is where today s advisor is really looking to us for help: Help me tap into that market cost effectively so I can earn a living. The other thing that I think that the SI market presents is, for those MGA s and distribution sources, you have new advisors coming into the business. I think SI presents a great opportunity for that new advisor to get their feet wet in the business. Products they can get compensated for quickly because it is a tough business for a new advisor. If they can sell a product that s easy for them to understand and easy for their customer to understand and they get paid quickly, then they can move on and expand. It s almost like getting their learner s licence, if you will, in the industry and getting paid. I think, to tie what the advisor is looking for is: they re looking for education, they re looking for more breadth in product and they re looking for assistance in how to tap into the marketplace. Moderator Shum-Adams: Thank you, Pamela. This is a big question. What are the considerations in terms of plan design, distribution, pricing, underwriting, et cetera, for an SI product, especially if this is a brand new initiative for an insurer? All three of our panellists have their comments. Pamela will start with her viewpoint on distribution target market, followed by Chris Ricketts on underwriting and the impact on the target market on underwriting. Kris Boundy will wrap it up in terms of the pricing and its impact on everything how distribution underwriting target market has an impact on pricing. Pamela, if you could start first please. Speaker Kwiatkowski: It s funny. When we were talking about the panel discussion and who s going to lead off, I said, I think I ll lead off, because actually at Assumption we just went through this exercise at the end of 2012 and Many of you may or may not know the history of Assumption, but we ve been very strong in the SI market as a permanent solution for the older, hard-to-insure customer in the final expense market. Our distribution loves the fact that we have an electronic process and we re quick to pay. They came to us and said, It s great that you ve got this permanent solution, but for a lot of my customers they simply can t afford a Vol. 45, juin 2014 DÉLIBÉRATIONS DE L INSTITUT CANADIEN DES ACTUAIRES

9 JUNE 2014 ANNUAL MEETING VANCOUVER (SESSION 24) 9 permanent solution and furthermore, they want a higher limit than what you re offering, and they want some more flexibility within the plan. So how about you develop a term product for the hard-to-insure market? We went to them and said, What are you looking for? What does your customer want? If we were to build this, what would work for you? They came back and we did sales projections, got some competitive intelligence. Then we brought it back and said, OK, is this going to fit with our platform? Is this going to fit with our strategic plan? It did and it s a great success. We ve exceeded our targets. It was a wonderful exercise to go through in terms of expanding our SI product distribution. That is where we launched that whole exercise. Speaker Ricketts: Onto the underwriting side of things. I think I was fortunate. For a number of years in my career, I see of them in the audience here, I worked for actuaries. I think that it really helped me to gain a far greater understanding of really the breadth, the end-to-end process. Starting with sales and right through to the claims process and seeing how important that really is. Obtaining input and buy-in from the field and really understanding what their needs are. Listening to them and continually engaging them. Understanding what their challenges are. What the opportunities are. Really having continued dialogue and making sure that we re focused on those things. Understand the target market and the demographics when underwriting the risk. Understand the risk of anti-selection and non-disclosure, a big chunk of things. Create an underwriting process that s fast and easy for the client and the advisor. I think we still have some work to do in this area. There certainly have been some improvements with that over the past 10 years in underwriting. I think that we need to think a lot more outside the box and figure out more creative ways that we can really expedite the underwriting process. I think that we re a little bit stuck in the mud sometimes with unnecessarily asking additional questions and getting details that aren t really required in order to make a sound decision. Getting the age and amount requirements right. Working closely with the actuarial team, making sure that we re all working off the same page so that we don t have any gaps down the road and that we re competitive within the industry. Application wording. Utilizing the plain language, as I was talking about before, is so critical for both the medical and non-medical language on the application. Ensuring that we have robust reflexive questions focusing on those key impairments which are our highest mortality risks. The turnaround time, again, I think that utilization of looking at rules engines to assist you, looking at the cost and benefit of those. My experience over the past, approximately 15 years now, has been that rules engines can really do a lot to expedite the underwriting and bring about those consistencies with decisions and confidence in the underwriting process. With that, you need to ensure that you have available skill and technical resources to analyze the data on a continued basis. You need to work closely with the actuarial product team and underwriting team to create and modify the rules engines as required. MIB: I think there are a few companies that don t utilize MIB, but certainly there s a huge productive value of utilizing MIB. Other considerations. I think that advisors are looking at what are the mortality thresholds. Where can I go to place the business and at what price is that going to be? Looking for underwriting shops that are flexible and creative with their underwriting decisions. Underwriters

10 10 ASSEMBLÉE GÉNÉRALE ANNUELLE JUIN 2014, VANCOUVER (SÉANCE 24) who are willing to think outside the box and look for creative ways to get it approved and get it issued. I m not sure that that is still happening. It s not happening everywhere at this point in time. Sometimes we re looking for ways to decline instead of ways to place the business, so working closely with reinsurers to figure out some creative solutions. Speaker Kris Boundy: I m going to now talk a little bit about what some of the considerations are from a pricing perspective. Now, obviously, this is a very large question. There are a lot of different factors, so I m just going to touch on a few different ones that I think are interesting and some that relate to the discussions that Pamela and Chris have already brought up. The first one is about the target market and how important it is to understand who it is you re hoping to target with this product. I spoke about some of the different markets that exist currently for SI. For the purpose of a large part of my discussion, I m really going to be focusing on that mid market, family market, in terms of the comments that I m sharing. For that market specifically, the price premium is very, very important in terms of attracting the good risks, making sure that you re getting standard risks in the door. The price premium needs to be justified by an improved client experience. You need to be able to get it to them faster, simpler, less intrusive. There needs to be a reason why that standard life is going to go and pay more, potentially, to get a simplified issue product. That s the first thing that you really need to keep in mind as you go through the development of a simplified issue product. As well, with the price differential, if you do start to see it growing too much, you are going to start to attract more impaired lives. This is going to affect your mortality assumption and then go back to your price. You re going to have to increase your price even more and that s going to continue to create a spiral. It s not going to be sustainable in the long term. So it is really important to get that price set properly from day one. Obviously, a large component of that price is going to come from what underwriting is actually being done. Specifically, what is the value of the underwriting that is not being completed may be one way to look at it. How is it different than the fully underwritten product? What value are you losing because of that? It s important to look at that specifically. Also making sure that the number and the quality of the underwriting questions that are being asked is there. Making sure the right questions are being asked. Making sure those questions are being asked in the right way. What I mean by that is, making sure that when you do see more non-disclosure coming through your product. That the way the question has been asked in the underwriting does leave room for investigation to be completed, if necessary, on early duration claims. Just to give an example of what I m looking at there, there are different ways to approach different questions that you may ask in underwriting. Looking at something like driving record as an example. If you ask, Have you ever lost your licence? The person may be able to answer that question honestly, but could still be an increased risk based on their driving record. Perhaps asking, Have you had any tickets? or asking more specific questions about their driving record may accomplish more and leave more room to being able to ask questions if an early claim does occur. Some of this has already been mentioned, but catch-all questions on simplified applications can be valuable as well. Actively at work questions is another one, where you can kind of get a general feel for the quality of the risk that you re getting on. As well as looking at alternative sources for underwriting or for getting data at time of underwriting. What I m referring to here is Vol. 45, juin 2014 DÉLIBÉRATIONS DE L INSTITUT CANADIEN DES ACTUAIRES

11 JUNE 2014 ANNUAL MEETING VANCOUVER (SESSION 24) 11 how you can collect additional information from independent sources from actually collecting it from the applicant? Chris mentioned MIB as one example. Others could be driving records or potentially one-day prescription databases in Canada. That type of thing where you can actually collect additional information that can help with the underwriting process but doesn t necessarily affect the experience of the end-user, the consumer. If these are known additional sources, it can also act as a sentinel in terms of preventing nondisclosure or actually increasing the level of disclosure that you do get from the applicants at the time of underwriting, which will help the performance of the entire product. Tele-underwriting is another source that was discussed a little bit earlier which has shown increased levels of disclosure when used. That s another valuable tool that can be incorporated into a simplified issue plan. Another underwriting consideration that s good to keep in mind is also the ability for policyholders to stack simplified issue policies. Often there aren t extensive questions about inforce insurance on a simplified application. Make sure there s thought given as to how that s being handled. To ensure that the policyholder who may be trying to avoid underwriting is not able to just accumulate a lot of simplified products in the market. Ways that you can accomplish this within your own company is actually having limitations in the contract about how much can pay out, as potentially more long term, as more companies are offering simplified and potentially higher limits of simplified. It may also be important to consider what other simplified products that person may already have purchased. Then, of course, incorporating the factor of what your expectations are around non-disclosure. How are you including that into the pricing of the product as well and making sure that that s accurately being incorporated into the pricing. A big part of this, actually, is communication at time of pricing. To what extent is underwriting at the same table and claims at the same table and distribution at the same table to make sure everyone is on the same page about how this product is going to be handled. Specifically, I mentioned claims there because it is really important about how the claims are planned to be handled. There is an expectation there will be more early duration claims and it s important from a pricing perspective to understand what the expectation is around those early duration claims. The last comments I m going to bring up are just around distribution. We ve heard a little bit here about how distribution approaches the simplified issue products. Certainly this is something that needs to be taken into consideration as well. Advisors are extremely sophisticated. They have a lot of access to information. In terms of things like spread-sheeting, they now have access to know which products have which features or ask which questions. Make sure that you re also aware of what information they have. Is there a potential for them to find an opportunity that could result in you getting business on the books that you re not comfortable with? That s something to be very aware of. Also early lapses, as already mentioned. We do see early lapses on simplified products. Be aware of that and the impact that s going to have on the mortality that you expect to see. As you can see, there are quite a few considerations to think about when it comes to figuring out how to ultimately reach that target market that you re working towards and getting the mortality experience that you re hoping to get. In the end, producing a sustainable and profitable simplified issue product.

12 12 ASSEMBLÉE GÉNÉRALE ANNUELLE JUIN 2014, VANCOUVER (SÉANCE 24) Moderator Shum-Adams: Thank you, Chris. Your comments about the brokers having a lot of information at their hands, particularly now with the advent of technology, is quite valid. I remember going on a website. I was just Googling. I was looking for information, not for this session, but in general, just doing some R&D work. This site pops up. Are you aware that this insurance company is not asking a question on this condition? If your client has that condition you may want to consider products from this company because you will be able to get it. Speaker Ricketts: If I could just add one more thing. Similarly, I think that certainly in many of my discussions out there with the MGAs and such, they re well aware of which underwriting shops are more likely to place business or to be a little bit more aggressive with their underwriting decisions. There s a lot of conversation about that in the industry too. I think that they are far well-versed on things than we might be aware. Like we ve all said, we really need to be aware of that when we re taking a look at this. Moderator Shum-Adams: Agreed. Speaker Kwiatkowski: I think to that point, there are triggers that you can see in distribution that will highlight the sophisticated behaviour of that advisor. Some of the things we were just talking about this morning. Have distribution that seems to sell the highest limit to every client? They tend to look the same, talk the same? It s these little triggers that say: when the average face amount is X, why is broker-over-here s average face amount well above the average X? What s going on there? I think these are some of the things we want to protect the insurer, but we also want to protect our distribution. We want to protect our reputation out there. What are those little peaks that we see in distribution that may inadvertently affect pricing and experience? How do we mitigate that as an industry together? Moderator Shum-Adams: Thank you, Pamela. Now we have developed a simplified issue product. You ve heard about that simplified issue product compared to a fully underwritten product. It has higher lapses, early claims experience that may suggest anti-selective behaviours. How can we make use of the feedback loop from the claims experience to modify pricing and underwriting over time? Chris Ricketts, if you would please start us off with your comments. Speaker Ricketts: I think historically, just from my experience, perhaps we haven t used claims data really to the fullest advantage. It has perhaps been under-utilized. It is really important for us to be completing audits on a regular basis, from an underwriting perspective, more than I think are perhaps being done currently. Not only at the time of underwriting or just postunderwriting, but also claims time. Looking out there for that anti-selection and ensuring that the integrity of the data is indeed intact. Included in that and an important component of that is not just auditing the actual underwriting in the case but also auditing the tele-interview and listening to the disclosures that the client s made. Ensuring that that information has been translated into that tele-interview, which then translates into those rules engines or what the underwriter is looking at to make the decision, ensuring that it s captured correctly. That claims data really gives us the opportunity to identify any gaps that we might have and to tweak wording accordingly. In this day and age, it s almost instantaneous, not exactly real-time. Back in the dark ages when I started underwriting, it was ages before you could really revise an application. It was very costly and such. Now, in the electronic world, it makes it much easier to do so and an important piece of the equation. Vol. 45, juin 2014 DÉLIBÉRATIONS DE L INSTITUT CANADIEN DES ACTUAIRES

13 JUNE 2014 ANNUAL MEETING VANCOUVER (SESSION 24) 13 We need to ensure that underwriting really fulfils the needs of the product and the expectations regarding the experience. Consideration, I think, needs to be given to auditing all claims within that first two-year contestable period. Really take a look at things very, very closely with the SI product. Moderator Shum-Adams: Kris Boundy, if you would share with us your viewpoint on pricing. Speaker Boundy: Certainly with monitoring simplified issue products, the ability to act quickly and react to any emerging experience that is different than expected is really critical to making sure that the product was successful in the long term. As Chris mentioned, we typically do expect to see more early-duration claims during the contestability period and so it s important to establish early on how those will be handled. As Chris mentioned as well, making sure those are thoroughly investigated and that if there are any gaps in the underwriting or potentially patterns in the distribution that are causing some of these disclosures, that they are being corrected moving forward. We do see higher volumes of non-disclosure coming through simplified issue products. Typically we see more rescissions than are on fully underwritten products. In the Canadian market on fully underwritten products during the contestability period we re usually looking at about 10 to 15% of policies are rescinded, claims are rescinded. On simplified issue products that can be significantly more than 30%. Actually we ve heard evidence from other markets that it can be as much as 60%. Determining early on how rescissions are going to be handled is extremely important. As everyone is aware, there is a reputation risk element when it comes to rescinding policies. Obviously everyone s in the business to pay claims. It s making sure that the risks you re taking on are the right risks so that you are able to pay those claims. Also making sure that at time of pricing, you re aware of how those rescissions are going to be handled. On the advisors side, Pamela mentioned a lot of this in the previous discussion here about how important it is to also monitor the advisor behaviour. Are you seeing anything in the market that might be an indication that an advisor is maybe not selling the product the way that you were hoping it would be sold? Are you seeing more early lapses from certain advisors? Are you seeing more non-disclosure and rescissions coming from certain advisors? Higher focus on specific impairments or a type of market? Larger face amounts? Basically, any characteristic of that sale that you can track to see if there s something standing out as being different to how that policy is being sold is also important to be able to monitor and react to. That s really the bottom line with a simplified issue product, making sure that you re actually hitting that target market that you re wanting to hit and that your experience is going to come out as expected. Moderator Shum-Adams: Thank you. Pamela, would you share with us, what are some the successes and perceived challenges for advisors in this market? Speaker Kwiatkowski: I think success is the number one is that advisors have more solutions for their customer. That s the first thing that the SI product and the development and the increase of the number of them in the industry have provided the advisor. It s also a success that the advisors have an opportunity to go back to their customer, get back to grassroots selling. They ve gone to the family market and they ve sold that term case to a husband and wife. They can go

14 14 ASSEMBLÉE GÉNÉRALE ANNUELLE JUIN 2014, VANCOUVER (SÉANCE 24) back to that family and say, Do you have anything for your parents? Particularly in the ethnic market, we have a lot of families that are living together under one roof, and so that advisor can go back and say: What about grandma in the kitchen? I use that example in training advisors. Now the advisor can go back and organically grow his block of business with his existing client base which I think is really exciting for the advisor and it s also going back to what we did. We d go into the home and we would sell everybody. We would sell the children. We would sell the grandparents. Not just go in for that T10, one-and-done sale that seems to be systemic or has been systemic in our industry for a while. I think also that with the emergence of advisors in the internet space, simplified issue products give them a product that they can offer that s cost effective and not just in the hard-to-insure market. As we grow in this market, what s really exciting is identifying those Canadian consumers who are more concerned about the speed of obtaining insurance coverage than being an impaired risk looking for that solution. I always talk about the 35-year-old woman who drinks a caramel macchiato every day, has no idea what a half of million dollars worth of term insurance is. An excellent risk, but doesn t want to go through what we call the pain of underwriting. So how do we capture that excellent risk? I think the internet space is where the advisors are looking to do that. SI products can fill that gap. Electronic process is something near and dear to our hearts at Assumption. That has also provided a success for the advisor. Can I do this more efficiently? Can I do it more effectively? Do I have to submit a paper application to my MGA from my MGA to scrub, to courier to the insurance company, and then it goes on. My customer is demanding to be served quickly. We even PDF the policies to the MGA to reduce the lag time of delivering of the policy. Do I have to have a delivery receipt to my client when they live in Prince George and I m in Victoria? Those types of things are providing success to the advisor and allowing them to be more efficient and to earn an income in this industry. I think the challenge that the advisors face is, How the heck do I keep up with the pace of all these changes and all these new products? Just to look at the example that Cathy gave us of the banks versus SI. What about the SI products in general? How do they fit and who s doing what? With the different electronic platforms as well, learning those multiple processes can be a challenge for the advisor. Those advisors that are in the internet space, it s becoming very costly. We have distribution that were in it 10 years ago well, the algorithms that the search engines use are so much more sophisticated and so much more costly to keep up with. That is becoming more and more of a challenge to the advisors in that market. I think the challenge that is finally, I m finally seeing the light at the end of the tunnel, is taking that advisor from a traditional paper application process. Eleven years ago, I d have advisors that were still on dial-up and were using the Nokia flip phone when it didn t do anything. The idea of an electronic process was just frightening to them. We ve come a long way and we still have a long way to go. I think that that has been a challenge to the traditional advisor. I m resisting that change. I understand that it needs to happen but I m really not ready to adapt to that. Finally, I think that the distribution is realizing if we don t adapt we re not going to exist anymore. We have been one of the slowest industries to adapt to utilization of electronic process in the sale of insurance products. That s been a challenge. Those that have been early adaptors Vol. 45, juin 2014 DÉLIBÉRATIONS DE L INSTITUT CANADIEN DES ACTUAIRES

15 JUNE 2014 ANNUAL MEETING VANCOUVER (SESSION 24) 15 are the ones that are seeing the success. There are a lot of challenges, certainly, for an advisor to be in the SI market, particularly with more and more products. I think the challenge is for us to help them, to educate them and to carry them along that process. To come alongside them and share with them how important some of these underwriting and pricing requirements are. They have a greater understanding of why those questions are being asked, why we re doing an MIB, and why it s important to have good risk coming into the market, so that we can sustain these products, and, in fact, expand on them. I think that that s where the advisor is looking at today and sitting there. Moderator Shum-Adams: I have promised you in our presentation that we will look ahead to the future and this is the question. How do you envision the simplified issue products to evolve over time in plan design? Target markets? Underwriting? I recently attended a meeting where one of the panellists proposed the following: With insurance companies making use of big data and predictive analytics, perhaps someday, in the not-too-distant future, all of us will receive a potential pre-approved offer in the mail for a product that s customized for us and all we have to do is sign on the dotted line. Anyway, that may be too futuristic, so I d like to hear your viewpoint, please. Why don t we start with Pamela? Speaker Kwiatkowski: I think that s a great idea. I m not sure that my colleagues, Kris and Chris, would agree, but could you imagine if an advisor could send out a thing and say, Here s your pre-approved, sign here, press hard, second copy is yours, and have a great day. Unknown: Why would they need the advisors? Speaker Kwiatkowski: Because it s still sold. I always say, No one wakes up in the morning and says, Today would be a great day to buy a life insurance policy. Unknown: They do. They do if you want to sell it to them. Speaker Kwiatkowski: Yes, exactly, because it might be their last day. At Assumption, we cover both ends of the spectrum and I think that we have an SI product for the healthy, both in the term and the permanent genre of products, as well as the substandard or the impaired risk. I anticipate that more and more carriers will do the same and look at SI as not limited to the final expense. It s not limited just to that impaired risk. There is a community of consumers that are more interested in procuring life insurance quickly and effectively than they are price-driven. The younger ages, when we look at their buying consumer behaviour and what they pay for a pair of jeans, it makes sense. They want to have value but they want it quickly. They don t want to have that long and painful application process. Higher limits, flexibility and plan design, I think we d like to see and this is the distribution wish list. It is not necessarily going to happen, but DI riders, CI riders, more additional features, child riders on your SI products, perm and term solutions that are bundled together. So that it really meets the needs of the consumer for their entire lifespan. Further development in electronic processes. We have an electronic process that you can do on an ipad, an Android, your Mac, your PC. That is where we need to be because that s where the consumer is. More non-face-to-face solutions. I think as we become more global and our families are living in different places, this is something that we re going to have to look at, to make it profitable for everybody. All of those wish list experiences and compliance and consumer demand will

16 16 ASSEMBLÉE GÉNÉRALE ANNUELLE JUIN 2014, VANCOUVER (SÉANCE 24) eventually dictate what s to come. From my purview and I think from most of us, we all believe that the end goal is that fewer and fewer Canadians are without a personal life insurance policy. I think that is the cornerstone of what we re doing here. Moderator Shum-Adams: Chris? Speaker Ricketts: Like with what Pamela said, we anticipate seeing the higher face amounts and more offerings in terms of different riders and such. People are looking for better options, more comprehensive options, an increase in the non-face-to-face, and an increase certainly in internet sales from a distribution perspective. I know I m supposed to be talking about underwriting, but the thing that I m hearing all the time is, even for advisors, it s great to have something electronic for them to tap into. It s got to be really simple and easy for them to use. Going out and talking to them. What does simple mean to you? How can we make it intuitive and easy to use? That s the way that you re going to start driving business coming your way. On cases where underwriter intervention is still required, underwriters have to continue to adapt their investigative and critical thinking skills. I still think that we re sort of falling short in that area. We have to look more closely for anti-selection, understand those demographics and target markets. We have to be aware of real-time claims data and adapt our underwriting philosophy accordingly. We need to think outside the box. I really can t say that enough. I think it is, as I said, a big challenge for our industry. We need to focus on that when developing our underwriters. We re going to continue to see a huge shift in trend towards adopting and accepting e- applications, e-signatures, virtual signatures, voice-recorded signatures. We have a way to go and we need to see some changes with the laws in our own country with respect to that, but I think it s going to come fairly soon. Insurers are going to continue to look for ways to adopt the latest technologies and that s going to help them increase the volume of applications being fed through underwriting engines. Looking to be able to feed data from various data points, whether it s a lab or your MBR data or your APS data or whatever it is. I know we re talking about simplified issues. This is a little bit larger-picture thinking, really tapping into other databases. Like the U.S. model, I would love it if we had the pharmaceutical database available up here. As an underwriter, I m almost thirsty for that type of information. I think it could greatly enhance our opportunity from an underwriting perspective. Consumers really want products that suit their needs and offer an easy process. We ve said that time and again throughout our discussions today: better data, better decisions, better pricing, better profitability, better client experience. That s really what we re driving to at the end of the day. Speaker Boundy: A lot of my comments are very similar to what Pamela and Chris said, but I ll add a little bit more. The products that we see today are fairly simple. As more companies enter this space, it ll be interesting to see what the differentiators ultimately will be. How will companies make sure that it s their product that you actually end up purchasing? Ultimately, I think the big thing that we ll have to see in the evolution here is a better way to actually reach that target market. Looking at different marketing strategies, use of social media, creativity and innovation. I saw a session this morning talking about Met Life selling in Walmart in the U.S. It Vol. 45, juin 2014 DÉLIBÉRATIONS DE L INSTITUT CANADIEN DES ACTUAIRES

17 JUNE 2014 ANNUAL MEETING VANCOUVER (SESSION 24) 17 is things like that that are really out of the box that are customer experience. We are seeing a lot of focus on underwriting automation today. There are definitely steps being taken to move in that direction, in terms of improving the client experience, the turnaround time, which will all help reach this market. I don t think Cathy s suggestion is necessarily crazy, in terms of finding opportunities to use existing data, historical data, and maybe data that you have from clients from other channels that you may operate in. Making use of that data to figure out where are the healthy cohorts of the population and approaching them with that insurance. Ultimately, maybe even removing some of the need for, potentially, some advisors or even some underwriters in cases where you know that life is healthy, it can simplify the process. I certainly think there are lots of areas where that won t be possible, but certainly that would be an exciting change to start to see in this market down the road. I do expect we ll probably start to see face amounts increasing over time. Although as the actuary on the panel, I will say that I think that s something that should be approached cautiously. This is a new market and there isn t a lot of experience in Canada at this point. That is something that I think is important to approach cautiously. Ultimately, we know the Canadian population is underinsured. Hopefully simplified issue is a product that we will see evolved and actually reach that market, that middle market. Moderator Shum-Adams: Thank you. We would welcome any questions you may have. John, you re going to start us off. Thank you. John Dark: I won t put Chris on the spot. I ll ask the underwriter and the marketer. Specifically, my question was about non-face-to-face. How can you be sure that the person answering the questions is the person about whom the questions are asked? We place some implicit trust in our agent to go and be there and look at the people. When you open yourself up to the anonymity, if you will, of the internet or the phone line, how do you really know that you re getting information about the people that you re being asked to insure? Speaker Ricketts: That s a great question. You don t always know. That voice-recorded signature becomes an important piece of things, especially at claims time. Other disclosures, in terms of the choices that you make, in terms of the wording that you re going to use during that recorded tele-interview, with respect to what you re asking the client to agree to in terms of the information that they re giving, it is a big challenge. Interestingly enough, I saw a case a couple of weeks ago where a client had applied for insurance coverage and the tele-interviewer was on the phone with the client and the client said, I sound like a man, but I m a woman. In a nutshell, it was a man not a woman, but it was a woman that had applied for insurance coverage and it was a man doing the tele-interview, so not the person. These are exactly the types of things we really need to be attuned to and aware of. I think that part of the challenge in our industry is a lot of folks have jobs and they re very singularly focused. They re thinking about, I m a tele-interviewer, I m collecting data, and that s all I m doing. Whether you re a tele-interviewer, an auditor looking at things, or an underwriter looking at things, you really need not only the depth of doing your own job, but understanding the breadth. What are the risks and challenges, and always thinking about that when you re actually doing your job. Holding up the red flag when something doesn t feel

18 18 ASSEMBLÉE GÉNÉRALE ANNUELLE JUIN 2014, VANCOUVER (SÉANCE 24) right, it s not right, and it s really important to bring that forward and do some further investigations. It is a big challenge. Speaker Kwiatkowski: Just to add to that. That s one of the good news stories about technology. We blue sky a lot in terms of technology in our head office. You have the ability, with webcams, Skype, to do the non-face-to-face, face-to-face. The other thing is we ve thought about: Let s check their Facebook account. You can do a check and have a signature via the Facebook account which actually verifies the person is who they are. Although there is no guarantee when you re over the phone talking to that customer, there are a couple of things that you can do. Technology is going to open that door. The non-face-to-face is really face-to-face; it s just not in the same room. I think that s great news. To us, is how do you make that non-faceto-face compliant and really verify that that customer is that customer. I think the technology is going to give us the tools that we need. That s the exciting part of it. Moderator Shum-Adams: Thank you. Another question, perhaps? Simon. Simon Curtis: I found that whole discussion interesting, but it makes me wonder. If you look at the big picture from the public point of view, the simplified underwriting still isn t very simple. If the end result today is a process that leads to 30% to 60% rescissions, is this actually going in a way that s in anyone s interest? Or is it being driven by the insurance industry but we re not really looking at what we re achieving at the end of the day. I think if you really are getting 30% to 60% rescissions, that s a disaster for the reputation of the insurance industry in the mid-term. Speaker Boundy: I agree with you. Seeing that level of rescissions is not something that you want coming out of the development of a product like this. What I do think, ultimately, if you re coming into the application and you are disclosing everything then there shouldn t be a concern of having that policy rescinded. Now, how is that communicated to the market? How is that understood? How are the questions written in plain language so there s no misunderstanding and that they re asking the right thing? So that ultimately, we can get that rescission number down. I do agree that that s not an ideal place to land. Moderator Shum-Adams: We have time for one more question. Paul. Paul Gobeil: Hello. My comment/question is: I think if we looked at how business is done now not in insurance, but all industries as if we were designing it from scratch, there s no way we would have the non-simplified process to sell insurance, but we have it because of the past and legacy. How much of a hindrance do you think maintaining the status quo is to making progress in simplified issue? I wonder if it s going to be some new company that comes along that doesn t have to worry about the status quo, that just goes for it 100% simplified, that s going to capture that market? Speaker Boundy: That s interesting. There are a few elements of that that I think are interesting considerations. One is actually the product offering. When you do have an existing company with fully underwritten products one of the big things that they re going to have to be concerned with at time of creating the product is what overlaps exist in your market. What opportunities are there for the advisor to actually anti-select within their own portfolio of products their own product shelf? That is an interesting idea that if you have someone coming in who s focused on this and doesn t have that other business to really worry about, it does take a bit of an element out of that aspect of it. Then the reputation side of it potentially to sorry, not reputation so Vol. 45, juin 2014 DÉLIBÉRATIONS DE L INSTITUT CANADIEN DES ACTUAIRES

19 JUNE 2014 ANNUAL MEETING VANCOUVER (SESSION 24) 19 much as maybe channel conflict, even, or having... maybe it is reputation a little bit. How things have been done in the past with their existing block of business and maybe how that s going to change going forward. I think that s really interesting. Speaker Kwiatkowski: I think there s room for both. If you look at the banking industry, you ve seen that a new bank has come in, the virtual bank. I look outside; I don t think it really hurt our big banks around the corner here. Insurance products are still intangibles, and we re still in the relationship business. I think that consumers there will be a portion as we ve seen in the U.S. that will be driven to the commoditization of insurance. There s also still that very strong relationship from the customer to the advisor looking for someone to affirm whatever buying choice that they make and hold their hand through the process of buying life insurance. It s a very interesting question. It s one that, as an insurer, we need to be aware of. But when you ve got 45% of the Canadian consumer that doesn t have an individual policy, there s a lot of room for growth for all of us. There s room for all of us to get better at delivering SI products to the market. Moderator Shum-Adams: Thank you. That brings us to the end of the session. Thank you for your attention and please join me in thanking the panellists for delivering an interesting presentation. [End of recording]